Who thinks its weird that binLaden was killed rather than tried and then killed ? Even Saddam had a trial.
13 Answers to "Who thinks its weird that binLaden was killed rather than tried and then killed ? Even Saddam had a trial."
-
Several points I'd like to make: The operation was not an assassination, it was a capture gone bad or dosen't anyone remember the helicopter crash. Maybe ChipmunkErnie and his crystal ball knows how to crash a helicopter to cover an assassination and make it look like a capture operation. We have the testamony of seal team 6 and the support team all saying it was a capture operation. Agin ChipmunkErnie and his crystal ball disagree. 50+ people who were there plus everyone up the line to the president vs. ChipmunkErnie and his crystal ball. Where was chip at the time? What is his phisic record? Was this a war situation or not? bin Laden had declared war on the U.S. Congress no longer declares was, it has passed that athority to the president. Treaties take presidence over U.S. law. We were fighting bin Laden under treaty to the U.N. which the president has the full athority to support in warfare aginst bin Laden and his terrorism endevors. Therefore bin Laden was an armed battlefield combatant and totally valid as a target. Please explain under what circumstances he is entitled to a trial while hostilities are continuing!
And how many lives of US soldiers/sailors should the U.S. be willing to sacrifice to ensure that bin Laden was captured rather than killed. The place was heavily armed and well fortified, deep in a country where our military did not have the presence afforded to bin Laden's forces. Fifteen or maybe twenty lives? if not the failure of the whole mission? Just about everything Obama has done, he has done poorly. Give the man credit for one of the few he got right. Americans accused of terrorism no longer have the right to a trial before execution, why give up American lives to afford that right to foreign terrorists? You're sure asking a lot of the 1% who voluntarily suspend their constitutional rights and put their lives on the line for you other 99%!Like (4)
-
I don't recall asking for anything other than opinions. It appears that your country has sacrificed more that military resources. You have lost your right to the presumtion of innocence. How sad that the US is no longer the icon of freedom it used to be. Any idea why no effort was made to capture Bin Laden in the many years that passed between the crime and the construction of his fortress ?
Like (1)
-
I agree some of what you say. However, isn't it a strange thing to be so well prepared (drones) for something they claim was an arrest plan ? I don't believe their intention was ever to capture him. I respect that you believe otherwise. After all, neither of us has enough info to know, definitively either way.
Like (1)
-
The fishies were hungry and could not wait.
Like (3)
-
lolLike (1)
-
I feel for the fishies, of course. But no trial.....when did that become acceptable ?
Like (1)
-
Because he already died years ago of kidney disease. I'm glad you question the lies.
Like (2)
-
Thanks mate. I didn't know about that :o)
Like (1)
-
they're giving up all pretensions of the moral high ground
Like (2)
-
Agreed. If I hadn't already picked, I think this would be best answer. I have to respect the chipmunk, though. At least he seems to grasp what has happened. :o)
Like (1)
-
iguanachips, you are permitted to change your "Best Answer" anytime and as many times as you wish! Even months after the question has been closed! If atadir has the best answer choose it! Both will get credit for a best answer!
Like (1)
-
It's not weird at all cause bin Laden took full credit on video for 9/11. So, the weird thing is that it took so long to find him. Saddam was found in that hole by our military who had no reason to kill him. He got a trial but after that botched hanging which must have hurt like heck he probably would have preferred a clean round to the head from Seal Team Six. It was sorta like when Henry the VIII loved Ann Boyln enough to send to France for an expensive expert to lope off her head with a sword and then Cromwells's enemies hated him so that they got the executioner drunk and it took five swings of the axe--there are historical letters of bystanders that speak of how he screamed and cried the first three times. I think bin Laden got off easy.
Like (2)
-
His video admission was conclusive evidence. I agree that he got off too easy. A trial would have humiliated him as well as killed him. An assassination made him a martyr and made the US look weak.
Like (1)
-
yes it was weird that they didnt show his body all bloody too like they did sadam or gadafi
Like (2)
-
Dodgy is the word I'd use. It's a shame. A trial would have been very rewarding for all.
Like (1)
-
Hundreds if not thousands would have been killed in retaliation had your suggestion been followed!
Like (1)
-
What disgusts me is, the bankers in the 2007 recession. They walked away with huge retirement packages, maybe they should be shot without a trial aswell. Oh sorry there was no investigation by the government for those people. Id like to see them bleed to death too.
Like (2)
-
Ha ha. Who wouldn't ? But I guess it's a good example. How much better if the bankers were all tried for high treason (as they wrecked your economy) then executed in front of their customers ?
Like (1)
-
-
Hmmm. That is an interesting point. Maybe the people in charge evaluated how the Saddam thing went down and said, "Next time we're in this kind of a situation, just kill the b*stard."
Like (2)
-
I think that's exactly what happened. Its so sad that he not only murdered tens of thousands of people, but now he has weakened your sense of justice as well.
Like (1)
-
Iraq was a conventional war, only becoming urban counter-insurgency after evolving into an occupation, totally different methodology! Staying after the third month was 1st mistake. Staying after Saddam's execution was the 2nd. Staying until the U.S.election was the 3rd.
Like (1)
-
that's a darned good question ...and buried at sea? very strange
Like (2)
-
A trial would have proved that America was still strong after suffering such a horrible loss. The assassination showed weakness. As an ally of the US, I find this very sad.
Like (1)
-
-
You think he was innocent then??
Like (2)
-
No I don't. This is my point. Due process would have led to his death, and strengthened the authorities ability to deal with terrorists. Assassination comprimises this authority.
Like (1)
-
No one was assassinated . Terrorists have no qualms about killing you or me, so why should we show anything different to them. They are the ones who seem to want to lay the rules down, you think if the boot had been on a different foot they would put some one on trial before shooting them, I don't.. If you make the bed you must be prepared to lay in it.
Like (1)
-
Whats weird is noone seen his dead body...
Like (1)
-
It was done the way it should have been done.
Like (1)
-
Not a fan of civilised justice, then ?
Like (1)
Best Answer (Chosen By Asker):
Posted by ChipmunkErnie 1 Jan 28th, 2012 at 9:38PM
It was an assassination, plain and simple. No different than the use of drones to take out the enemy in this war. The only reason it was done close-up and personal was we wanted to make sure it was him that was killed--otherwise a missile strike would have sufficed.
[ Reply ] | Like (3)
Reply by iguanachips Jan 28th, 2012 at 9:44PM
Like (1)
Reply by ChipmunkErnie Jan 29th, 2012 at 11:45AM
Like (1)