Thread: Should Bin Laden have been taken alive?

The other Bin Laden thread is very interesting, but it kind of lost its way after about the third of its several hundred pages, admittedly that was partly because of me. Anyway I have decided to start another Bin Laden thread, but following a slightly different theme. Basically do you think it was right to shoot an unarmed man in the head? And do you think that he should have been captured and given a fair trial?

The first thing that bugs me about this whole sorry affair is that US forces went into a sovereign nation and assasinated someone. Now okay, maybe they were worried that Pakistan might have been supporting Bin Laden etc, but that strikes me as decidedly dodgy. I'm not sure of the legal ramifications of this. The former German Chancellor has apparently called into question the legality of the procedure. However, as is usually the case, law doesn't really apply to superpowers.

The other thing that bugs me is the fact that Bin Laden's wife was seemingly able to get away with a bullet to her leg and yet the unarmed Bin Laden needed a bullet to the head. It just seems to reek of vengeance rather than any sense of trying to bring a man to justice. A case of shoot first and then sweep it all under the carpet. I am sure I am not alone in thinking that it would have been far more proper to lead by example and bring the man to justice in a court of law. I am sure I am not alone in wanting to know what Bin Laden knew and to see how he would defend himself. It makes me wonder how solid the case against him really was and how dangerous he might of been had he been able to open his mouth and present his case.

What are your views on Bin Laden's demise? It seems to me that it could and probably should have been handled far differently. That he seems to have been captured and then assasinated anyway troubles me greatly.

Thoughts?

A very interesting short piece by Robert Fisk who is always very good. I think he raises a number of very salient points concerning Bin Laden and his subsequent assasination.

Robert Fisk: The al-Qa'ida leader knew he was a failure. Now US has turned him into martyr - Robert Fisk, Commentators - The Independent

Why kill him? Why do you give an order to assasinate an unarmed man? The gun culture has once again fed its way to the top and it seems that just as invading countries for no good reason is deemed quite acceptable, it is also quite acceptable to kill people arbitrarily. It seems that Bin Laden was able to take away all of America's morality and sense of 'right'. From the Patriot act, through to systematic torture, to Guantanamo Bay, to the wars, to this. It's a breathtaking fall and all within a decade. The worlds policeman becomes the biggest gangster overnight.

This final act could have been handled with far greater care and rather than America solving the riddle, for me at least, it casts an even greater shadow over the elite that make the decisions

Shooting him in the head was bringing him to justice, don't be ridiculous. I don't support many things the US government does but killing Bin Laden at any oppourtunity was a no brainer. It wasn't his wife that took a bullet in the leg either, apparently it was his couriers. The fact that after everything he was supposed to stand for he would still use a woman to shield himself although death was imminent, just shows what a truce spineless coward he was in actuality, I thought that bit was quite poetic in fact. It's mind numbing to read some of the stuff people have written about this already. He was in a compound less than 5kms from Pakistans most prestigous Military academy. Of course the Pakistani Gov't or military on some level knew he was there, leaving cooperation with Pakistan completely impossible. Also, although this is extremely doubtful, the US officials involved had said that he would be captured alive if there wasn't resistance, which clearly wasn't the case regardless.

Originally Posted by p4pking

Shooting him in the head was bringing him to justice, don't be ridiculous. I don't support many things the US government does but killing Bin Laden at any oppourtunity was a no brainer. It wasn't his wife that took a bullet in the leg either, apparently it was his couriers. The fact that after everything he was supposed to stand for he would still use a woman to shield himself although death was imminent, just shows what a truce spineless coward he was in actuality, I thought that bit was quite poetic in fact. It's mind numbing to read some of the stuff people have written about this already. He was in a compound less than 5kms from Pakistans most prestigous Military academy. Of course the Pakistani Gov't or military on some level knew he was there, leaving cooperation with Pakistan completely impossible. Also, although this is extremely doubtful, the US officials involved had said that he would be captured alive if there wasn't resistance, which clearly wasn't the case regardless.

What is your source for the part bolded above? I have read differently, but the stories seem to be changing by the hour.

Originally Posted by miles

Originally Posted by p4pking

Shooting him in the head was bringing him to justice, don't be ridiculous. I don't support many things the US government does but killing Bin Laden at any oppourtunity was a no brainer. It wasn't his wife that took a bullet in the leg either, apparently it was his couriers. The fact that after everything he was supposed to stand for he would still use a woman to shield himself although death was imminent, just shows what a truce spineless coward he was in actuality, I thought that bit was quite poetic in fact. It's mind numbing to read some of the stuff people have written about this already. He was in a compound less than 5kms from Pakistans most prestigous Military academy. Of course the Pakistani Gov't or military on some level knew he was there, leaving cooperation with Pakistan completely impossible. Also, although this is extremely doubtful, the US officials involved had said that he would be captured alive if there wasn't resistance, which clearly wasn't the case regardless.

What is your source for the part bolded above? I have read differently, but the stories seem to be changing by the hour.

My apologies, I indeed misquoted the article I read. The woman Bin Laden used as a shield who was apparently died was the wife of his courier, and it is believed that the one shot in the leg was his( makes a bit more sense anyways I guess). They released photographs today of the compound and several men who had been shot dead, they are extremely gruesome images, apparently taken by Pakistani journalists and sold independently. One looks a lot like Bin Laden and is believed to be one of the sons he decided to keep around. It's extremely fishy to me that they have not released a photograph of Bin Laden himself, which Obama has claimed does exist, but decided against releasing to the public. I think it was a link from Yahoo or MSN actually but I completely misread it, my bad again.

Yes, it seems that the woman was not his wife.

Leading article: The nagging questions that refuse to go away - Leading Articles, Opinion - The Independent

It appears false that he used human shields or died a coward though. He was unarmed and from what I have been reading it seems as though he could very well have been taken alive. To shoot him dead when a viable alternative was readily available, just sounds so wrong to me.

I am aware that my views are probably not in line with a lot of others. On conservative newpaper message boards the most typical messages are pretty much as follows: "He caused 9-11. I hope he burns in hell". I would love to see the hard evidence that he actually caused 9-11 or that there is a hell. Those are minor quibbles though.

Originally Posted by miles

Yes, it seems that the woman was not his wife.

Leading article: The nagging questions that refuse to go away - Leading Articles, Opinion - The Independent

It appears false that he used human shields or died a coward though. He was unarmed and from what I have been reading it seems as though he could very well have been taken alive. To shoot him dead when a viable alternative was readily available, just sounds so wrong to me.

I am aware that my views are probably not in line with a lot of others. On conservative newpaper message boards the most typical messages are pretty much as follows: "He caused 9-11. I hope he burns in hell". I would love to see the hard evidence that he actually caused 9-11 or that there is a hell. Those are minor quibbles though.

Well first off regardless of the fashion he died it was as a coward, among many other terrible things. I no longer pretend to have any idea what his role in 9-11 actually was, it's very possible he was nowhere near the mastermind made out to be, but there is also no doubt he has orchestrated many other terrorist attacks and was utterly scum. I just don't see how on earth you could feel justice would have been better served by actually putting him to trial? Where would this have taken place? Obviously they would just kill him anyways, and he would bask in all the attention he received in the lead up as a martyr. Why give him any more time in the limelight for christs sake, not to mention dealing with Pakistan in the lead up to it all. Saddam Husseins show trial was bad enough, and the US was already occupying Iraq making it possible to try him there, however absurd it was. Would they have set up a tribunal in Pakistan, let him hire the best lawyers he could and give him months in the limelight praising Allah and inspiring more radical sentiments? Any way this happened it was not going to sit well with the Arab world, they did it the easiest way possible and I'm glad for that.

Hahah CFH where do you find pictures like that? I agree this thread could get really nasty and probably isn't worth debating, but don't feel Miles or I have posted anything remotely uncivilized thus far.

Originally Posted by p4pking

Originally Posted by miles

Yes, it seems that the woman was not his wife.

Leading article: The nagging questions that refuse to go away - Leading Articles, Opinion - The Independent

It appears false that he used human shields or died a coward though. He was unarmed and from what I have been reading it seems as though he could very well have been taken alive. To shoot him dead when a viable alternative was readily available, just sounds so wrong to me.

I am aware that my views are probably not in line with a lot of others. On conservative newpaper message boards the most typical messages are pretty much as follows: "He caused 9-11. I hope he burns in hell". I would love to see the hard evidence that he actually caused 9-11 or that there is a hell. Those are minor quibbles though.

Well first off regardless of the fashion he died it was as a coward, among many other terrible things. I no longer pretend to have any idea what his role in 9-11 actually was, it's very possible he was nowhere near the mastermind made out to be, but there is also no doubt he has orchestrated many other terrorist attacks and was utterly scum. I just don't see how on earth you could feel justice would have been better served by actually putting him to trial? Where would this have taken place? Obviously they would just kill him anyways, and he would bask in all the attention he received in the lead up as a martyr. Why give him any more time in the limelight for christs sake, not to mention dealing with Pakistan in the lead up to it all. Saddam Husseins show trial was bad enough, and the US was already occupying Iraq making it possible to try him there, however absurd it was. Would they have set up a tribunal in Pakistan, let him hire the best lawyers he could and give him months in the limelight praising Allah and inspiring more radical sentiments? Any way this happened it was not going to sit well with the Arab world, they did it the easiest way possible and I'm glad for that.

To assasinate someone is an act of terrorism in itself and to do it on sovereign soil quite outrageous. It is just that it is ordered by those who are supposedly legitimate. To just deal with problems using a trigger is self defeating because it shows us as being on the same moral level as the so called terrorists. You bring them to trial and produce your evidence. If you don't do that then you cannot claim the higher ground and it seems that America has been going down this slippery slope a long time now. The reaction to Wikileaks, the treatment of Bradley Manning and now this, suggest a moral decay and these are just issues from the past year or so.

Originally Posted by p4pking

Hahah CFH where do you find pictures like that? I agree this thread could get really nasty and probably isn't worth debating, but don't feel Miles or I have posted anything remotely uncivilized thus far.

I was looking for this pic, but when I did a Google search I was the other pic and, obviously, found it full of awesome:




And you guys are being perfectly civil, I've just seen enough of these threads to know where they lead.

You are right CFH, they usually go off in predictable directions. We could probably compile a "make your own Saddo boxing thread" program and all the appropriate parts will just compile themselves. I anticipate Lyle emerging as the 25th poster in this thread and Bilbo posting 73 times. There is a 7% chance of me announcing that I am leaving on page 17.

You make a very good point for sure Miles, fully understood. I just feel that in this case a judicial process would have done more harm than good globally, I guess I have a pretty slippery foothold on that though. Also Pakistan is about as sovereign as Botswana these days by everything I've been reading. They are supposed to be an American ally, and were less cooperative than practically any neutral country would have been in dealing with this by all accounts. They have been receiving hundreds of millions of dollars every year from America and couldn't bring us a 6'6 arab on a dialysis machine living a mile away from their top Military academy. It just stinks really.

Originally Posted by p4pking

You make a very good point for sure Miles, fully understood. I just feel that in this case a judicial process would have done more harm than good globally, I guess I have a pretty slippery foothold on that though. Also Pakistan is about as sovereign as Botswana these days by everything I've been reading. They are supposed to be an American ally, and were less cooperative than practically any neutral country would have been in dealing with this by all accounts. They have been receiving hundreds of millions of dollars every year from America and couldn't bring us a 6'6 arab on a dialysis machine living a mile away from their top Military academy. It just stinks really.

I think he should have been taken alive, but have a feeling I might be in the minority. I am curious to know what other people think really, so am going to let this thread run for a few pages and just be a casual observer for a bit.

I agree that it was quite amazing for him to be located where he was. It seems all the local residents were equally surprised. Must have been an eye opener to find out that Bin Laden had been living next door for several years. Either Pakistan really is that inept in terms of security or Bin Laden had help. You would have to assume the latter.

Originally Posted by miles

Originally Posted by p4pking

You make a very good point for sure Miles, fully understood. I just feel that in this case a judicial process would have done more harm than good globally, I guess I have a pretty slippery foothold on that though. Also Pakistan is about as sovereign as Botswana these days by everything I've been reading. They are supposed to be an American ally, and were less cooperative than practically any neutral country would have been in dealing with this by all accounts. They have been receiving hundreds of millions of dollars every year from America and couldn't bring us a 6'6 arab on a dialysis machine living a mile away from their top Military academy. It just stinks really.

I think he should have been taken alive, but have a feeling I might be in the minority. I am curious to know what other people think really, so am going to let this thread run for a few pages and just be a casual observer for a bit.

I agree that it was quite amazing for him to be located where he was. It seems all the local residents were equally surprised. Must have been an eye opener to find out that Bin Laden had been living next door for several years. Either Pakistan really is that inept in terms of security or Bin Laden had help. You would have to assume the latter.

I was watching an interview on TV yesterday with some journalist who made the point that Pakistani police are VERY strict in dealing with foreigners. If you move there and build yourself a house, you can bet damn well that they will knock on your door to find out who you are, in his words. It's ridiculous to think that Pakistani officials didn't know in my opinion.