Osama Bin Laden: Dead

[Bryn]

The US is most certainly guilty of assisting the rise of OBL when he was fighting the USSR in Afghanistan. He was, in effect, their (the USA's) man (in their eyes).

[Stillhomewardbound]

The US taking OBL out changes precisely nada. He was worth more to the international community alive than dead, He was the ultimate bogey man. And so, now, we will wait for the US to determine who is OBL II, and III and watch them go after those 'pesky critters' in the same, futile way.

In the West our system of justice has never been based on the notion of an eye for an eye, etc, and while the US may feel they had to do what they had to do, then they might take a leaf out of their Mossad colleagues and not glory in their killing.

The scenes outside the White House were deplorable and Obama's speech little better. So much for the moral high ground. Now the US is down in the gutter with their enemies and we are wholly sullied in the process.

I would like to think that there are American citizens out there who's first thoughts were to remember and mourn the victims of the New York atttacks. So much more appropriate than jubliant celebrations for the loss of another life.

'Vengence is mine', saith the Lord.

Somehow, the US just never quite reads it right. The immaturity of this nation continues to astound and we sleep not safely but more frettfully in our beds tonight.

[Mandryka]

The US taking OBL out changes precisely nada. He was worth more to the international community alive than dead, He was the ultimate bogey man. And so, now, we will wait for the US to determine who is OBL II, and III and watch them go after those 'pesky critters' in the same, futile way.

In the West our system of justice has never been based on the notion of an eye for an eye, etc, and while the US may feel they had to do what they had to do, then they might take a leaf out of their Mossad colleagues and not glory in their killing.

The scenes outside the White House were deplorable and Obama's speech little better. So much for the moral high ground. Now the US is down in the gutter with their enemies and we are wholly sullied in the process.

I would like to think that there are American citizens out there who's first thoughts were to remember and mourn the victims of the New York atttacks. So much more appropriate than jubliant celebrations for the loss of another life.

'Vengence is mine', saith the Lord.

Somehow, the US just never quite reads it right. The immaturity of this nation continues to astound and we sleep not safely but more frettfully in our beds tonight.

Totally agree with all of this.

The jubilant scenes outside the White House were predictable: they are of a piece with the kind of scenes you see at the executions of American mass murderers.

Nobody in this discussion has suggested that OBL was anything other than a thoroughly bad lot but the idea of celebrating anyone's death - no matter who they are, or what they've done - is something that should be repellent to everyone.

[Uncle Monty]

The only thing that might keep me awake is the thought that supposedly intelligent people, such as some of the contributors to this thread, think that it is the US who are the guilty party here. That is truly alarming.

I don't believe anyone is saying the US are THE guilty party. But they never fail to disappoint. If western liberal democracy is to prevail against benighted bigotry and murderous terrorism, we have to show that our way is better, and that means acting scrupulously correctly at all times, not just riding into town (any town) and shooting up the place. The US claims not to understand why it's criticised -- "Hey, we're the good guys" -- but until it cleans up its act no one else is going to be happy.

[Flosshilde]

THe actions of the USA govt in this case are, as someone has pointed out, the actions of the lynch mob or the vigilante. They are not morally or legally justifiable. I do wonder how Mr Pee can continue to justify them - what are his moral parameters?

[Sydney Grew]

Nice to see how our allies are acting in accordance with international law and justice

and congratulations to the . . . USA for showing the world that assassination is a perfectly legitimate and moral way to conduct foreign policy

isn't there an international court somewhere that's supposed to deal with these things ????

No proof, no judge, no jury.

Where is the proof that Mr. Laden was in any way responsible for the crashing of those aeroplanes into those buildings? At first there was a rumour that he was, but there were a great many other rumours and theories at the time. The Laden rumour seems to have somehow quite quickly hardened into fact in many people's minds, probably because it seemed the simplest explanation, but I have never seen anything approaching proof.

And what about all the anthrax business? Why is that never now spoken of? Is he really thought to have been responsible for that as well?

[Lateralthinking1]

Actually, I am not sure that I wholly agree with these comments. I also recognise that I am on slightly dodgy ground rationally but maybe not that much. I don't know. Basically, I find the recent killing of the Gaddafis far more deplorable. Among those murdered were children who could not have chosen to have been born into the families they were. I'm not convinced that this wasn't intentional. I also find it very hard to believe that it complies with the international agreement simply to enforce a no-fly zone. In fact, I don't like the whole business. If, say, a quarter of the British population took to the streets against the royal family and the government and it all became so out of hand that military action was taken against them, would it be appropriate for the French to intervene to support them? Bomb a few state buildings. That sort of thing, if the protesters were requesting it? Of course not.

But in reality, if other countries are going to insist on intervening in a situation like Libya, it may be that this sort of action is the only option to prevent stalemate. There is a fairly predictable course. The leader and his family stick together in a building with strategic associations. Dare others to attack etc. They decide that they probably won't have the nerve to do it but if they do - and, of course, they did - it is a quid pro quo. The foreigners can claim a reason - the building could have been used for military purposes - and on the other side there is the power of martyrdom. In a sense, this was the Bin Laden situation too although we don't know to what extent he was simply living "the quiet life". It is all very well to say that he should have been seized and taken to an international court but practically this might not have been easy. He would not have been alone. We know there was a struggle. We do need to think of the troops too and what was best for them not to endanger their lives.

Sorry but I can understand the whooping and the hollering in the States. It may not be the most dignified, or indeed sensible, way to behave and it isn't quite how I would have reacted had I been there. But I don't find it particularly offensive. A lot of people had their lives cut short by what happened and their families have suffered ever since. Whatever you think about the US, those people had no choice about where they were born and were unfortunate where they chose to work. This is different from the usual mass murderer inside a country. I don't go along with the death penalty at all because it does not seem to me that a country or a state can ever have moral authority if it has such a policy. But shoot-to-kill is not the same. What would you do if someone was in a playground firing a gun, had already killed many, and it just wasn't possible to stop him or her going further without it?

As for the burial at sea, if Bin Laden had been given the full dignity of a burial in line with his religion, this would have sent out a signal that his form of Islam had full legitimacy. It didn't. It seems to me that half-respecting the usual expectations of Muslims around burial was wholly appropriate in his case because he was only half-Muslim. The other half was in direct contradiction with many of the central tenets of Islam. I have to be honest here and say that I actually feel reasonably joyous because he didn't do his faith any favours. Beyond all else, he was a sad man with a serious mental illness. If there had been a more humane way of dealing with him, it should have been arranged but I doubt it was possible. Finally, I do support both Obama and Hillary Clinton. As American politicians go, I just don't believe that they are instinctive war makers and for that reason I want to see them re-elected.

[Mark Sealey]

Living here, may I suggest that an appropriate response to the rather strange behavior of some Americans in their jubilation (and it's been pretty much non-stop on TV today; + the national anthem at sports events etc) is compassion?

Most Americans are kept in a state of permanent ignorance of what their own terrorists are doing in their name, of the aggression, materialism and destructive force that drives American (public) life. And are schooled to believe, 'My country right or wrong.'

At the same time many (most?) really have been brainwashed into believing that they are special, that they have the right to wreck, judge and slaughter - especially if the commerce that runs the country might benefit.

This is just as evident in the American versions of culture: utterly materialistic, trivialized, commodified, superficial and populist - so relevant to other discussions on this Forum… the need to resist the Disneyfication of R3, for example.

Like children who've yet to decenter, they know no better.

[Op. XXXIX]

Finally, I do support both Obama and Hillary Clinton. As American politicians go, I just don't believe that they are instinctive war makers and for that reason I want to see them re-elected.

It would certainly be preferable to any Republican alternative.

[Op. XXXIX]

There's great ignorance (particularly of what American terrorists are doing around the world day in and day out) and there's the inevitable result of a lifetime's propaganda being taught that Americans have some sort of special privilege - to wreck, adjudicate and destroy.

, well Americans don't doubt their 'special privilege', but the 'wreck, adjudicate and destroy' seldom factors in. They don't see it that way, definitely propaganda at its most successful.

[Norfolk Born]

Totally agree with all of this.

The jubilant scenes outside the White House were predictable: they are of a piece with the kind of scenes you see at the executions of American mass murderers.

Nobody in this discussion has suggested that OBL was anything other than a thoroughly bad lot but the idea of celebrating anyone's death - no matter who they are, or what they've done - is something that should be repellent to everyone.

I agree.

[Mr Pee]

Nobody in this discussion has suggested that OBL was anything other than a thoroughly bad lot but the idea of celebrating anyone's death - no matter who they are, or what they've done - is something that should be repellent to everyone.

Hitler? Rheinhard Heydrich? Dr. Mengele? A serial child abuser? The Yorkshire Ripper?

I don't find it repellent that certain people would wish to celebrate the death of such people, and I include Bin Laden in that category.

[Flosshilde]

Mr Pee, I find your views on this matter utterly repellent; perhaps you should go the whole hog & dance on Bin Laden's grave?

[Donnie Essen]

Y'all seen Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith, right? If Mace Windu had killed Chancellor Palpatine when he had the chance, a whole host of problems could've been avoided. When confronting evil, it's best not to pussy out, but end it.
That's what God wants.

Note also that in Michael Bay's movie, The Transformers (2007), the evil Decepticons pretty much wrecked a city and at the end of the movie, their remains were tossed in the ocean as a cover-up by the military. This corresponds to my theory that Michael Bay was sent by God. He was not that light, but was sent to bear witness to that light.

[Paul Sherratt]

Which god would that be, in this instance ?