I agree. They gave him exactly what he wanted instead of a lifetime of punishment.
I find it hard to believe that inmates would have made his life easy. He deserved a slow, painful life of agony. Not a quick, and high profile, martyrdom. I'm sure radicals will see this as a win against the western world.
Just my opinion...
Setting moral arguments aside, martyring Tsarnaev is a bad idea for lots of pragmatic reasons, too.
not buying the martyr bit either there's enough people who want to do exactly what he did regardless of whether he dies or not.
What makes you think that he wants death? If he doesn't drop his appeals, he probably does not want death. I regularly hear opponents of capital punishment say that that life in prison is worse than execution, but very few capital offenders willingly drop their appeals in order to get executed, so they do not seem to think it is worse.
But which is worse? A dead martyr, or a live recruiter living in arguably the easiest place to turn people against the government?
But which is worse? A dead martyr, or a live recruiter living in arguably the easiest place to turn people against the government?
For Islamic radicals like Tsarnaev, execution is much more glorious end than slowly rotting to death in a Federal super max. Other disaffected young men like him will take note.
Based on what I've read, it's not so much the execution itself, as having to live under its shadow while our interminable appeals process plays itself out. Psychological torture.
If that's a serious concern, the authorities can stick him in solitary.
Our government is painfully inept at combating radical Islam on an ideological level. Here was an easy opportunity to deny a would-be martyr his glorious mortal exit, and we (predictably) failed to do so simply because the death penalty makes us feel tough.
Islamic terrorist aren't going to celebrate his actions any less just because he might not have gotten the death penalty. They applaud the terror not the "death or prison" aspect.
You're right that they're not going to view the attack any differently. But executing Tsarnaev will make it much easier for others to lionize the man himself as an Islamic martyr who struck a mighty blow against the Great Satan. We had an opportunity to deny them that recruiting angle here, and failed to take it... for what? Killing him will not bring any of the victims back to life.
The Tsarnaevs proved that a couple of disaffected losers without any sort of network or training could still cause significant damage on US soil. That's a really dangerous f*cking lesson that our government should be trying its level best to downplay. But instead they're going to make this guy a hero and shout that lesson from the rooftops by killing him.
This is what is going to help in their recruitment, not the fact that he is going to be executed. The whole martyr angle is something cute the recruiters tell the soon to be deceased to get them to pull off the act. When these guys are sitting around watching "highlight" videos of acts of terror, they're not omitting the ones where the perpetrator didn't get killed.
These guys get their recruits because they hate the west, not because a guy pulled a bombing and was executed. Just my opinion.
Setting moral arguments aside, martyring Tsarnaev is a bad idea for lots of pragmatic reasons, too.
Have you read much on the psychology behind Islamic radicals? Because what you're asserting contradicts basically everything I've read on the subject.
There are shiftless and anxious young men in every country (including the US) who are looking for an ideology to dignify them and give their lives purpose. Most terrorists become radicalized because Islamism offers them exactly that; not primarily because they hate the West. A decadent crusading West led by the US is part of the narrative they end up buying into, but it's the positive portion that sells them.
You seem to be taking this deeper than it needs to be. Ending this guys life is not going to aide in recruiting any more radicals then his successful actions already have. A prospective jihadists is not going to be swayed on whether or not this guy is a martyr.
Except Whiskey is saying that all the evidence from cultural anthropology indicates that you're wrong here and your gut feeling isn't a form of proof to the contrary.
You seem to be taking this deeper than it needs to be. Ending this guys life is not going to aide in recruiting any more radicals then his successful actions already have. A prospective jihadists is not going to be swayed on whether or not this guy is a martyr.
Go ahead and live in a fantasy land where we would have prevented future jihadists by simply not executing this guy.
Go ahead and live in a fantasy land where we would have prevented future jihadists by simply not executing this guy.
I'm not sure you quite understand how martyrdom works or how important it is the jihadists. If you did, you wouldn't be telling all of us that we are "living in fantasy land" when we tell you that all imperial evidence shows that his death will be seen as a victory.
Also, you're the one just "going with your gut" while the rest of us are going off of actual facts. So who is really living in "fantasy land"?
Imperial or empirical?
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/R2yF8oFAxpk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
TBF, there are plenty of examples of radical Islamists gaining martyr-like fame through imprisonment. Sayyid Qutb was probably the most famous.