was it lawfull to kill bin laden

[thesheriff443]

was it lawfull to kill osma bin laden with out a trial?
saddam hussain got a trial despite being responsable for the death's of thousand's more than osama bin laden!

true bin laden was the leader but he was not pulling the trigger,

[Black Dagger]

Ask google.

[Niamh.]

I doubt anyone cares that much about his rights tbh, I know I haven't lost any sleep thinking about the injustice of it, that's for sure

[Roy Mars III]

yes

[thesheriff443]

I doubt anyone cares that much about his rights tbh, I know I haven't lost any sleep thinking about the injustice of it, that's for sure

well if it's not in your back yard most people dont.

[arista]

Yes they had to kill him.

[thesheriff443]

Ask google.

why dont you do it for me, i asked the question.

[thesheriff443]

Yes they had to kill him.

why did the have to kill him?,revenge or justice.

[arista]

why did the have to kill him?,revenge or justice.


For 9/11

[Niamh.]

why did the have to kill him?,revenge or justice.

Justice for a mass murderer is not a top priority imo

[Jesus.]

No. They should have captured him and tickled his feet with a feather. I'd have given up every terrorist in the world if anyone ever did that to me.

[Vanessa]

I don't think Saddam Hussain should have got a trial either. Sorry if it sounds harsh, but they're both mass murderers.

[AnnieK]

No. They should have captured him and tickled his feet with a feather. I'd have given up every terrorist in the world if anyone ever did that to me.

I would rather be shot than that.....tickling IS torture...

But wasn't Bin Laden escaping when he was killed? I think capture and trial would have been better - as he died a hero in his supporters eyes and at least if he had been captured he wouldn't have had that "glory"

[thesheriff443]

Justice for a mass murderer is not a top priority imo

well gerry adam's fronted the ira, and he never got shot.

[Niamh.]

well gerry adam's fronted the ira, and he never got shot.

You say that like he's my dad or something.............

[Jesus.]

You say that like he's my dad or something.............

He says he was terrorising at the time, and couldn't be the father.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8fflNilfXjE/TjbV-oDTDlI/AAAAAAAAIUw/o-IC3XeuooQ/s400/kyle.jpg


The DNA test shows that...............................

[Niamh.]

He says he was terrorising at the time, and couldn't be the father.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8fflNilfXjE/TjbV-oDTDlI/AAAAAAAAIUw/o-IC3XeuooQ/s400/kyle.jpg


The DNA test shows that...............................

:laugh:

[Shasown]

No it wasn't lawful to kill him,

However it was decided at the highest levels of the US admininstration that he wouldnt be given the opportunity for a trial that would have more followers rallying to his cause.

Call it justice, revenge and deterrent.

[Jack_]

No.

End of discussion.

[Joseline]

No it wasn't lawful, but it was the only option. Could to imagine what all thoses crazies in the middle east would have done to try and get him released. People being kidnapped and then beheaded when Obama doesn't release him and of course more bombings.

[InOne]

I would rather be shot than that.....tickling IS torture...

But wasn't Bin Laden escaping when he was killed? I think capture and trial would have been better - as he died a hero in his supporters eyes and at least if he had been captured he wouldn't have had that "glory"

Don't think he was escaping. They found him in a room with his wives, asked him to confirm his name and then shot him.

[AnnieK]

Don't think he was escaping. They found him in a room with his wives, asked him to confirm his name and then shot him.

Oh right, thanks...I should really check things before I post or pay more attention at the time....

[Kazanne]

Oh right, thanks...I should really check things before I post or pay more attention at the time....

:joker::joker::joker:annie your avvy makes me laugh everytime I see it

[AnnieK]

:joker::joker::joker:annie your avvy makes me laugh everytime I see it

:laugh:

[Jamie.]

No it wasn't at all lawful, but frankly he got what he deserved. He was a terrorist, he didn't deserve his human rights the moment he plotted 9/11

[Jesus.]

I don't think that many people on here are as liberal as I am, but I have no idea how people view this act as anything but lawful. What do people want? He was a known terrorist, and financier of terrorism.

If people read a story in the daily heil tomorrow about a high ranking Nazi being executed by the Mossad in Argentina, very few people would have an issue with it. Why is OBL any different?

[Joseline]

I don't think that many people on here are as liberal as I am, but I have no idea how people view this act as anything but lawful. What do people want? He was a known terrorist, and financier of terrorism.

There is a difference between lawful and right.
Lawful
Adjective
Conforming to, permitted by, or recognized by law or rules

Bin Ladens death was a clear violation of the fundamental the right of a fair trial before a punishment of death.

However it was 100% the right thing to do.

[joeysteele]

Yes,it was.

[Jesus.]

There is a difference between lawful and right.
Lawful
Adjective
Conforming to, permitted by, or recognized by law or rules

Bin Ladens death was a clear violation of the fundamental the right of a fair trial before a punishment of death.

However it was 100% the right thing to do.

Some people are so highly sought after for numerous terrorist actions that they are wanted dead or alive. This is cleared through the legal channels in their own country.

America acted lawfully within their own laws.

[Joseline]

Some people are so highly sought after for numerous terrorist actions that they are wanted dead or alive. This is cleared through the legal channels in their own country.

America acted lawfully within their own laws.

Actually, I think you will find there was no military tribunal conducted before Bin Laden execution and it was therefore not legal under US law.

[Jesus.]

Actually, I think you will find there was no military tribunal conducted before Bin Laden execution and it was therefore not legal under US law.

I think the fact they added him to their most wanted list, sort of informs people what their intentions are. Once you're on that list, it's dead or alive. It's not capture, trial, punishment.

OBL declared war on the US numerous occasions and attacked the WTC on 2 seperate occasions killing over 3000 people, with money he provided.

I'm sorry, but there was nothing unlawful about the killing of OSL.

http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2011/may/binladen_050211

[Joseline]

I think the fact they added him to their most wanted list, sort of informs people what their intentions are. Once you're on that list, it's dead or alive. It's not capture, trial, punishment.

OBL declared war on the US numerous occasions and attacked the WTC on 2 seperate occasions killing over 3000 people, with money he provided.

I'm sorry, but there was nothing unlawful about the killing of OSL.

http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2011/may/binladen_050211

Well what if the seals had tortured him, made him their sex slave and then killed him after a 10 hour ordeal. Would that be lawful?

[Jesus.]

Well what if the seals had tortured him, made him their sex slave and then killed him after a 10 hour ordeal. Would that be lawful?

If my auntie had bollocks, would she be my uncle?

Of course that wouldn't be ok, because torture is never is, and directly contravenes the Geneva convention. Your example also suggests they raped him, which again is illegal. We can play stupid scenario based word games for as long as you like.

But at some point you're going to need to provide a real reason why this was unlawful. If you can do that, then I'll hold my hands up and say you're right.

[Joseline]

Summary executions go against the Geneva Convention.
Also not sure how murder is more legal than rape and touture. I'd much rather have the rape and torture, but then I'm a kinky bitch.

[Jesus.]

Summary executions go against the Geneva Convention.

This isn't a summary execution. He wasn't captured.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/avila.gif

[Joseline]

This isn't a summary execution. He wasn't captured.
Wikipedia:
A summary execution is a variety of execution in which a person is accused of a crime and then immediately killed without benefit of a full and fair trial.

[hijaxers]

why did the have to kill him?,revenge or justice.

To stop all the other malicious nasty men ( that hide behind religion) thinking they can dictate to the rest of the planet !

[Jesus.]

Wikipedia:
A summary execution is a variety of execution in which a person is accused of a crime and then immediately killed without benefit of a full and fair trial.

Can you add the rest of that paragraph to your text please?

And he wasn't just accused of this crime. He declared war, financed it, then made video's about how awesome his work was.

Legally, they could say he was killed on the battleground, using a civilian human shield.

[Joseline]

Can you add the rest of that paragraph to your text please?

And he wasn't just accused of this crime. He declared war, financed it, then made video's about how awesome his work was.

Legally, they could say he was killed on the battleground, using a civilian human shield.

This includes show trials, but is usually understood to mean capture, accusation, and execution all conducted during a very short span of time.

This holds true for the Bin Laden case, the time span was very shot but he was essential captured, they didn't have to kill him.

[Jesus.]

This includes show trials, but is usually understood to mean capture, accusation, and execution all conducted during a very short span of time.

This holds true for the Bin Laden case, the time span was very shot but he was essential captured, they didn't have to kill him.


No more questions your honour.

He wasn't captured, he was executed trying to use a civilian as a human shield.

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m85sp8DmnE1qzbh7d.gif

[Joseline]

Whatever superstar.

[Apple202]

joseline :worship:

[Shasown]

No more questions your honour.

He wasn't captured, he was executed trying to use a civilian as a human shield.

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m85sp8DmnE1qzbh7d.gif

Where did you get the bit about a human shield?

Surely a US Navy Seal team could have captured him if that had been their orders.

But that would have meant a lot of publicity for him and the cause , with a trial etc. And a lot of the faithful going out to gain their 72 virgins and spot in paradise.

Incidentally, although the US wanted him dead or alive, why was it ok to shoot him in cold blood in a foreign country?

[thesheriff443]

more people are killed by america's own then the threat from al qaeda

[Livia]

No. They should have captured him and tickled his feet with a feather. I'd have given up every terrorist in the world if anyone ever did that to me.

Makes a note...

Bin Laden is dead and I'm okay with that. If I wanted to take up the torch for injustice there would be about a million cases in the world that would come before him.

[Jesus.]

Where did you get the bit about a human shield?

1) Surely a US Navy Seal team could have captured him if that had been their orders.

2) But that would have meant a lot of publicity for him and the cause , with a trial etc. And a lot of the faithful going out to gain their 72 virgins and spot in paradise.

3) Incidentally, although the US wanted him dead or alive, why was it ok to shoot him in cold blood in a foreign country?

1) They would never be the single orders in this situation because the battle field is a dynamic environment of semi-organised chaos. But I think dead or alive is a pretty blunt objective. It's not like they say "preferably alive, but y'know, sh*t happens".

2) I'm a real advocate for human rights, and in an ideal world he should have had his day in court. The thread is about whether it was lawful or not to kill him, and it absolutely was lawful.

3) Because that's what "dead or alive" means. It's the "dead" part of the sound byte.


The guy who actually shot OBL said he was either trying to push his wife in front of him or was actually hiding behind her when he went in to the room. I'm paraphrasing. That would clear up any legal argument if any were needed as a last defence. But the killing was lawful, so of course it's not necessary, but we're playing what ifs.

[Joseline]

Dead or alive. Please. Believe it or not, the US military is far too smart to have wanted him caught alive. After the Saddam Hussein fiasco there is absolutely no way in hell the orders were dead or alive.

[thesheriff443]

german soldier's who oversaw the death's of hundred's of thousand's of jew's during the war got a trial.

[lostalex]

He declared war on America, so normal laws don't apply. The laws of war are different.

If he wanted a fair trial, he had 10 years to surrender himself and get a trial. Clearly he didn't want a trial, if he did he had plenty of opportunities to turn himself in to the justice system.

[Ramsay]

Ask google.

:joker::joker:

[lostalex]

german soldier's who oversaw the death's of hundred's of thousand's of jew's during the war got a trial.

umm, no. The ones who continued fighting and did not surrender did not get a trial, they were killed on the battlefield.

OBL did not surrender. If he did, he would have gotten his trial. He choose to continue fighting on the battlefield, and therefore it was absolutely lawful for him to die in the battlefield.

[Shasown]

1) They would never be the single orders in this situation because the battle field is a dynamic environment of semi-organised chaos. But I think dead or alive is a pretty blunt objective. It's not like they say "preferably alive, but y'know, sh*t happens".

2) I'm a real advocate for human rights, and in an ideal world he should have had his day in court. The thread is about whether it was lawful or not to kill him, and it absolutely was lawful.

3) Because that's what "dead or alive" means. It's the "dead" part of the sound byte.


The guy who actually shot OBL said he was either trying to push his wife in front of him or was actually hiding behind her when he went in to the room. I'm paraphrasing. That would clear up any legal argument if any were needed as a last defence. But the killing was lawful, so of course it's not necessary, but we're playing what ifs.

How is it legal, which court decided that the US had the right to run an armed operation in another country without the permission from that country's government.



He declared war on America, so normal laws don't apply. The laws of war are different.

If he wanted a fair trial, he had 10 years to surrender himself and get a trial. Clearly he didn't want a trial, if he did he had plenty of opportunities to turn himself in to the justice system.

A fair trial? When rightly or wrongly he believed his actions were justified.

Why should he submit himself to a trial by the US, when he beleived them to be the enemy. Can one man "declare war" on a country?

umm, no. The ones who continued fighting and did not surrender did not get a trial, they were killed on the battlefield.

OBL did not surrender. If he did, he would have gotten his trial. He choose to continue fighting on the battlefield, and therefore it was absolutely lawful for him to die in the battlefield.

Was he given a chance to surrender? Did the Seal team annouce who they were and under what jurisdiction they were operating. He was taken out in a house not on a battlefield.

Its interesting to note that as soon as the "hit" had been confirmed and he had been identified the SEAL left the area without waiting for the local police to investigate.

[thesheriff443]

:joker::joker:

thank's karl, now if you can try to work your way upto using word's that will be great!

[lostalex]

Was he given a chance to surrender?


Yes. He had 10 years to surrender. He had plenty of opportunities and chances. He chose instead to hide like a rat, hide like a coward. He was the 21st century Hitler, and he died like the cowardly rat he was.

If he believed he was innocent, he could have surrendered himself to the international court system and proven his case, HIS case was only that Americans are evil infidels and that he has every right to kill as many Americans as he could.

He was a violent racist piece of ****.

[MTVN]

Strictly speaking I'd say it wasn't legal, no. It was done without consulting Pakistan or getting their consent

I remember Chomsky making an interesting point about the killing; how would people be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic, all while thinking they had no responsibility before the operation to inform anyone about it. (I know it's not a perfect comparison but it's about the principle of violating a states sovereignty to kill someone whom you consider a mass murderer/criminal)

[lostalex]

Strictly speaking I'd say it wasn't legal, no. It was done without consulting Pakistan or getting their consent

I remember Chomsky making an interesting point about the killing; how would people be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic, all while thinking they had no responsibility before the operation to inform anyone about it.
how would people react? well if George Bush had ordered the murder of every muslim in the world, then they would be justified. If Goerge Bush attempted a genocide and "holy war" the way that Osama Bin Laden had, and the United States protected him from justice, then they would absolutely be justified.

George Bush did not attempt a genocide though, George Bush was nothing like Osama Bin Laden, the comparison makes no sense. George Bush was only defending his own people. Osama Bin Laden was trying to impose his fascist islamic beliefs onto the entire world. He was the 21st century Hitler. George Bush was on the defensive, OBL was trying to kill every American.

[Nedusa]

Was it Lawful to kill Bin Laden........No of course it wasn't he was never tried convicted and found guilty of any crime. He was shown as the public face of Al-Qaeda a known terrorist organisation but we don't really know what crimes he may or may not have been involved in. Was he involved in 911...who knows ?? there was never any trial so his innocence or guilt could never be proved either way.

If the CIA had overwhelming evidence he was involved then capture him and make him stand trial and if proved guilty then it would be lawful to execute him, but recent events in Pakistan were unlawful in the extreme.

[lostalex]

Was it Lawful to kill Bin Laden........No of course it wasn't he was never tried convicted and found guilty of any crime. He was shown as the public face of Al-Qaeda a known terrorist organisation but we don't really know what crimes he may or may not have been involved in. Was he involved in 911...who knows ?? there was never any trial so his innocence or guilt could never be proved either way.

If the CIA had overwhelming evidence he was involved then capture him and make him stand trial and if proved guilty then it would be lawful to execute him, but recent events in Pakistan were unlawful in the extreme.

Umm, he admitted he was behind the 9/11 attacks... so he was guilty...when someone tells you they are guilty, why would you not believe him? do you think he was lying?

And since the CIA and the military had tried to catch him before, but the PAKISTAN military would warn them, because clearly the pakistan military is helping the terrorists, why would the US trust them??

you make no sense.

Do you not understand that Pakistan is a terrorist state that supports the taliban??

[MTVN]

how would people react? well if George Bush had ordered the murder of every muslim in the world, then they would be justified. If Goerge Bush attempted a genocide and "holy war" the way that Osama Bin Laden had, and the United States protected him from justice, then they would absolutely be justified.

George Bush did not attempt a genocide though, George Bush was nothing like Osama Bin Laden, the comparison makes no sense. George Bush was only defending his own people. Osama Bin Laden was trying to impose his fascist islamic beliefs onto the entire world. He was the 21st century Hitler. George Bush was on the defensive, OBL was trying to kill every American.

It makes sense because both were responsible for mass murder, Bush's total actually far exceeding that of Bin Laden's as well. Bush was only defending his own people? It's a pity that cost over 100,000 innocent lives in Iraq then isn't it

If Bush's actions were defensive then I would hate to see him on the offensive

[lostalex]

It makes sense because both were responsible for mass murder, Bush's total actually far exceeding that of Bin Laden's as well. Bush was only defending his own people? It's a pity that cost over 100,000 innocent lives in Iraq then isn't it

If Bush's actions were defensive then I would hate to see him on the offensive

If BUsh's or America's actions were on the offensive, believe me, there would not be a muslim alive today.

America has been incredibly restrained in our reaction since 9/11 believe it or not, compared to what we could have done to them, are you kidding" you don't think we could have destroyed them by now?

If you don't think we have been restrained in our war, then you very much underestimate the capability of the US military.

We could have made every desert in the middle east into glass if we wanted to.

[MTVN]

Oh no I'm sure you could if you wanted to, and I'm sure that you probably do want to

[lostalex]

If you really want to educate yourself, look into how many chinese firms have gotten oil contacts. Look at where that oil is going. Look at who's benefited the most from these wars. It's not America. it's China.

Follow the money.

[Jesus.]

If you really want to educate yourself, look into how many chinese firms have gotten oil contacts. Look at where that oil is going. Look at who's benefited the most from these wars. It's not America. it's China.

Follow the money.

I think his killing was a lawful action, but I don't think you can blame China for the fact both our governments lied us into the illegal Iraq war.

[Nedusa]

Umm, he admitted he was behind the 9/11 attacks... so he was guilty...when someone tells you they are guilty, why would you not believe him? do you think he was lying?

And since the CIA and the military had tried to catch him before, but the PAKISTAN military would warn them, because clearly the pakistan military is helping the terrorists, why would the US trust them??

you make no sense.

Do you not understand that Pakistan is a terrorist state that supports the taliban??

I did not realise Bin Laden admitted the 911 attacks, but even then I would still prefer to see some evidence linking him with these attacks before closing the investigation. They should have captured him in Pakistan in cooperation with the Pakistan authorities since Pakistan is fighting the same terrorist threat as the US,Europe and the rest of the World.

Oh and by the way it makes no sense to describe Pakistan as a terrorist state, they are a Sovereign Nation....!!!!!

[Jesus.]

I did not realise Bin Laden admitted the 911 attacks, but even then I would still prefer to see some evidence linking him with these attacks before closing the investigation. They should have captured him in Pakistan in cooperation with the Pakistan authorities since Pakistan is fighting the same terrorist threat as the US,Europe and the rest of the World.

Oh and by the way it makes no sense to describe Pakistan as a terrorist state, they are a Sovereign Nation....!!!!!

He admitted it on numerous occasions. I believe the evidence can be found in financial records, in links to the terrorists and OBL's group, in documentation left behind by the hijackers. There is la fair bit of evidence. He also admitted the 93 WTC bombings.

[MTVN]

Pakistan is not a terrorist state, it was thanks to them and with their assistance that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of 9/11, was captured there. Ideally that is also how the Bin Laden operation would have been carried out

[lostalex]

Pakistan is not a terrorist state, it was thanks to them and with their assistance that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of 9/11, was captured there. Ideally that is also how the Bin Laden operation would have been carried out

sorry but you are wrong, Pakistan, atleast the military is NOT a trusted ally. The pakistani's have tiped off terrorists a bunch of times before America was going to make a strike, that's why America didn't inform the Pakistani's about the strike to get Bin Laden, cause we'd tried to get him before, and everytime all of a sudden, they disappeared, and wow, when the pakistani's did tell us where a terrorist was, it turns out it was a wedding ceremony and they had us bombing political dissidents or someone that the pakistani military wanted to get rid of. They purposefully told us to bomb a location full of civilians, tellingt us it was terrorists, just to make the US look bad.

They have screwed us over sooo many times. they cannot be trusted.

The US had to learn the hard way that the pakistani's cannot be trusted, cause they'll just use us to kill the people they din't like, while still protecting the Taliban.

So obviously the Pakistani's cannot be trusted. Pakistan is a ****cake of horribleness, and i don't know how the military even tolerates them at this point.

[MTVN]

It is not a terrorist state though, and they have at times been very valuable to the West assisting in the "war on terror". I don't doubt though that there is a lot of anti-American sentiment among the population and within parts of the establishment itself, little wonder really with all the drone attacks

[lostalex]

It is not a terrorist state though, and they have at times been very valuable to the West assisting in the "war on terror". I don't doubt though that there is a lot of anti-American establishment among the population and withing parts of the establishment itself, little wonder really with all the drone attacks

so are you denying that they have actually told us targets, that turned out to be civilians, like weddings, just to make the US look bad?

They have done that. They told us, bomb this location to get this terrorist, and then it turn out to be a wedding or a mosque or some other civilian place. They do it on purpose.

They have screwed us over so many times, they cannot be trusted anymore.


If we trusted them about the Bin Laden raid, there's no way we would have got him. They would have warned him. You know that's true.

[MTVN]

What was the incident with the Wedding?

Would you deny that Pakistanis have legitimate reason to also not trust the US?

[lostalex]

i don't give a crap anymore, i'm just saying, we know not to trust Pakistan anymore.

For Bin Laden to be right under their noses for so long, he was literally right next to their biggest military training camp, you won't convince me that they didn't know he was there.

America didnt tell them cause we KNOW NOW that PAkistan is not on our side.

If we had tried t work with Pakistan on the Osama Bin Laden raid, you know that he would have gotten away. They cannot be trusted period.

[lostalex]

The truth is Muslims think that it's a war of the West against Islam. And plenty of people in their ranks will still be anti-west. no matter how much we try to tell them that it's not a war against Islam. They are brainwashed. like a cult.

[Jesus.]

The truth is Muslims think that it's a war of the West against Islam. And plenty of people in their ranks will still be anti-west. no matter how much we try to tell them that it's not a war against Islam. They are brainwashed. like a cult.

When Dubbya is on TV calling it a crusade, then I can sort of sympathise with my non-pork eating brothers and sisters.

[lostalex]

When Dubbya is on TV calling it a crusade, then I can sort of sympathise with my non-pork eating brothers and sisters.

really? can you? when's the last time a christian strapped a suicide vest on in a muslim market place? when's the last time a christian hijacked a plane in the name of jesus? get real.

i understand you want to be empathetic Jesus, but really... get real.

[GypsyGoth]

I'm glad Bin Laden is dead, I think killing him was the right thing to do.

Was it lawful? Not by amreican laws, but by Bin Laden's own laws, it probably was. He seemed to think it's fine to kill anyone just to make a point.

[lostalex]

they wanted to bring him in alive, i'm sure the guys at guantanamo were foaming at the mouth thinking about the chance to get to torture that mutha fooka....

they were thinking, ohh, we gonna have some FUN with him...

personally i hope the conspiracy theories are right, i hope we do still have him alive somewhere, and we are torturing the crap out of him.


is that wrong of me? i'm sorry :(

[InOne]

I think they messed up the mission when they landed and authorities found out, so that's why they had to go in for the quick kill and get out of there

[Jack_]

they wanted to bring him in alive, i'm sure the guys at guantanamo were foaming at the mouth thinking about the chance to get to torture that mutha fooka....

they were thinking, ohh, we gonna have some FUN with him...

personally i hope the conspiracy theories are right, i hope we do still have him alive somewhere, and we are torturing the crap out of him.


is that wrong of me? i'm sorry :(

Yes. Wrong and highly disturbing...

Guantanamo should've been shut down a long time ago.

[lostalex]

Yes. Wrong and highly disturbing...

Guantanamo should've been shut down a long time ago.

wel it's in Cuba. a country that supposedly hates us...

so if even Cuba is okay with it, who are we to judge?

[lostalex]

I think they messed up the mission when they landed and authorities found out, so that's why they had to go in for the quick kill and get out of there

but they got out of there with his body...

[InOne]

but they got out of there with his body...

Or so they say :o

I'm only going by the long doc I watched on it around a year ago where Obama himself was talking about it.

[Jesus.]

really? can you? when's the last time a christian strapped a suicide vest on in a muslim market place? when's the last time a christian hijacked a plane in the name of jesus? get real.

i understand you want to be empathetic Jesus, but really... get real.

I have no idea why any of that is relevant. It stopped being about 9/11 when our governments lied us into illegal war against Iraq. Afghanistan to get OBL was justified. Iraq wasn't.

I was responding to the point you made about Muslims thinking it was a war against the west. I think my point stacks up pretty well when you read it in that context. The Iraq war, plus dubbya talking of crusades would make me think they were taking a medieval approach to the Muslim world.

[lostalex]

I have no idea why any of that is relevant. It stopped being about 9/11 when our governments lied us into illegal war against Iraq. Afghanistan to get OBL was justified. Iraq wasn't.

I was responding to the point you made about Muslims thinking it was a war against the west. I think my point stacks up pretty well when you read it in that context. The Iraq war, plus dubbya talking of crusades would make me think they were taking a medieval approach to the Muslim world.

Well i don't think they lied. I think they were wrong, but they didn't lie. They were honestly responding to what they thought was a real threat though.

You forget what it was like in 2003. When everyone was screaming at the government "why didn't you prevent 9/11!, why didn't you catch it!" so of course they were being overly cautious.

It's easy to sit back in 2013 10 years later and forget the atmosphere of the time...

We were still scared in 2003, and we had a right to be scared in 2003.

It's easy to forget what it felt like in 2003. That's one of the problems with history, it's hard to make people remember what it actually felt like in that time period. Unfortunately historians don't do a good job of really describing what it FEELS LIKE to be in those periods.

[Jesus.]

Well i don't think they lied. I think they were wrong, but they didn't lie. They were honestly responding to what they thought was a real threat though.

You forget what it was like in 2003. When everyone was screaming at the government "why didn't you prevent 9/11!, why didn't you catch it!" so of course they were being overly cautious.

It's easy to sit back in 2013 10 years later and forget the atmosphere of the time...

We were still scared in 2003, and we had a right to be scared in 2003.

It's easy to forget what it felt like in 2003. That's one of the problems with history, it's hard to make people remember what it actually felt like in that time period. Unfortunately historians don't do a good job of really describing what it FEELS LIKE to be in those periods.

We do know what happened because of people like Dick Clarke who have come out and told us. In the afternoon meeting on 9/11 the CIA was told to find a link between OBL and Sadam. The intelligence people told them there and then it was impossible as OBL hates SH, and thinks he's a heretic. So they lied there way to bollocks about 45minutes away from death, and WMDs being hidden.

I'll tell you what we, the people were doing in 2003, we were allowing our liberties stripped back through the politics of fear. As an American your rights are nothing like the rights envisaged the the founders. They've been stripped away after 9/11. We're all guilty.

[lostalex]

As an American your rights are nothing like the rights envisaged the the founders. They've been stripped away after 9/11. We're all guilty.

You have no idea how much i love being told about My rights from a fooking European lol. :wavey:

enjoy that horse meat, that's being regulated by the EU my friend :joker:

Imagine all the other things in yur products that's being regulated from Brussels.

You ain't British, yur European now!

[Jesus.]

You have no idea how much i love being told about My rights from a fooking European lol. :wavey:

:joker:

It can't be as much as this European loves telling Americans about their rights.

[lostalex]

It can't be as much as this European loves telling Americans about their rights.

yea, I've noticed. You convince all the Europeans that America is soo much worse, and the EU can take more and more and more...

enjoy the naivety :) (wait, i've seen this pattern before.. omg) what did george bush say about fool me twice?

[Jesus.]

yea, I've noticed. You convince all the Europeans that America is soo much worse, and the EU can take more and more and more...

enjoy the naivety :) (wait, i've seen this pattern before.. omg)

You have me wrong. Again. I'm not saying America is worse, far from it. I admire the American idea, and as a democracy it's far superior to 95% of Europe. It doesn't mean that both of our rights haven't been infringed upon since 9/11. That's all I'm saying.

[lostalex]

You have me wrong. Again. I'm not saying America is worse, far from it. I admire the American idea, and as a democracy it's far superior to 95% of Europe. It doesn't mean that both of our rights haven't been infringed upon since 9/11. That's all I'm saying.


The far right is on the rise in Europe. anti-immigrant sentiment in Europe makes the Tea Party in America literally look like a tea party.

[Jesus.]

The far right is on the rise in Europe. anti-immigrant sentiment in Europe makes the Tea Party in America literally look like a tea party.

The far right always does better in times of economic recession. That's just history. Now we're talking about which side of the ocean has the beast racists? Really?

[lostalex]

The far right always does better in times of economic recession. That's just history. Now we're talking about which side of the ocean has the beast racists? Really?

i don't think it needs to be discussed. the Golden dawn, UkiP, marie le penn, no far right parties in America have anywhere near as much support. Sarah Palin looks longingly at Europe and says "if only i was born on the other side of the atlantic". lol "if only i was with MY people, Europe must be so nice, where they appreciate WHITE people" lol

[Shasown]

Yes. He had 10 years to surrender. He had plenty of opportunities and chances. He chose instead to hide like a rat, hide like a coward. He was the 21st century Hitler, and he died like the cowardly rat he was.

If he believed he was innocent, he could have surrendered himself to the international court system and proven his case, HIS case was only that Americans are evil infidels and that he has every right to kill as many Americans as he could.

He was a violent racist piece of ****.

The international court system, pray tell what is that? is it totally devolved from American influence?

how would people react? well if George Bush had ordered the murder of every muslim in the world, then they would be justified. If Goerge Bush attempted a genocide and "holy war" the way that Osama Bin Laden had, and the United States protected him from justice, then they would absolutely be justified.

George Bush did not attempt a genocide though, George Bush was nothing like Osama Bin Laden, the comparison makes no sense. George Bush was only defending his own people. Osama Bin Laden was trying to impose his fascist islamic beliefs onto the entire world. He was the 21st century Hitler. George Bush was on the defensive, OBL was trying to kill every American.

Bin Laden didnt order the death of every American or "infidel" however GWB was in charge of an administration that caused the deaths of more Muslims than Americans who died under the orders of OBL, who is the biggest criminal?


And since the CIA and the military had tried to catch him before, but the PAKISTAN military would warn them, because clearly the pakistan military is helping the terrorists, why would the US trust them??

you make no sense.

Do you not understand that Pakistan is a terrorist state that supports the taliban??

Pakistan is not a terrorist state. it is an ally of the US, however members of the Pakistan administration, police and army have been known to pass information on to Al Q, etc.

Please get your facts right. It is a country divided within itself and there are factions within that country that do not like the Western influence of the US or UK

so are you denying that they have actually told us targets, that turned out to be civilians, like weddings, just to make the US look bad?

They have done that. They told us, bomb this location to get this terrorist, and then it turn out to be a wedding or a mosque or some other civilian place. They do it on purpose.

They have screwed us over so many times, they cannot be trusted anymore.


If we trusted them about the Bin Laden raid, there's no way we would have got him. They would have warned him. You know that's true.

Yes, the stories of weddings being bombed or targeted were true, unfortunately as the US press seems to have you believing these were not Pakistani intelligence led.

Even if they had been, its down to the person who pulls the trigger (or in this case hits the launch button on the hellfire from the drone) in the eyes of the law(both international, US Federal and the USCMJ) to determine how much credance to give to "external intelligence sources".

they wanted to bring him in alive, i'm sure the guys at guantanamo were foaming at the mouth thinking about the chance to get to torture that mutha fooka....

they were thinking, ohh, we gonna have some FUN with him...

personally i hope the conspiracy theories are right, i hope we do still have him alive somewhere, and we are torturing the crap out of him.


is that wrong of me? i'm sorry :(

No agree entirely with you on that point, what an intelligence scoop he is. AQ are still turtle necking over what he may or may not have passed along.

The problem is though, the OP asked if the OBL hit was legal, the answer is NO, morally justified, the only practical solution yes, but legal no.

Anyway on that note I wil raise a glass to OBL the worlds best Hide and seek champion ever, Sorry mate the games up courtesy MI6 and Seal Team 6 (when you care enough to send the 2nd best - not quite M&S)

[sassysocks]

was it lawfull to kill osma bin laden with out a trial?
saddam hussain got a trial despite being responsable for the death's of thousand's more than osama bin laden!

true bin laden was the leader but he was not pulling the trigger,

Too right, he was scum. The world is a better place without him.