[Mick]

Hussein, Qaddafi

In both cases we were bombing/invading their country. This isn't an "assassination". It is an outright act of war. All tacit "agreements" are pretty much off the table at that point :-).

FWIW, Hussein had already attempted to assassinate George H. W. Bush, so that "agreement" was obviously void. He was also no longer "head of state" at the time, as we had occupied the country and dissolved his government. In point of fact, we captured Hussein, but did not kill him. The Iraqis did that.

Technically, Qaddafi was no longer "head of state" when he was captured and killed. He had been overthrown already by that point. Mahmoud Jibril was the nominal "prime minister" and had been for some time. The actual killing was not done by the US. It was done by Libyans not under the control of NATO. NATO also claimed (FWIW) that they were unaware Qaddafi was in the convoy of vehicles that was attacked by French jets and led to his capture.

The bombing raid under Reagan in 1986 was an undoubtedly an "assassination" attempt, among other things. It was justified on the basis that Qaddafi had plotted the assassination of "high US officials" and for certain the heads of other Arab states. However, when two countries are shooting at each other "tacit" agreements are probably not reliable in any case :-).

Sorry, I was unclear. As near as I can tell -- and as the Russians frequently state -- the USA is in a proxy war in which we're supplying Ukraine with information and weapons (though not soldiers). The whereabouts of Putin would be valuable information to share with Ukraine, if in fact we had it. And it would be Ukraine's act of war, not ours...and not an assassination to take out the other side's leader who has declared war on Ukraine.

[Mick]

Hussein, Qaddafi

In both cases we were bombing/invading their country. This isn't an "assassination". It is an outright act of war. All tacit "agreements" are pretty much off the table at that point :-).

FWIW, Hussein had already attempted to assassinate George H. W. Bush, so that "agreement" was obviously void. He was also no longer "head of state" at the time, as we had occupied the country and dissolved his government. In point of fact, we captured Hussein, but did not kill him. The Iraqis did that.

Technically, Qaddafi was no longer "head of state" when he was captured and killed. He had been overthrown already by that point. Mahmoud Jibril was the nominal "prime minister" and had been for some time. The actual killing was not done by the US. It was done by Libyans not under the control of NATO. NATO also claimed (FWIW) that they were unaware Qaddafi was in the convoy of vehicles that was attacked by French jets and led to his capture.

The bombing raid under Reagan in 1986 was an undoubtedly an "assassination" attempt, among other things. It was justified on the basis that Qaddafi had plotted the assassination of "high US officials" and for certain the heads of other Arab states. However, when two countries are shooting at each other "tacit" agreements are probably not reliable in any case :-).

Sorry, I was unclear. As near as I can tell -- and as the Russians frequently state -- the USA is in a proxy war in which we're supplying Ukraine with information and weapons (though not soldiers). The whereabouts of Putin would be valuable information to share with Ukraine, if in fact we had it. And it would be Ukraine's act of war, not ours...and not an assassination to take out the other side's leader who has declared war on Ukraine.