Quote:
Originally Posted by Shasown
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.
20-02-2013, 06:34 PM
Reply With Quote
Threaded Mode