Gildor's got a gun

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by JeffF.

The destruction of the ring was not an attempt on Sauron's life. As Gandalf describes at the Last Debate in RotK,"If he (Sauron) regains it (the ring)...his victory will be swift and complete, so complete that none can foresee the end of it while this world lasts. If it is destroyed than he will fall; and his fall will be so low that none can foresee his arising ever again. For he will lose the best part of his strength that was native to him in the beginning...and he will be maimed forever."

The attempt to destroy the ring was to render Sauron helpless rather than kill him.

Well, Gandalf was likely well aware of Sauron's true nature as an angelic sprit, and he would have known they had no way to permanently 'kill' him.
All they could do was reduce him to a state in which he could never again threaten the peace of ME. They did so, and I think I can see that as an 'assassination' of sorts, when put into that perspective.

[FeRaL sHaDoW]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

All they could do was reduce him to a state in which he could never again threaten the peace of ME. They did so, and I think I can see that as an 'assassination' of sorts, when put into that perspective.

1. to kill suddenly or secretively, esp. a politically prominent person; murder premeditatedly and treacherously.
2. to destroy or harm treacherously and viciously: to assassinate a person's character.

I would say it still counts as an assassination coming under point two of harming the person’s character. Surely if you destroyed a large portion of someone it would have a heavy effect on their character. Since the ring held the best part of his power and that was taken away from him a heavy hit would be dealt to Sauron leaving him as no longer a huge threat. You do not need to kill someone for it to be an assassination just harming Sauron as they did by destroying the ring would come under an assassination.