General Question

ibstubro's avatar

Was it morally wrong for the CIA to use a false immunization campaign in Pakistan in order to verify Bin Laden's exact whereabouts?

Asked by ibstubro (18636points) May 20th, 2014


I find this troubling because I remember hearing that countries were against vaccinating children because there were rumors that it was a plot. Now it seems there was a plot, and it’s come to light.

Was nailing down the exact position of a mass murderer worth the risk that millions of children my die because they weren’t immunized? Badly needed health care workers killed.

Additional info

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

15 Answers

bolwerk's avatar

It’s immoral to take evidence from people without their consent.

But this is the CIA we’re talking about here. Plus, only white Americans have rights.

Bluefreedom's avatar

The list of CIA wrongdoings are numerous and appalling. I’m going to go with a definite “yes” on morally wrong for the false immunization campaign.

Some of the CIA’s legacy of dishonor:

Orchestrating the “Banana Wars”
Operation PHOENIX
Operation CHAOS

and on and on and on….......

Dan_Lyons's avatar

If they even did get Bin Laden.

LDRSHIP's avatar

The vaccines they received were fake? I would think if it was all fake it would be rather obvious after a point.

ibstubro's avatar

Perhaps they immunized, @LDRSHIP. Was the ruse warranted?

filmfann's avatar

BFD. It was worth it. If parents are now overly suspicious and not allowing their kids to be immunized, they are exactly the same as many American parents who are listening to bad advice from people like Michelle Bachman and Jenny McCarthy.

FireMadeFlesh's avatar

Yes, it was morally wrong. It was wrong of them to use a health program to collect intelligence. It was wrong of them to violate the sovereignty of an allied country. It was wrong of them to kill Bin Laden without a trial, when they clearly had the manpower to arrest him. It was wrong of them to celebrate his murder like some grotesque national holiday.

BUT countries do not act on moral grounds, whatever they say. They operate based on the principles of statecraft. And that’s not a bad thing. A state that acted by a moral code rather than the principles of statecraft would quickly crumble.

Dan_Lyons's avatar

It was wrong of them to claim they had killed Laden and offer no proof of having done so.

stanleybmanly's avatar

It was a REALLY BIG f&*kup, and classic demonstration of ends justifying means. It only served to validate the agency’s already sucky reputation.

ibstubro's avatar

Great capture of the conundrum, @FireMadeFlesh.

Darth_Algar's avatar

If the question involves the words “morally wrong” and the name “CIA” then the answer is probably always “yes”.

Linda_Owl's avatar

It was a DISASTER…. and it led to Humanitarian teams being wiped out!

Rollercoaster's avatar

I want a job in the CIA

elbanditoroso's avatar

What was the alternative? Let Osama hide in plain sight for another 10 years?

Answer this question




to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther