Mactep wrote:Shit. Now I'll never get the $10 he owes me.
St. Jimmy wrote:I gotta hurry up and get some sleep, I have a 50 minute drive to work in 8 hours and need some sleep before then, so I'm just gonna post my opinion from facebook and get back to a more well spoken opinion later tomorrow.
Bin Ladin was killed, so what? It doesn't mean Al-Qaeda has been eliminated. They are still very existent. Also, the US announcing so very quickly and in a patriotic in-your-face style that our country is responsible, should be a frightening thing, not a cause for mass celebration. I hope the CIA and all other intelligence agencies have their shit together, and I'm damn glad I don't live somewhere important.
Arneb wrote:The SEALs who went in for this operation deserve endless praise for their skill and courage. But I would have preferred Usama Bin Ladin in an orange jumper, with all the medical treatments necessary, well-fed, strong, manicured, silvery beard flowing thick from his chin, scented in rosewater, sitting beside a fire-spouting fat cat lawyer - in front of a New York jury.
Arneb wrote:After that, life imprisonment together with other killers.
Arneb wrote:I'd even have suspended my on-principle opposition to capital punishment for him.
Arneb wrote:But it would have been better than this mangled body with a hole in its head, dropped into the sea, ideal stuff for a martyr legend.
Superluminal wrote:The Donald wants to see his death certificate.
Mactep wrote:But I do wonder about something. If he were captured alive, and brought before a trial with somewhat more objective standards than those of the Moscow trials of the 1930s, what evidence did they actually have on him? Is there really anything that would have stood up to the standards of a criminal trial? I don't really know. It wouldn't have looked so good for the Americans if he were acquitted, and then promptly sued the US government for damages. Maybe that's why, wishing to spare the Americans this potential embarrassment, he went down in a blaze of glory.
Superluminal wrote:With all the controversy over his burial at sea. We should have stuffed his body with explosives, then released it to who ever wanted it, then detinated it at the funeral. Could have gotten a lot more terrorist then.
KLA2 wrote:As for the disposition of the body, someone said it should be ground up, fed to rats, the rats fed to inebriated pigs, the pigs then served to residents of Guantanamo Bay.
Heid the Ba' wrote:Depending on the jurisdiction they might have enough for inciting hatred or conspiracy but I haven't heard of any evidence that would stand up in court. His claims and videos (however true) would not necessarily be enough to convict him.
KLA2 wrote:Come on, Arneb.
KLA2 wrote:Had he been taken alive, put on trial, jailed, ... fanatical followers would be kidnapping innocents and torturing/murdering/mailing body parts demanding OBL's release.
KLA2 wrote:Besides, maybe he really was captured, and a kindly, gentle team of CIA agents are saying, "give us some information, please, pretty please with a cherry on top?" I would like to think so.
KLA2 wrote:We know he would not be hurt, because President Bush assured the world that the USA does not torture.
KLA2 wrote:As for the disposition of the body, someone said it should be ground up, fed to rats, the rats fed to inebriated pigs, the pigs then served to residents of Guantanamo Bay.
I do not agree.
Rats deserve better.
Arneb wrote:KLA2 wrote:We know he would not be hurt, because President Bush assured the world that the USA does not torture.
I have serious doubts as to the validity of that promise.
Heid the Ba' wrote:Superluminal wrote:With all the controversy over his burial at sea. We should have stuffed his body with explosives, then released it to who ever wanted it, then detinated it at the funeral. Could have gotten a lot more terrorist then.
How does this differ morally from carbombing a marketpalce or flying a plane into a tower? You would simply be killing random people.KLA2 wrote:As for the disposition of the body, someone said it should be ground up, fed to rats, the rats fed to inebriated pigs, the pigs then served to residents of Guantanamo Bay.
The residents of Guantanamo Bay are suspects, they haven't been convicted of anything, or even given the hope of a trial. They are still innocent in the eyes of the law.
Come on people, we're better than this.
St. Jimmy wrote:So after reading and listening to all these different reports and retraction of comments and statements by officials, I have serious doubts about everything. And not because I'm some conspiracy theorist, but because the way the US officials are releasing information is inviting doubt.
This whole 10 year manhunt hasn't been about justice being served or trying to detain an evil man; it's been a US revenge quest from start to finish. I don't think the mission on Sunday ever including capturing him. Especially when, he was shot through the left eye while unarmed. I can't say I blame us, he claimed responsibility for thousands of innocent American's deaths caused by Al-Qaeda terrorist attacks.
This is the only thing I believe whole-heartedly. I'm gonna take back all other statements I've made on the Bin Ladin situation and wait until some more official statements and info are released from officials, as new things seem to be emerging every day.
Arneb wrote:KLA2 wrote:Come on, Arneb.
?
Come where? Or is this simply to say that you can't take me seriously? In that case, you can stop reading.
Jeeze, Arneb, you are so darned sensitive. I respect you greatly, and take you seriously. That does not mean I will never disagree or discuss an issue with you.KLA2 wrote:Had he been taken alive, put on trial, jailed, ... fanatical followers would be kidnapping innocents and torturing/murdering/mailing body parts demanding OBL's release.
OK, so you can't take hostages to demand the release of someone who is already dead. No argument there. But so what? Islamist terrorists don't generelly take hostages in order to have their demands fulfilled. They make impossible-to-fulfil demands in order to have a pretext for slashing their hostages' throats as publicly as possible (Daniel Pearl, anyone?). And, will terrorists hell-bent on destroying Western civilisation act any more friendly and likeably because a navy SEAL commando killed OBL instead of taking him prisoner? Will they be any less likely to butcher innocent people because OBL was shot in the head while in bed with his wife, unarmed - instead of being handcuffed, hooded, and rushed off in a helicopter? No, Islamist terrorism will do anything, and as cruelly as possible. A living and convicted OBL wouldn't change that at all.
I do not agree. In the past, "enemies of the state" have gone to extraordinary (brutal) means to "liberate" incarcerated "leaders." Granted, a terrorist will do do anything to inspire terror. It is not that far right fringe you hope to affect. It is those to the left. If you get my drift.
You see, I wouldn't EVER criticise the actions of the team that went in there. Because I don't know what happend there, and I don't know what their orders were.
See my previous comments. Maybe the SEALS were ordered to kill him on sight. Maybe they thought he was going for a weapon under his pillow. Maybe if he had thrown up his hands and said, "I surrender." Maybe more facts(?) will be released.
I merely point out that my personal preference would have been taking OBL alive: He, convicted as criminal, in spite of being given all the rights criminal suspects enjoy in the Free World, and in spite of being given good medical treatment, food and spiritual counsel, would have shown how strong the Free World and its leading nation, the US, really are (Mactep's interjection about the quality of the actual evidence against OBL is, of course, highly relevant here).
Well, see my previous comments on the actions terrorists will take to "free" leaders. Would the loss of one more life be justified? Millions of dollars in court costs? And, possibly, acquital on legal technicalities?KLA2 wrote:Besides, maybe he really was captured, and a kindly, gentle team of CIA agents are saying, "give us some information, please, pretty please with a cherry on top?" I would like to think so.
Sorry, I don't know what you mean by that.
Sarcasm. But, you knew that.KLA2 wrote:We know he would not be hurt, because President Bush assured the world that the USA does not torture.
I have serious doubts as to the validity of that promise. But I'd like to make the point that not torturing people, e.g. detainees in Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo, would actually be good for the U.S..
Sarcasm. I do not approve morally or logically of the use of torture, except under extraordinary, controlled and monitored circumstances.KLA2 wrote:As for the disposition of the body, someone said it should be ground up, fed to rats, the rats fed to inebriated pigs, the pigs then served to residents of Guantanamo Bay.
I do not agree.
Rats deserve better.
I actually find this statment quite repulsive. Some islamic fundamentalists have said that the infidels are "worse than pigs". I can think of no reason at all why anyone would aspire to reach down to that level - even if every inmate of Guantanamo were indeed a terrorist as bad as or worse than OBL. Which they aren't, see Heid's statement.
Geeze, Arneb, lighten up. Again sarcasm/letting off steam. (Although, not being religious, if my corpse is disposed of in that way, I really do not care. Bon apatit to the rats, etc.)
If we act or even speak at the same level of depravity as Islamist terrorists do, which moral high ground can we claim?
Return to Current Events and Politics
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests