Is it ethical to steal money from a terrorist organization?

Hey Bruce - stop stealing my arguments!    


In the clinical or moral absolute sense - the answer is no. 


That being said, let's look at the definition of Ethics from Dictionary.com

Ethics - the body of moral principles or values governing or distinctive of a particular culture or group


In this sense, it could be ethical to steal monies as it deals with the values governing a particular culture and how the culture deals with terrorism.

Moral - founded on the fundamental principles of right conduct rather than on legalities, enactment, or custom 

In this case, while it may be ethical it is not moral.  Although interesting enough, a synonym for Ethics is moral.  Yet as we can see there is a difference.

Both the Swiss nationalist and the Terrorist are using the funds to forward their own agendas. 

First. he is a thief by his own accord. --- unmoralistic
Second the terrorist is using the funds to kill people -- unmoralistic
Third - they both are immoral.

As a swiss nationalist - and swiss is known to take a hands off on money transaction whether they are by good or bad people through their banks.  It may be ethical in his society.  With a don't ask, don't tell atmosphere concerning others, I would wager that it would not be an outrage to do this in his society.

Unknown where the terrorists' money is being held.  If it is in a society that is conducive to a terrorist, then the gathering of the funds for killing is not unethical.  If the money is being held in a society where this would be unethical, it probably would be illegal and subject to seizure by that country's government.  The seizure of the money is therefore ethical.  The party seizing it is questionable though.

Just because the act is immoral on both parts, does not make it unethical in each person's culture. 

On a personal note,  I would say that it can have an objective moral point of view.

Personally, I find that both are immoral and unethical in my personal point of view.  Stealing is stealing, whether it is from a child, store, or even a friend let alone from a criminal. Killing people is also just as wrong  and immoral, which I would of course be against. However, doing an immoral person an unethical act does not relinquish the fact that both are wrong in my morals.

Is my morals written in stone, yes, but action and judgement is only conceived when the full light of the situation has shown what the causes were.  It is not the person that slants the moralistic viewpoint but rather But my own code of conduct in judging the consequence.

Stealing is wrong, but I would not judge harshly a person who stole to feed himself or others, to get care and for the betterment of fellow humans/animals. (for the animal lovers  )  I probably would help them find ways to get what they need legitimately. 

Killing others, if it came to a personal survival instinct, I would probably have to side with the killer. What we call "terrorists" are in other arenas known as freedom fighters.  In the American Revolution we were considered Terrorists.  Once, we won, we were no longer the terrorist but a new country recognized by the world.  If it is being done just for terror of others, then it is unequivicably unethical and immoral.

Objective Morality is a valid thought.  But the judging of your reaction is what is in flux constantly. 

OK, so it should have said immoral -    

I agree with your analysis on the thieves, yet the terrorist organization in the scenario did not indicate that they were stealing money, only using the money to do killing.

So, did you mean to address the killling portion and just mistyped thieves instead.


Love the excuse that you gave,  (Forgive me, I feel like my words are all jumbled today and I'm not making much sense. The communication lines aren't running smoothely in my brain and between there and my fingers....  . Sorry if I'm not making sense.)   I can use that one when Christine corners me on something that I write.   Loved it.       

Thanks for the help. 

Answer to new scenario -   No.   

All he really wants is just a new car. 

Let's change it up a bit.  If he used the terrorist money to fund cancer research that could save countless lives of innocent children, would this change the situation any?

Less money = Less bombs = Less deaths

In this respect, is he doing the ethical thing by stealing their money?

Consider this:  Would it be ethical if the United States government stole the terrorist's organization money?  What would be different about this? 

Is it ethical for the Swiss man to kill terrorists?  How about the US Government?  Is there a distinction between the two?