[peteretep]

> If not, would you also consider it okay if the military of your country conducted drone strikes and used thermobaric bombs with "acceptable level of collateral damage" for extrajudicial killings of fellow citizens in your own country

It would entirely depend on the situation, but without doubt there are levels of crime and depravity I could find myself surrounded by where I'd welcome it. Duterte's extra-judicial killings are far from unpopular. Also: did occupied Western Europe want to be liberated, despite the inevitable collateral damage? I'd expect largely the answer was yes.

[jpmoral]

Anyone who thinks the extra-judicial killings are actually solving any problems in the Philippines is naive.

[peteretep]

Citation?

[jpmoral]

The burden of proof that problems are being solved is on you.

Police assertions that most violent crime in the Philippines is drug-induced/related wasn't even supported by their own data in 2016! Where's the data that shows illegal drug flows are actually being reduced and that such reductions are affecting crime rates? Where are the 'big fish' (ranking police officers, big businessmen and politicians) that were promised to be arrested/imprisoned/otherwise neutralised in 2016? Those who have been killed are either small-fry, cases of mistaken identity, or innocent bystanders.

[jonathanstrange]

Any introductory textbook on moral philosophy or philosophy of law should do.

[peteretep]

Ah, there I was thinking someone had data and not simply their opinion.

[jonathanstrange]

What do you know? I've studied this. The fact that you believe that moral insight can somehow be produced from data about the status quo tells me that you haven't.