POST HERE For Discussion About The DEATH OF OSAMA BIN LADEN (Updated)

Scroll to see replies

hmm...I'm really not sure about this one. It makes me very uncomfortable that they just shot him, as I am inclined to think that the Americans probably decided that they were going to kill him if they could and I am pretty firmly against capital punishment. But at the same time I cna see the arguements as to why its best for him to be dead.

I guess one way of looking at this is in the context of whether this was a war or whether he was simply a criminal. Because in a war there are casualties, you are fighting for your life and you don't generally stop to have trials. I think America think they are at war, Al Quieda probably as well. But if he is just a criminal then he should be tried.

I challenge you to find anyone who's seen/is seeing action in Afghanistan and Pakistan who'd say they're not at war. It is hellish out there.

Reply 1861

Aphotic Cosmos

I agree that he should have been tried in front of the ICC. It's there for a reason and justice, rather than vengeance, would have been served. The case against him is strong but it should be for a professional judiciary to decide his guilt, not the US president and a squad of SEALs. I do not mourn him for a second, but the morbid street parties in New York, Washington and LA are, frankly, very disturbing. Western society is meant to value due process and the rule of law and this was a flagrant disregard for both of those.

Unfortunately the US does not recognise the authority of the ICC because they fear that it will lead to trigger happy US troops being hauled up to answer for breaches of the Geneva convention in an environment that will not be anywhere near as accommodating as US military court martials, and as they do not recognise the ICC's authority they will not send prisoners there either.

War criminals and global terrorists should be brought to account by the supreme planetary judiciary, and nobody else.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 1862

Rant

He was murdered by a corrupt country - it's not like they haven't done the same before, e.g Allende.

Reply 1863

Gryffindor

Original post by Drewski

And if someone chooses not to take this right up..?

As has been frequently reported, he said that they'd never take him alive and that his bodyguards were told and prepared to kill him rather than allow his capture.

Well then thats his prerogative

Reply 1864

v-zero

You're right, he should have been hanged by his testicles in the centre of New York just out of reach of a nuclear warhead.

Reply 1865

Gryffindor

Original post by Nick1sHere

If you've got people shooting at you the last thing on your mind is their basic human rights...

Well that's the problem humans shoulnt be in the position where they are shooting at each other, but your right I guess!

Reply 1866

Tommyjw

Original post by Drunk Punx

How did he die? I've heard 4 different accounts of how he died, each as plausible as the other.
Given that he was apparently living in a mansion in Pakistani village that had a military training centre in, how was he not found sooner? Why now?
Why are there no pictures or other proof of his death rather than just what someone has said?

Not sure how he has died, haven't listened in about it for a good half a day so not sure that the 'latest official' thing is about it. All i know about the latest news is that he 'resisted but was not armed'

Well according to a lot of people (including important US officials) there is no way he could of been hiding. Someone somewhere in Pakistan knew and helped. The area he lived in required people to essentially 'sign in and sign out' so unless those military were directly involved... he basically never left.
(Plus a article from wikileaks states that the US knew Pakistan were helping him., something like that)

Pictures are coming, don't worry. I do agree we need them. But tbh.. 1) The conspiracy theorists will find reasons to not believe the pictures & 2) I do honestly see the logic behind not showing them.

Don't take this the wrong way, i'm not saying you are stupid for asking the questions. Just trying to make more sense of some of the questions some people are asking.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 1867

a.posteriori

Original post by DorianGrayism

He was unarmed and holding a woman as a human shield.

They could have brought him in if they really wanted to.

And you're sure of this because of your extensive counter-terrorism training?

Reply 1868

Tommyjw

'The agency quotes CIA chief Leon Panetta as telling US broadcaster NBC that one such photo "will ultimately be released".'

Reply 1869

Don Serious

I would've pissed on him, then throw him in a pool of period blood and cum and make him drink it. Then **** on his face and make him eat some pork chops, then slap him up a little bit, followed by some waterboarding etc..

Reply 1870

LaughingBro

Original post by Psuedo

I'm absolutely appalled that those sadistic American soldiers shot an unarmed man to death. I am also incredibly disgusted that those brutal yanks shot the unarmed man through his eye. Those 'licensed chavs' are there to capture people, not to play real life Call of Duty!

Reply 1871

Tommyjw

Original post by LaughingBro

You're actually complaining that our soldiers are trained enough to know, and to go through with, a kill shot?.

Unarmed or not, he resisted, he was a threat.

Reply 1872

Woffles

Original post by LaughingBro

Well with PSN down, they had to fill it in some way

Reply 1873

SteveCrain

The USA have added a new twist to the saga of Bin Laden, namely, that he was "unarmed when shot".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-13274176

This diversion tactic has been introduced to bring authenticity and substance to a story which has no semblance of believability. There have been petty "concessions" by the US government, which, though sating he who wants to believe, are glaringly inadequate for all others, especially so, given the scale and planning purported to have gone into this operation.

The evidence? An empty compound, a dead family, a bloody room.

"

, therefore Bin Laden is dead.

Reply 1874

sollythewise

Original post by Psuedo

He should have been tried and punished by an international criminal court.

Discuss.

they tried to take him alive. he resisted. they shot him. so?

Reply 1875

Bobifier

I hear Bin Laden is a lizard man.

Reply 1876

Aj12

Because the pics of him are pretty brutal and the White House is nervous about letting them go. However knowing Obama's government even if they are not released they would be leaked soon

Reply 1877

manchild007

The State Department is releasing pictures of the body and burial within the next few days. I have no doubt however, that you'll proceed to idiotically claim this evidence is fake and that the "man" is telling us lies, lies and more damn lies :rolleyes:

Reply 1878

Dude Where's My Username

Original post by levantine

By shooting him then he gets an easy way out, not being tried in an international court or anything.. Itll just fuel more anti american sentiment that they shot him unarmed which probably is a violation of international law because they bascially assasinated him. What was more disgraceful was the americans celebrating his death.. I mean are they for real, he kill us so we kill him and thats it were fine revenge gained. that wont bring back all the 9/11 victims back will it.

Bascially what im saying is that obamas primary motive was for him to get some brownie points. Had Obama really wanted justics then they would have captured him and then trial him someway (although Id love to see whod defend in court??)

I don't have much time or empathy for bleeding heart politics at all I'm afraid to say. I think the Americans are entitled to celebrate if they wish. They know it won't bring back the dead and they know Al Qaeda still exist, so the war is far from over. But its a significant positive step in the fight against terror so I'm all for celebrating.

And as for "fuel more anti-American sentiment", you talk like thats possible in the middle east :lol:

Reply 1879

sparky86

Original post by Tommyjw

You're actually complaining that our soldiers are trained enough to know, and to go through with, a kill shot?.

Unarmed or not, he resisted, he was a threat.

They were American soldiers, they quite often shoot soldiers of countries who they are allies with, so a man with which they have been trained/programmed to perceive as the devil doesn't really stand a chance.