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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by miles

Quote:

---

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.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3424/...6d81f4bb88.jpg

Quote:

---

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?;D 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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by p4pking

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by p4pking

Hahah CFH where do you find pictures like that?;D 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:

http://gal.patheticcockroach.com/var...g?m=1299273274


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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by miles

Quote:

---

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.

i would have liked to have seen him taken alive and suffer in captivity for a bit - then tortured and killed by Michael Madsen on a live tv free ppv event sometime in September.

But alas this was not to be.

We will never know the truth of what happened in that 'firefight' but like fuck did he deserve a fair trial so lets not even go there.

And yes the Pakistan govt knew he was there for sure.

The body photos should be released though to silence the doubters. Stand him up by a tape meausre as he was about 6 foot 6 or something ridiculous wasnt he.

or stand him next to Vitali Klitschko

He wasn't killed at all. He's been dead 9 years.

The Bin Ladens are a wealthy family, in cahoots with the leading American familes and a part of the Carlye group. This is all factual, google it.

Osama died of kidney failure in 2002, too soo for the US who were using him as the face of fear and a pretext for invading Iraq and Afghanistan. So they did not report his death, and preferred to keep him alive.

These kind of lies are something they have a history of doing, and I invite you to look up the proven factual fabrications of the Gulf of Tonkin incident, where they faked an attack on the USS Maddox by the Vietnamese in order to get justification to go to war with them, and Operation Northwoods where they planned attacks on their own people, including shooting down planes, to blame on the Cubans. This went as high as the US Army's chief of staff, and was only ruled out by JFK, who it has to be said, was assassinated in suspicious circumstances, maybe for refusing to carry out the whims of those really in charge.

Already Obama has covered himself in case of future revelations by revealing he did not actually witness the assassination live on cam in the control room himself. They have no body because they threw it in the ocean. They took no photo's becauase he's too badly mutilated, therefore the only thing we have to go on is their word.

Sorry but after Vietnam, Northwoods, Pearl Harbour, Saddam's WMD's, their word doesn't mean a whole lot.

They were just waiting for the best timing to announce his death and now with revolutions going on all around the Arab world and a very different Middle East emerging, it made sense to get rid of the face of fear and end the post 911 era. They will create a new story for the Arab world in the coming months and years.

What about my thread sounds so absurd? All you have is you assured belief that America wouldn't act in this way, even though it has been proven and documented that they do. They have given no evidence whatsoever that Bin Laded was killed, or that he has been alive for the last 10 years.

He made one video in 2004, contradicting his earlier denials of being involved in 911 and that's all we've heard of him. They claim they have a new video now, I guess they need to create the illusion he was still active and a threat.

Open your minds people, and start looking into this.

Video: Protests in Pakistan follow Bin Laden's death - Asia, World - The Independent

It seems that some Pakistani's are not happy about what the US did and I think their arguments are perfectly valid. I mean where do you draw the line? Some US politicians were calling for Julian Assange to be assasinated just a few months ago. Going on the Osama precedent it would be quite acceptable for US forces to go to the UK, find Assange, and then shoot him dead.

That is unbelievable really. The President of the USA should not have the right to assasinate anyone, anywhere and at any time. It raises many serious questions and is an extremely slippery slope IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

He wasn't killed at all. He's been dead 9 years.

The Bin Ladens are a wealthy family, in cahoots with the leading American familes and a part of the Carlye group. This is all factual, google it.

Osama died of kidney failure in 2002, too soo for the US who were using him as the face of fear and a pretext for invading Iraq and Afghanistan. So they did not report his death, and preferred to keep him alive.

These kind of lies are something they have a history of doing, and I invite you to look up the proven factual fabrications of the Gulf of Tonkin incident, where they faked an attack on the USS Maddox by the Vietnamese in order to get justification to go to war with them, and Operation Northwoods where they planned attacks on their own people, including shooting down planes, to blame on the Cubans. This went as high as the US Army's chief of staff, and was only ruled out by JFK, who it has to be said, was assassinated in suspicious circumstances, maybe for refusing to carry out the whims of those really in charge.

Already Obama has covered himself in case of future revelations by revealing he did not actually witness the assassination live on cam in the control room himself. They have no body because they threw it in the ocean. They took no photo's becauase he's too badly mutilated, therefore the only thing we have to go on is their word.

Sorry but after Vietnam, Northwoods, Pearl Harbour, Saddam's WMD's, their word doesn't mean a whole lot.

They were just waiting for the best timing to announce his death and now with revolutions going on all around the Arab world and a very different Middle East emerging, it made sense to get rid of the face of fear and end the post 911 era. They will create a new story for the Arab world in the coming months and years.

What about my thread sounds so absurd? All you have is you assured belief that America wouldn't act in this way, even though it has been proven and documented that they do. They have given no evidence whatsoever that Bin Laded was killed, or that he has been alive for the last 10 years.

He made one video in 2004, contradicting his earlier denials of being involved in 911 and that's all we've heard of him. They claim they have a new video now, I guess they need to create the illusion he was still active and a threat.

Open your minds people, and start looking into this.

---

He was one of triplets now there's one left who will wreak havoc on us. Bin Laden.
Pedal Bin Laden and Recycle Bin Laden.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

He wasn't killed at all. He's been dead 9 years.

The Bin Ladens are a wealthy family, in cahoots with the leading American familes and a part of the Carlye group. This is all factual, google it.

Osama died of kidney failure in 2002, too soo for the US who were using him as the face of fear and a pretext for invading Iraq and Afghanistan. So they did not report his death, and preferred to keep him alive.

These kind of lies are something they have a history of doing, and I invite you to look up the proven factual fabrications of the Gulf of Tonkin incident, where they faked an attack on the USS Maddox by the Vietnamese in order to get justification to go to war with them, and Operation Northwoods where they planned attacks on their own people, including shooting down planes, to blame on the Cubans. This went as high as the US Army's chief of staff, and was only ruled out by JFK, who it has to be said, was assassinated in suspicious circumstances, maybe for refusing to carry out the whims of those really in charge.

Already Obama has covered himself in case of future revelations by revealing he did not actually witness the assassination live on cam in the control room himself. They have no body because they threw it in the ocean. They took no photo's becauase he's too badly mutilated, therefore the only thing we have to go on is their word.

Sorry but after Vietnam, Northwoods, Pearl Harbour, Saddam's WMD's, their word doesn't mean a whole lot.

They were just waiting for the best timing to announce his death and now with revolutions going on all around the Arab world and a very different Middle East emerging, it made sense to get rid of the face of fear and end the post 911 era. They will create a new story for the Arab world in the coming months and years.

What about my thread sounds so absurd? All you have is you assured belief that America wouldn't act in this way, even though it has been proven and documented that they do. They have given no evidence whatsoever that Bin Laded was killed, or that he has been alive for the last 10 years.

He made one video in 2004, contradicting his earlier denials of being involved in 911 and that's all we've heard of him. They claim they have a new video now, I guess they need to create the illusion he was still active and a threat.

Open your minds people, and start looking into this.

---

What I find absurd about that idea is that you mention the Carlyle group and Bin Ladens ties etc, and then fail to realize that George H and W BUSH are both members for crying out loud. If Osama had died in 2002, you don't think perhaps it would have been in the corporate interest, better timing to stage his death before the election in 2008? You're talking absolute nonsense in actuality. I'm referring strictly to the Bin Laden theory I should add though, you've got the Gulf of Tonkin and Northwoods, WMDS, etc. This just doesn't share ties.

Bilbo stop being a douchebag

And hell no why would we want Bin Laden alive? THAT would incite attacks and kidnappings etc with the crazy muslims wanting to free their zealot leader.

OBL got what he deserved...better than he deserved actually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by El Kabong

THAT would incite attacks and kidnappings etc with the crazy muslims wanting to free their zealot leader.

---

very true. Could have been like Airforce One, Die Hard II , Toy Soldiers etc..


this outcome was for the best - though a short period in captivity and torture would have been better

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by p4pking

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

He wasn't killed at all. He's been dead 9 years.

The Bin Ladens are a wealthy family, in cahoots with the leading American familes and a part of the Carlye group. This is all factual, google it.

Osama died of kidney failure in 2002, too soo for the US who were using him as the face of fear and a pretext for invading Iraq and Afghanistan. So they did not report his death, and preferred to keep him alive.

These kind of lies are something they have a history of doing, and I invite you to look up the proven factual fabrications of the Gulf of Tonkin incident, where they faked an attack on the USS Maddox by the Vietnamese in order to get justification to go to war with them, and Operation Northwoods where they planned attacks on their own people, including shooting down planes, to blame on the Cubans. This went as high as the US Army's chief of staff, and was only ruled out by JFK, who it has to be said, was assassinated in suspicious circumstances, maybe for refusing to carry out the whims of those really in charge.

Already Obama has covered himself in case of future revelations by revealing he did not actually witness the assassination live on cam in the control room himself. They have no body because they threw it in the ocean. They took no photo's becauase he's too badly mutilated, therefore the only thing we have to go on is their word.

Sorry but after Vietnam, Northwoods, Pearl Harbour, Saddam's WMD's, their word doesn't mean a whole lot.

They were just waiting for the best timing to announce his death and now with revolutions going on all around the Arab world and a very different Middle East emerging, it made sense to get rid of the face of fear and end the post 911 era. They will create a new story for the Arab world in the coming months and years.

What about my thread sounds so absurd? All you have is you assured belief that America wouldn't act in this way, even though it has been proven and documented that they do. They have given no evidence whatsoever that Bin Laded was killed, or that he has been alive for the last 10 years.

He made one video in 2004, contradicting his earlier denials of being involved in 911 and that's all we've heard of him. They claim they have a new video now, I guess they need to create the illusion he was still active and a threat.

Open your minds people, and start looking into this.

---

What I find absurd about that idea is that you mention the Carlyle group and Bin Ladens ties etc, and then fail to realize that George H and W BUSH are both members for crying out loud. If Osama had died in 2002, you don't think perhaps it would have been in the corporate interest, better timing to stage his death before the election in 2008? You're talking absolute nonsense in actuality. I'm referring strictly to the Bin Laden theory I should add though, you've got the Gulf of Tonkin and Northwoods, WMDS, etc. This just doesn't share ties.

---

The Bush family and Bin Ladens are friends, or at least business partners. The day after 911 when a no fly zone was enacted over the whole of the US the US government flew the Bin Laden family out of America in secrecy. Again, factual.

The whole Al Qadea threat was created by America as a pretext for war in Iraq and carrying out there vested interests in the middle east. They absolutely wanted Bin Laden alive as he was the face of that fear, makes no sense at all to stage his death before that.

Some good stuff here

Bin Laden Ties

In answer to the question: Yes.

Considering what happened to Saddam Hussien, I would of thought the same would have been done to OBL.

To show the world he had been captured and paraded on global television, then tried in court for his criminal activities would have been better imo.

Maybe the is some truth in what Bilbo is saying, who knows? and I guess we wont till the US divulges all the info regards to shooting.

Capture him, parade the capture, try him, then a public execution would have been the way I would have done it.

I think in the morden world the law does not always seem to equel justice.

Bin Laden deserved to die in a horrible way and thats what he got IMO.It was justice

Also what benifit would it serve to keep him alive.All it would do is fan more extreamists when he would spout his hatred at his trail.

The SEAL team were give the nod and wink the same way the British SAS were when dealing with the IRA.Bring him in dead.

Job well done!;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by porkypara

I think in the morden world the law does not always seem to equel justice.

Bin Laden deserved to die in a horrible way and thats what he got IMO.It was justice

Also what benifit would it serve to keep him alive.All it would do is fan more extreamists when he would spout his hatred at his trail.

The SEAL team were give the nod and wink the same way the British SAS were when dealing with the IRA.Bring him in dead.

Job well done!;D

---

Miles has a point though about Assange. Had the US dropped a killing squad into the mansion he was staying in and slaughtered a bunch of people there would have been an outcry.

Had the Pakistani's launched an attack on some enemy of their state on American soil they would now be facing two weeks of carpet bombing.

Also it makes the British look stupid. America send in their navy seals and kick ass, we sent our SAS into LIbya to help the rebels and they captured us and sent us packing tail between legs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by porkypara

I think in the morden world the law does not always seem to equel justice.

Bin Laden deserved to die in a horrible way and thats what he got IMO.It was justice

Also what benifit would it serve to keep him alive.All it would do is fan more extreamists when he would spout his hatred at his trail.

The SEAL team were give the nod and wink the same way the British SAS were when dealing with the IRA.Bring him in dead.

Job well done!;D

---

Miles has a point though about Assange. Had the US dropped a killing squad into the mansion he was staying in and slaughtered a bunch of people there would have been an outcry.

Had the Pakistani's launched an attack on some enemy of their state on American soil they would now be facing two weeks of carpet bombing.

Also it makes the British look stupid. America send in their navy seals and kick ass, we sent our SAS into LIbya to help the rebels and they captured us and sent us packing tail between legs.

---

The seal mission and the sas in Libya are two totaly different cases and they cant really be compaired.

If Pakistan had been willing or able to do the job they would have been left to do it.But unfortunaly Pakistan could not be trusted and the US had to do the job.

Another good question in addition to the thread title is :

"Should a photo be released to prove Bin Laden is dead?"

The fact it's been stated he was behind the worst terrorism attack on American soil ever,,, on the World's most wanted list for the better part of the last 10 years,,, had probably 100's of millions of dollars of American taxpayer money spent on finding him and his posse,,, the fact it actually TOOK America 10 years to find him,,, I think it needs to be released...

I don't really buy into any of the reasons given of why they can't provide evidence other than their word...

Assange has some work to do!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dizaster

Another good question in addition to the thread title is :

"Should a photo be released to prove Bin Laden is dead?"

The fact it's been stated he was behind the worst terrorism attack on American soil ever,,, on the World's most wanted list for the better part of the last 10 years,,, had probably 100's of millions of dollars of American taxpayer money spent on finding him and his posse,,, the fact it actually TOOK America 10 years to find him,,, I think it needs to be released...

I don't really buy into any of the reasons given of why they can't provide evidence other than their word...

---

I think Bush should take some of the blame as to why its taken so long as he started the pointless war in Iraq which made the world a more dangerouse place and made millions of new enemys for the west.Also it diverted much needed resourses from the hunt for Bin Laden.

You can't take alive a guy that's been dead for ten years.

or one that never existed in the first place.


And even if he did exist and was stil alive, taking him alive and bringing him to justice in a fair court of law is just not the american way.

The other problem with taking him alive is you'd have to charge him for 9/11. Now the problem with that is the FBI never held him responsible for 9/11 in the first place.

FBI — Ten Most Wanted And his name is spelt differently....


People would find that a bit odd, and then if you did decide to try him for 9/11 you'd have to come up with some kind of evidence not to mention that bin laden may have started talking and showing up more inconsistancies in the official story.

Nope it's better to kill off the boogie man in a blaze of Hollywood movie style bravado, that the american people lap up like a thirsty dog on a hot day.

Just when Obama's approval rating is at the lowest of any american president at this point in a term, just when Obama needs to show he's a leader, just as he's about to start a re election campeign. and now he's off to ground zero to grand stand and no doubt give an emotional and rousing speech about 'getting the job done' or some other 'mission accomplished' style propaganda bullshit.


The whole thing is so absurdly comical to me, that people actually believe and buy into this crap.


My final thoughts.....

If the US went into afghanistan to get bin laden how come they are still there now that the guy is dead?

Doesn't the fact that they 'found' him in Pakistan make the last 10 years of blood shed pointless? (setting aside the real agenda which was to secure oil, opium and lithium) Surely anyone with half a brain should be asking what the real agenda is.

One of the most technologically advanced milliataries with one of the biggest budgets in the world took ten years to find one guy living in a mansion in Pakistan? But hold on they didn't, it was his next door neigbours twitter feed that gave the game away. That doesn't sound the remotest bit ludicris to any of you?

After killing bin laden the corpse is thrown in the sea and the pictures are too disgusting? Just take our word for it we got him? Really?

The media and government have got it so easy. They don't even need to try anymore. People will believe ANYTHING!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hornfinger

Now the problem with that is the FBI never held him responsible for 9/11 in the first place.

FBI — Ten Most Wanted And his name is spelt differently....

---

Jesus Christ...

:vd:

You do know that the name isn't actually spelt using the English alphabet... it's Arabic and there is no official English translation... a lot of people say Osama and a lot of people INCLUDING THE FBI and CIA say Usama

"The problem with Arabic is that its difficult to read" - OSS 117

أسامة بن محمد بن عوض بن لادن‎

When anyone starts to say he was unarmed and it was wrong I think about the innocents in the Twin Towers and on the tubes/bus in London - they were unarmed too.

You go around blowing people up then don't expect when justice comes calling that it's coming with a cup of tea and a blanket. If there was intel to be gained then yes he should have been taken alive if not then to me a double tap to the head was quicker and more humane than he deserved - period.

Honestly? I hope he didn't go out shooting... becuase the cunt does not deserve an ounce of valour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by porkypara

I think in the morden world the law does not always seem to equel justice.

Bin Laden deserved to die in a horrible way and thats what he got IMO.It was justice

Also what benifit would it serve to keep him alive.All it would do is fan more extreamists when he would spout his hatred at his trail.

The SEAL team were give the nod and wink the same way the British SAS were when dealing with the IRA.Bring him in dead.

Job well done!;D

---

Miles has a point though about Assange. Had the US dropped a killing squad into the mansion he was staying in and slaughtered a bunch of people there would have been an outcry.

Had the Pakistani's launched an attack on some enemy of their state on American soil they would now be facing two weeks of carpet bombing.

Also it makes the British look stupid. America send in their navy seals and kick ass, we sent our SAS into LIbya to help the rebels and they captured us and sent us packing tail between legs.

---

It's a very important point really.

It seems to me that the fact that the US went to a sovereign nation without them knowing and murdered people seems to be getting lost amongst all the euphoria and chants of "USA, USA". It seems to me that America has no respect for international law and also had no desire to bring a man to justice. Shooting an unarmed man in the head just isn't justice. It is barbaric and shows America to be no better than Bin Laden and his so called terrorists, but I guess we knew that all along. It is hardly a new topic for me.

I also call into question the humanity of people who say that it was better off this way. So we should basically start murdering people without trial and we are comfortable with this? I certainly am not. I find the idea that this should be acceptable quite repugnant. Evidence should be laid out and a case made. I am opposed to the death penalty, but if there is enough evidence then the death can come at that juncture.

I view this as yet another sorry episode in America's recent political/military history. A shame really because it should have been something that showed them as something much better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shamrock

When anyone starts to say he was unarmed and it was wrong I think about the innocents in the Twin Towers and on the tubes/bus in London - they were unarmed too.

You go around blowing people up then don't expect when justice comes calling that it's coming with a cup of tea and a blanket. If there was intel to be gained then yes he should have been taken alive if not then to me a double tap to the head was quicker and more humane than he deserved - period.

---

Those were terrible events for sure, but we should have taken him in and laid the evidence out for all to see. We have never really put together the direct links saying that he caused 9-11 for instance. We are just led to believe that this was the case. He was a terrible piece of work, but two wrongs don't make a right. As I say, if we needed to execute him them it should have been done after he had been proven guilty.

I'm leaning in favor of taking him alive, but I understand why they didn't.

Miles: "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"

LOL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hornfinger

Now the problem with that is the FBI never held him responsible for 9/11 in the first place.

FBI — Ten Most Wanted And his name is spelt differently....

---

Jesus Christ...

:vd:

You do know that the name isn't actually spelt using the English alphabet... it's Arabic and there is no official English translation... a lot of people say Osama and a lot of people INCLUDING THE FBI and CIA say Usama

---

Out of all the things mentioned in my post you pick up a descrepency on spelling :vd: