The world is a better place with him silent. Whether he deserved to die in the first place is up to Saudia rules. He was on Saudia land. If they deemed him a traitor and made the judgement there then its fine.
?
I could not disagree with you more.
Do you mean that the embassy is considered Saudi land? He was on Turkish soil until the Saudi’s lured him to his death. Did China have the right to lure the head of Interpol to the mainland so they could do away with him, since he ended up on their soil? I think others have a right to judge the Saudi actions based on their own moral standards, not Saudi rules.
Regardless of where it took place the world has a right to pass judgement on a nations actions.The world can condemn North Korea for putting millions of their own in concentration camps and starving and beating them even though it’s on North Korean land. The world can condemn China for forcing millions of Uighurs into “re-education camps” despite their taking place on Chinese soil. The same goes for the dozens of other countries and regimes that starve, beat, imprison, and murder various segments of their populations. Just because it takes place on your land doesn’t give you a moral pass.
The fact that the world turns a blind eye to all these ongoing atrocities , but is enraged at selective situations such as this one (as well as the “oppression of the Palestinian people” ) is a testament to world hypocrisy, political expediency trumping morality, and might makes right.....
(As an aside, this is why the UN will never be an effective organization. It is not that it is a failure as an organization, just that it will always be a reflection of the behavior and moral compass of the nations that it is comprised of, and so it will always manifest the hypocrisy and lack of moral standards that are endemic to the counties in its membership.)