Should France continue to assassinate suspected terrorists in foreign countries?

I don't trust the government in international affairs

If able to captured, then captured and given trial but if cannot, and there is undeniable evidence that they are planning an attack , then yes kill

No. The UK is NOT murderers. They should be arrested, put on trial and then executed. But I believe we shouldn't reinstate the death penalty.

If they attacked, it is fine, if they were planning, it needs solid evidence and depends on the crime they were planning

Yes depending on international norms and the countries' standards. E.g. EU goes for a fair trial so do the same. Russia assassinates who they like, we should assassinate Russian terrorists also

No, our foreign intervention already goes too far. We need to focus on our citizens rather than propagandised specters of foreign threats

Yes, but only if there is an agreement between countries that this is permissable or that us and them become allies in the same target

I would answer both "Yes" options. 1 only if there is undeniable evidence that they are planning an attack on our country OR 2. If there is undeniable evidence that they have committed an attack on our country.

No, capture, interrogate and imprison them but hate breads hate, I believe we need to tackle the beliefs behind it - as an educated and humane nation our message should be of peace in the vain hope that will bring about more change. Killing should be a last resort but if the threat were imminent and nothing could be done to save more than one soul then our nations security and well-being prevails.

if they become a threat to our country and their capture will not cause greater conflict then they will be captured and given fair trial and dealt with accordingly

Depending on how bad the crime is. Like if they bombed Big Ben and killed many citizens then yes but if smaller they should be captured given a fair trail if guilty interrogated and then sentenced to the death penalty but if found not guilty they can walk free but under investigation for a while.

Yes as it would protect a nation and many innocent before and attack harms them. No- as evidence may be bias depending on those in power - may cause greater damage than good.

First you interrogate the suspect and understand and identify the severity of the situation. When it gets severe, then yes, they can assassinate the suspect. If it wasn't really severe then they would be sentenced for many years.

Yes but liaising with nations the terrorists inhabit is vital, and extrajudicial killings should only be done with express approval from domestic governments.

UK should not be involved in other countries issues. Interrogated, imprisoned by their own government.

yes, but only if it is the only way to stop attack, neutralise imminent threat, otherwise capture and trial.

Yes but only if there’s undeniable evidence that they’ve either attacked or are planning to attack the uk

There should be a attempted capture, and only if all other options are exhausted and there's undeniable evidence they are going to/did attacks on this country

Capture and manipulate into giving up information and imprison and make them work for the global good

No, capture and interrogate them only if there is reasonable suspicion that they are terrorists, after which they should be imprisoned if found guilty and compensated if not, or if it is later found out that they have been wrongfully imprisoned.

No, the UK should start moving itself away from fighting wars that dont involve themselves. There are other countries that are not involving themselves with wars + terrorism are an all low

Yes but only if there’s undeniable evidence that they have either attacked or are going to attack the UK

Yes, however it must be proved to a court where a lawyer will act on behalf of the suspected terrorist

I believe that this is a job for the U.S,the UK, lets face it, is no more a global piwer, as such it should not be as invested in international affairs.

Unless there is undeniable evidence they have committed an attack against our country or if there is undeniable evidence they are planning to attack our country, then I don't believe the UK should assassinate suspected terrorists in foreign countries. If there is undeniably evidence of either, then I believe our military action should act accordingly to uphold international law when combatting terrorism.

Yes, granted other nations approve of such an idea and that the target themselves is the leader of their terrorism group. All options should be considered in order to complete this goal and minimalise civillian casualties.

Yes, but only with undisputable proof and approval from the UN

No, they should pool resources and cooperate with foreign countries and take the route those countries allow. I.e if they want imprisonment, then do that.

Want me to assassinate them for you? I don't mind, call me.

Dictators should be assassinated and terrorists should have a fair trail and imprisoned

No but should perform a valid background check

No, suspected terrorists should be given the right to prove their innocence through a fair trial. However, a person who is known to have committed terrorism against the UK have committed acts of war against the state and the people of the UK, and should therefore be treated as legitimate enemy combatants or spies, and should be eliminated or imprisoned as soon as possible

They could be completely innocent! Assassination is not the approach!

Yes, but only if there is undeniable evidence that they are indeed a terrorist, and that civillian casualities (if using drones) are kept to a mininum (or none at all.)

Worry about what's going on in your own country

Yes, but only if they know they're a terrorist

No. Leave it will alone

Responses are too generalised

it is for to complicated to make a definite decision. we should be the better person and give them a fair trial, however getting rid of a suspected terrorist with undeniable evidence gets rid of the chance that the attack will happen, but killing one terrorist doesnt make the problem go away.

Only with high evidence that they are a terrorist.

Only in extreme citations with high evidence.

If there is high evidence they are a terrorist in sever circumstances.

In sever circumstances with high proof that they are a terrorist.

Only in sever circumstances if there is high proof the person is a terrorist.

Only in sever circumstances if there is a high chance they are a terrorist.

Yes, providing it is legal

Yes, only if it is legal to do so

Yes, without mercy and without due process.

If found enough evidence they should be slowly tortured and barley kept alive