> In this connection, we might also note a few things:
> (1) al Qaida is not and never has been a threat to the
> existence of any international order or the survival
> of any state; it is a criminal gang; (2) lawless
> behavior tends to encourage the same, particularly if
> it is perceived as being unnecessary and arbitrary; we
> might want the Empire to observe norms of due process
> where possible.
International law (such as it is) and the bodies with the authority to execute it cannot adequetely "deal" with internation criminal gangs. Until the time at which we have realized
> a set of incentives in the domestic and international
> environment that encourages desirable behavior--not
> only preventing retail terrorism of the al Qaida
> sort,
another, less desirable solution must be implemented. Now, I presume you think pursuing those less desriable solutions undercuts the possibility of ultimately building institutions of (substantive as opposed to nominal) international law. I myself am not so sure.
-- Luke