Maybe I can lead the discussion away from the fight by taking the first post dead serious but giving a slightly different response from Thomas.

Let's suppose the man was Hitler in 1943: I wouldn't save him.
Let's suppose the man was Bush in 2004: I would save him.

What's the difference? I wouldn't save a person that I would murder if I could (assuming for a moment I wouldn't be afraid to risk my life). With extremely few exceptions I'm against murder in politics (and, of course, for private reasons). But when I agree with murdering the worst of tyrants I have to agree in this case that not saving him is morally right for me.

Wolfgang

(What would you do if you saw a Turk about to drown in a river? That's how some recent German Neonazi jokes start. One of the response is: I'd take a picture)