Protest at US murder of Bin Laden

ben.schlomo · 05-05-2011 07:53PM

MyKeyG wrote: »

Except for being executed at Nuremberg first.

Anyway as for the OP. The only problem I have with Osama being killed at the compound is that he didn't get the chance to suffer the humility of a trial and being shown to the world dangling from the end of a rope like the cruel minded spawn of Satan that he was!

ehhhhhhhhhhhhh,what?

MyKeyG · 05-05-2011 07:54PM

k_mac wrote: »

In any case, would the arrest and transport to America have been lawful as regards a criminal trial? I doubt it.

Yeah one more body in Guantanamo Bay for the hippies to cry about.

stewie01 · 05-05-2011 07:54PM

Einhard wrote: »

If they went in intending a bloodbath, then surely everyone would have been shot? More people were taken alive than were killed, so unless the Seals are pretty crap at actually killing people, I think it's safe to say that a bloodbath wasn't intended. Also, he declared war on America. It wasn't a criminal operation, so there was no obligation on America to treat him as a criminal, as opposed to an enemy combatant.

Also, how do you know exactly what transpired? They were operating in hostile circumstances, against a man who would have no compunction about killing them, and who, by all accounts, lunged at them. They had already exchanged fire with hostiles within the compound. It's all very well to pontificate whilst sitting at your computer in Ireland with a cup of tea in your hand- not quite the same when you're living through it.

Also, it's BS to state that he should have been taken alive. Because, if he had, the usal suspects would be hammering America for violating Pakistan's sovereignty, or failing to knock on the compund door, or not being polite enough to the bin laden family. No matter what had transpired, one would still have peope here condemning America and Americans, and plannign marches on their embassies.

pot kettle black there with your pontificating matey.

they just reported there was 1 gun man that they killed straight away before shooting up the rest of the compound. there are also rules of engagement against enemy combatants and afaik shooting an unarmed man in the head is a no no. correct me if im wrong???

and again the USA and any democratic country should be holding there moral standards and values and principals in a higher regard than some loon. or are they above the law???

Killer Pigeon · 05-05-2011 07:55PM

Osama Bin Laden died in 2001.

Al-Qaeda doesn't exist as what it's perceived by most people.

Al-Qaeda (or "base") was the codename of a US database of Mujahideen operatives during the Soviet-Afghan War.

cosanostra · 05-05-2011 07:56PM

MyKeyG wrote: »

As far as I know they carry a pocket full of these. http://www.treehugger.com/zipit-chair-ties.jpg

For the body bags?

stewie01 · 05-05-2011 07:56PM

k_mac wrote: »

They weren't in the land of the free and they weren't looking for a criminal. They were in Pakistan, currently a warzone, and where looking for the leader of the opposition army. In any case, would the arrest and transport to America have been lawful as regards a criminal trial? I doubt it.

so just kill him then to avoid the all that hassle. crazy really. rules of war???

Einhard · 05-05-2011 07:57PM

stewie01 wrote: »

covered by who??? its not about how his followers feel is it, its about how a ''democratic'' country is ment to conduct itself around the world and hold its own values above those of a munatic.

It's interesting to note that you put democratic in "" when talking of America. Are you privy to information that suggests that the US isn't a democratic state?

how do you know he would of been sentenced to death. what crime did he commit? and saving money on keeping someone in prison doesnt really come into the equation in the ''land of the free'' now does it?

If you have to ask what crime Osama bin Laden committed, then there's no point even reasoning with you.

rednik · 05-05-2011 07:58PM

We should hold a day of joy and celebrate.

MagicSean · 05-05-2011 07:59PM

stewie01 wrote: »

so just kill him then to avoid the all that hassle. crazy really. rules of war???

Yes. That is how wars are fought. You kill the enemy and eliminate their infrastructure and command.

Einhard · 05-05-2011 07:59PM

stewie01 wrote: »

so just kill him then to avoid the all that hassle. crazy really. rules of war???

stewie, Osama bin Laden declared war on America. Numerous times. Not only by his actions, but through his words. He wasn't a common criminal, or even an uncommon criminal, so I fail to see how you think he should have been treated as such. I have yet to read of a war in which the opposing sides were issued with restraints so that they could arrest their foes.

fontanalis · 05-05-2011 08:01PM

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

Osama Bin Laden died in 2001.

Al-Qaeda doesn't exist as what it's perceived by most people.

Al-Qaeda (or "base") was the codename of a US database of Mujahideen operatives during the Soviet-Afghan War.

yawn

ben.schlomo · 05-05-2011 08:01PM

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

Osama Bin Laden died in 2001.

Al-Qaeda doesn't exist as what it's perceived by most people.

Al-Qaeda (or "base") was the codename of a US database of Mujahideen operatives during the Soviet-Afghan War.

hahahahahahahahaha,good one

realdanbreen · 05-05-2011 08:02PM

I was told by a fella in the pub who tends to be in the know about these things that the yanks actually captured bin laden and have him held somewhere.After all it wouldn't have made sense to kill him there and then what with all the info they can get out of him.

fontanalis · 05-05-2011 08:07PM

Einhard wrote: »

stewie, Osama bin Laden declared war on America. Numerous times. Not only by his actions, but through his words. He wasn't a common criminal, or even an uncommon criminal, so I fail to see how you think he should have been treated as such. I have yet to read of a war in which the opposing sides were issued with restraints so that they could arrest their foes.

There's no point. Too many people are siding with the worse types of proxies to protest US foreign policy.

The Waltzing Consumer · 05-05-2011 08:07PM

realdanbreen wrote: »

I was told by a fella in the pub who tends to be in the know about these things that the yanks actually captured bin laden and have him held somewhere.After all it wouldn't have made sense to kill him there and then what with all the info they can get out of him.

Good source of info there. Ranks up there with hearing things from a taxi driver and things hairdressers say to your girlfriend. Always 100% accurate.

Caoimhín · 05-05-2011 08:08PM

realdanbreen wrote: »

I was told by a fella in the pub who tends to be in the know about these things that the yanks actually captured bin laden and have him held somewhere.

The neighbours cat told me that Obama is really a lizard and that they all just want to bring in the new world order.

fontanalis · 05-05-2011 08:08PM

realdanbreen wrote: »

I was told by a fella in the pub who tends to be in the know about these things that the yanks actually captured bin laden and have him held somewhere.After all it wouldn't have made sense to kill him there and then what with all the info they can get out of him.

Paul Williams?

realdanbreen · 05-05-2011 08:09PM

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

Good source of info there. Ranks up there with hearing things from a taxi driver and things hairdressers say to your girlfriend. Always 100% accurate.

Yea I thought so too waltz, I mean the yanks would never be stoopid enough to kill him there and then.

Einhard · 05-05-2011 08:17PM

stewie01 wrote: »

pot kettle black there with your pontificating matey.

Pontificating? Not sure that's what I was doing...

they just reported there was 1 gun man that they killed straight away before shooting up the rest of the compound. there are also rules of engagement against enemy combatants and afaik shooting an unarmed man in the head is a no no. correct me if im wrong???

and again the USA and any democratic country should be holding there moral standards and values and principals in a higher regard than some loon. or are they above the law???

But shooting Obama wasn't against the law. What law are you talking about even? OBL declared war on America. They had a right to treat him as an enemy combatant, and in war, enemy combatants tend to be targetted for killing.

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

Osama Bin Laden died in 2001.

Al-Qaeda doesn't exist as what it's perceived by most people.

Al-Qaeda (or "base") was the codename of a US database of Mujahideen operatives during the Soviet-Afghan War.

I was gonna reply, but then I laughed, and just thought "Don't feed him".

fontanalis wrote: »

There's no point. Too many people are siding with the worse types of proxies to protest US foreign policy.

Good point. I remember reading a book a while back called What's Left? by Nick Cohen. He's an avowed Lefty, but he wrote the book to protest against the tendency on the part of many people, especially on the Left, to adopt a "my enemies enemy is my friend" approach to America, and the West in general. Thus, people dislike America; so does Osama bin Laden- thus there's more common ground between us and OBL than between us and America. It was a very instructive read and, I think, accounts for much of the equivoacting that goes on whenever America is discussed (see Mick Wallace's America=Nazis for example.

stewie01 · 05-05-2011 08:18PM

Einhard wrote: »

stewie, Osama bin Laden declared war on America. Numerous times. Not only by his actions, but through his words. He wasn't a common criminal, or even an uncommon criminal, so I fail to see how you think he should have been treated as such. I have yet to read of a war in which the opposing sides were issued with restraints so that they could arrest their foes.

where did i say to threat him like a common crimanal. prisoner of war possibly. does that sound right. someone declaring war on someone else=prisoner of war. they have rights (drawn up probably by the us with the un signing off on it) too. just because hes the leader does not give a right to execute him in cold blood. sadam hussein??? justice???

KeithAFC · 05-05-2011 08:20PM

The SAS and Navy Seals should work together as a team as sniper units around the world and just go out and take leaders out like Mugabe and do it in declassified missions.

fontanalis · 05-05-2011 08:21PM

Einhard wrote: »

Pontificating? Not sure that's what I was doing...

But shooting Obama wasn't against the law. What law are you talking about even? OBL declared war on America. They had a right to treat him as an enemy combatant, and in war, enemy combatants tend to be targetted for killing.

I was gonna reply, but then I laughed, and just thought "Don't feed him".

Good point. I remember reading a book a while back called What's Left? by Nick Cohen. He's an avowed Lefty, but he wrote the book to protest against the tendency on the part of many people, especially on the Left, to adopt a "my enemies enemy is my friend" approach to America, and the West in general. Thus, people dislike America; so does Osama bin Laden- thus there's more common ground between us and OBL than between us and America. It was a very instructive read and, I think, accounts for much of the equivoacting that goes on whenever America is discussed (see Mick Wallace's America=Nazis for example.

Same with Cuba.

Wheelie King · 05-05-2011 08:23PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Maybe they should have just crashed a plane in to the house and killed the women and kids too.

Why would they do that?

stewie01 · 05-05-2011 08:25PM

Einhard wrote: »

But shooting Obama wasn't against the law. What law are you talking about even? OBL declared war on America. They had a right to treat him as an enemy combatant, and in war, enemy combatants tend to be targetted for killing. QUOTE]

so your saying its ok to shoot an UNARMED enemy in the head instead of taking him prisoner? rules of engagement? laws of war? i know law usually dissapears when the us is involved but in sure there is some sort of laws regarding the killing of unarmed enemy combatants

steve9859 · 05-05-2011 08:30PM

stewie01 wrote: »

so just kill him then to avoid the all that hassle. crazy really. rules of war???

The fact that Obama sent in a Seal Team Six rather than NYPD SWAT should have given it away really!

steve9859 · 05-05-2011 08:34PM

stewie01 wrote: »

Einhard wrote: »

But shooting Obama wasn't against the law. What law are you talking about even? OBL declared war on America. They had a right to treat him as an enemy combatant, and in war, enemy combatants tend to be targetted for killing. QUOTE]

so your saying its ok to shoot an UNARMED enemy in the head instead of taking him prisoner? rules of engagement? laws of war? i know law usually dissapears when the us is involved but in sure there is some sort of laws regarding the killing of unarmed enemy combatants

That may be so, but lets not pretend that a military force shooting an unarmed military commander (and a bloodthirsty one at that) is anywhere near as big a deal as a civilian force shooting an unarmed criminal.

catbear · 05-05-2011 08:37PM

stewie01 wrote: »

they just reported there was 1 gun man that they killed straight away before shooting up the rest of the compound. there are also rules of engagement against enemy combatants and afaik shooting an unarmed man in the head is a no no. correct me if im wrong???

Just curious, which rules of war were the the people who planned 9/11 following? I don't think Osama ever expected the protection of international laws seeing as he wanted to bring in his own laws.

It wasn't me! · 05-05-2011 08:39PM

stewie01 wrote: »

so your saying its ok to shoot an UNARMED enemy in the head instead of taking him prisoner? rules of engagement? laws of war? i know law usually dissapears when the us is involved but in sure there is some sort of laws regarding the killing of unarmed enemy combatants

You're spending an awful lot of time using the words "rules" and "laws" without actually pointing to any. Why is that?

KeithAFC wrote: »

The SAS and Navy Seals should work together as a team as sniper units around the world and just go out and take leaders out like Mugabe and do it in declassified missions.

That's so mind numbingly dim it hurt my head.

KeithAFC · 05-05-2011 08:41PM

It wasn't me! wrote: »

You're spending an awful lot of time using the words "rules" and "laws" without actually pointing to any. Why is that?

That's so mind numbingly dim it hurt my head.

You can't read?

stewie01 · 05-05-2011 08:44PM

It wasn't me! wrote: »

You're spending an awful lot of time using the words "rules" and "laws" without actually pointing to any. Why is that?

That's so mind numbingly dim it hurt my head.

Rules of engagment?? against an enemy combatant. you can not open fire on an unarmed enemy. the international laws of war within the UN regarding the treatment of prisoners of war. that ok

Protest at US murder of Bin Laden

Comments