What point are you trying to make?
WM, in the article you cite is the following:
So there appears to be a price for inaction, six years of civil war. The good news for us was, it was not our war...., Shi’ite Muslim suicide bombers blew up US Marine and French barracks in Beirut, killing 241 Marines and 58 French paratroopers. President Ronald Reagan pulled forces out of Lebanon in February 1984. Lebanon’s civil war raged on until 1990.
In the case of bin Laden the limited actions we did take led to a different result for the U.S.
In this case our actions were too weak to deter our enemy and we suffered for it.Analysts and historians say “Operation Infinite Reach” was interpreted by bin Laden, who reportedly joked that the attack killed only camels and chickens, as evidence that the United States lacked the stomach for confrontation with his forces. In October 2000, the US Navy guided-missile destroyer USS Cole was hit by an al Qaeda suicide attack while it refueled at port in Aden, Yemen, killing 17 American sailors. A year later, the 11 September attacks in New York and Washington killed nearly 3,000 people.
So there is a fine line here. Looking back it is easy to see what worked and what didn't. Looking forward is another matter.
As for the five purposes of punishment, deterrence would be the one we are most interested in. Remember that there are two other considerations with punishment. First, deterrence works not only against the perpetrator, but it also can have an effect on others who would take a similar course of action. The second point is that there is a correlation between the time lag from the time the crime is committed and the time the punishment is administered. The longer the period between, the less it is apt to work. Perhaps that only applies with children and common criminals, but it is worth considering.
Bookmarks