A Seattle resident named Sue writes in response to the time President Obama shot Osama bin Laden in the face:
There is no doubt that Bin Laden was not a popular figure. Maybe this is why no one has uttered a single peep—that I have seen, at least—about the fact that he was killed at point-blank range, and killed without a trial, or any semblance of due process whatsoever.
Has anyone considered what this kind of precedent might lead to?
Is Sue thinking that Navy Seals are now going to be shooting shoplifters in the face? Or that we’re going to institute some kind of law that says if you murder thousands of America citizens, you’ll get shot in the face as an act of war, instead of put on trial like a common criminal? I’m unsure. Anyway, to allay her concerns: A poll!
@47 Exactly.
Or as my buddy put it “taunt a bull, and you get the horns”.
OBL sealed his fate on 9/11 and I’ll bet that even he was surprised at how long it took.
It’s the new refrain of the Democratic Party: We will git you. We will find you. We will smoke ya outta your holes…because this is WAR.
Even if we created you, sold you weapons, and trained your foot soldiers. I don’t see any reason to question American actions on foreign lands.
You mean like government staged terror attacks, TSA checkpoints and national passports? Then yes.
yeah, arrest him and bring him to the US, let him have a dog and pony show like the one we gave Saddam Hussein. The thought of a public execution would just turn my stomach–better he go out this way. The less we explicitly sanction murder (and more implicitly allow it) the less like hypocrites we seem.
I haven’t considered the implications, nor do I give a shit. I’m glad he’s gone. It’s a rare case of justice and vengeance done at the same time. Plus we have plenty of information from what bin Laden left behind, so why detain and question him?