Bin Laden dead

[jibber]

Indeed. Any reason why you found quoting that scripture had anything to do with this thread? Except, perhaps, you trying to justify Osama's actions as a holy man, or whatever?

[ullquiora]

Anyone ever read Machiavelli?

I know I am late, but as I understand it, most of Machiavelli's works were intended as satire at the time. They were not to be taken seriously, but to poke fun at other contemporary works and politics. This includes "The Prince" from my understanding.

[Imoutgoodbye]

I know I am late' date=' but as I understand it, most of Machiavelli's works were intended as satire at the time. They were not to be taken seriously, but to poke fun at other contemporary works and politics. This includes "The Prince" from my understanding.[/quote']

Shhh. We don't want the politicians that sleep with that book under their pillow to know THAT view on it...you'll ruin my advantage.

[Teralis]

Am I the only one who actually thinks its sad that America is happy he is dead? By no means do I think the guy should not have been left free to do as he pleased but its still a human life we are talking about' date=' and despite what he did it leaves a bad taste in my mouth thinking about people being glad he's dead. Maybe its just me but to me it seems as if we as American's are moving backwards instead of forwards.[/quote']

I really wish you would tell this to my nephiews parents, wife, and three kids, as well as my two beloved childhood friends who left thier two children orphans due to this bastards actions. I only hope their ends were swift and they did not burn to death awaiting for help to arrive.

Also as far as him not having a weapon and being so called assassinated, I dont know maybe its the sniper in me (from my time in service) but if this man would have came to my door to sell me girl scout cookies I would have dropped him right there on the spot, then went to watch tv while eating his cookies. And these are my beliefs and I expect you to respect them as I respect yours as I have not knocked anyone here.

[Pali]

Indeed. Any reason why you found quoting that scripture had anything to do with this thread? Except' date=' perhaps, you trying to justify Osama's actions as a holy man, or whatever?[/quote']

Only brought it up because I misunderstood one of Mma's posts. If I was trying to explain bin Laden's behavior, why would I be quoting the Bible? I'd quote the Qu'ran.

Teralis, I mean no offense, but you're advocating vengeance based on emotion, not justice based on our legal system. I understand that desire, but I cannot support it.

EDIT: And some food for thought - this is exactly how bin Laden would've wanted himself to die, killed by infidels mid-jihad. The last thing he would've wanted would be to die peacefully as an old man rotting in a cell.

[Mali]

I think it is apparent that he did not want to die at all. In any case, his preferences in the matter are no longer relevant. Furthermore, keeping him around costs money, wastes time, and opens up the remote possibility of future escape or release (ala lockerbie bomber).

[Ex-D&Der]

I do think there is evil, although I also think it's hard to define, but I do have opinions about who I think is evil, or at least who committed evil acts (whether a person is irredeemably and inherently evil is hard to say, but I guess it kind of passes a point of no return in some cases, such as those Mali mentions). Bombing the WTC I think was evil. I'm not a philosopher, so I'm not sure I can define it to anyone else's satisfaction. But that is certainly my view. It was also murder, not just conspiracy to commit murder.

That said I'm not in favor of assassination, or execution for that matter. But I'm also not a pacifist. Bin Laden was at war with the United States, and was apparently killed in action. If he was trying to surrender and he was killed, there should be an investigation and those guilty of violating the Geneva Conventions dealing with prisoners of war should be punished. This would be true whether those surrendering were Nazis, or Khmer Rouge, or anyone else. But this was a combat operation, not an arrest, and there was in fact firing from at least one Al Queda operative. So I would hesitate to conclude that the US was guilty of a crime here. Bin Laden was unquestionably a combatant. He wasn't a Nazi leader who surrendered peacefully. So we'll find out.

In terms of Iraq, Pali is basically right. It was an illegal war and we are basically guilty of war crimes. Afghanistan is harder--it was endorsed by the UN and NATO, and was arguably undertaken out of self-defense because the Taliban running the country were helping Al Qaeda. That's why Obama ended the war in Iraq and has shifted our resources to Afghanistan. Now arguably the war there isn't worth it, or isn't accomplishing anything. But I think the case for war crimes is more difficult.

[Mindflayer]

Is an act of terrorism exempt from the statues of the Geneva Convention?

[mmajunkie]

Survey says?

Absolutely not.

[Celerity]

If you follow your heart and kill somebody out of hate, without indisputable proof of guilt in a court of law, then you have an act of terrorism.

The conditions of tightening national security, fiscal planning (especially in the military), and ideological extremism are fast approaching those seen in Germany and Japan as they began to turn facist.

[Mali]

Cel, your post makes no sense.

[Pali]

I think it is apparent that he did not want to die at all.

Nor do I, but I still know how I'd prefer to go.

Furthermore, keeping him around costs money, wastes time, and opens up the remote possibility of future escape or release (ala lockerbie bomber).

I'm not aware of any criminal trials that didn't take time or money and existed in a risk-free setting - including those of Gacy, Dahmer, Manson, Nazis, etc. Do you seriously consider those trials to have been a waste, that these people should've just been lined up and shot?

Re Ex-D&Der: You actually don't seem to view evil all that differently than I do. There are certainly things that I personally view as good/evil... my objection is to treating them as objective qualities or as metaphysical forces.

If you follow your heart and kill somebody out of hate' date=' without indisputable proof of guilt in a court of law, then you have an act of terrorism.[/quote']

I wouldn't label it an act of terrorism... terrorism generally requires a political/ideological motive to use the act to manipulate others. I view this as vengeance, plain and simple - and I don't consider vengeance a suitable reason to kill someone.

The conditions of tightening national security, fiscal planning (especially in the military), and ideological extremism are fast approaching those seen in Germany and Japan as they began to turn facist.

While I don't anticipate things going that badly, one of the many things that concern me is that most Americans seem either ignorant or apathetic of our President being considered to have the legal authority to order the killing without a trial of American citizens.

[Mali]

including those of Gacy, Dahmer, Manson, Nazis, etc. Do you seriously consider those trials to have been a waste, that these people should've just been lined up and shot?

When there is no reasonable doubt about their guilt, then yes.

[Pali]

When there is no reasonable doubt about their guilt' date=' then yes.[/quote']

I cannot consider that justice. Guilt is to be established by the trial - that's the primary purpose of having it. Even in cases where guilt is damned clear, the trial still serves at least two more valuable functions that I can think of at the moment. First, it provides an official accounting of charges, the evidence for them, and by what laws they are being punished. Things that are extremely helpful when it comes to maintaining a standard of justice so that people are not punished unfairly. edit: And, obviously, they're the best way for outside observers and people reading history books in the future to learn what happened and why.

Second, doing things through the courts shows (in an arguably more than symbolic way) that it is specifically a system of laws that is determining the offender's fate, rather than the whims of the people or the throne or the president, all of which may hate the offender and want them to suffer far more than the law says they should.

Saying "We all know he's guilty and I don't feel like bothering with a trial, just shoot the bastard"... saying that in any situation regarding anyone is something that I can only describe as barbaric.

There's a reason why Battlestar Galactica devoted three episodes to a trial illustrating this exact point. It's important for civilized societies to not just execute people via popular opinion.

[Mali]

There's a reason why Battlestar Galactica devoted three episodes to a trial illustrating this exact point.

LOL

Good argument up until this point.

I agree that trials are good, however I also believe that this country should use capital punishment much more frequently. Any mass murderer, serial killer, child rapist, mass banking fraud or similar type of crime should be federally mandated to receive the death penalty once guilt is established.

However, to get the thread back on track... Osama is dead, he deserved it, and there are others out there that deserve it as much if not more.

[Balgashang]

While I don't anticipate things going that badly' date=' one of the many things that concern me is that most Americans seem either ignorant or apathetic of our President being considered to have the legal authority to order the killing without a trial of American citizens.[/quote']

Thats why they're called black ops.

[Pali]

LOL

Good argument up until this point.

Eh, the parallel popped into my head randomly while I was typing, so I put it in.

Balg, it having a name doesn't excuse it.

[Rensvert]

I agree that trials are good, however I also believe that this country should use capital punishment much more frequently. Any mass murderer, serial killer, child rapist, mass banking fraud or similar type of crime should be federally mandated to receive the death penalty once guilt is established.

However, to get the thread back on track... Osama is dead, he deserved it, and there are others out there that deserve it as much if not more.

Based off of this I can only assume then, that you also agree that the U.S. Soldiers involved in The Kill Team should also be lined up and shot. As they are just as guilty of being killers as Osama was. Maybe they didnt kill as many people but they still killed.

Also I can't help but ask how is it justice for a rapist or a mass banking fraud to receive the death penalty? When their victims still live? Perhaps its just me but my idea's of justice are clearly different than yours.

[Brehan]

mass banking fraud to receive the death penalty?

When has this happened?

[Rensvert]

To the best of my knowledge it hasnt happened. I was just wondering why Mali seems to think Mass banking fraud should be federally mandated to receive the death penalty. Heck to me it sounds like if that were to happen the next logical step in our destructive path would be to start giving out the death penalty for traffic violations or for bouncing a check.

[Mali]

The Kill Team should also be lined up and shot.

No, there is a difference between killing an enemy in battle and murdering innocents. They didn't murder Osama's wife, but they did exchange fire with extremists that surrounded America's most wanted terrorist.

When has this happened?

I don't believe it has here, but it should. This should also be applied to companies that willfully endanger populations with misconduct, regardless of industry.

Case in point: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/4315627/Two-sentenced-to-death-over-China-melamine-milk-scandal.html

We could learn alot from China in this regard.

the next logical step in our destructive path would be to start giving out the death penalty for traffic violations or for bouncing a check.

No. The difference is the degree to which an action has negative effects on a population, but also the severity of that effect. A severe effect on an individual may be taken into consideration, as well as moderately severe effects to many people. If you rape a child - death. If you bankrupt 10,000 people - death. If you poison manufacture chemicals and then dump it in the river that people use for recreation and drinking water - death.

Still - these viewpoints of mine are outside the scope of the original post.

It bugs me that some folks here are upset about the way Osama was killed. Get over it, and let it be an example to anyone else who masterminds terrorism against the US.

[Twinblades713]

The slippery slope implication is fallacious. Yes, because we killed a mass terrorist, we should start capital punishment for jaywalking. We should be humane to this guy that would STILL kill your whole family while you watched if he has the opportunity. If you wanna help people, talk about the ones that need it. I'm for the poor, and helping less fortunate. Not for being nice to the guy that defined modern day terrorism.

[Pali]

It's not about being nice, Twin. It's about dealing with criminals through the justice system, rather than with summary executions.

"The degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons." - Dostoyevsky

[KRins]

I've always preferred Beccaria's views on the subject, particularly his best known work On Crimes and Punishment. Basically he argues it is immoral and detrimental to society to use capital punishment. My counter-argument... because I feel like arguing with myself right now... is how much of a part of any society was bin Laden? When you break the Social Contract (another philosophical favorite of mine) you have essentially placed yourself outside of society. Anything outside of society is in a state of nature. In a state of nature, it is eat or be eaten. Osama got eaten. Whether it is right or wrong is kind of irrelevant to me, as he made no attempts to be a part of society, productive or otherwise, and in fact went well out of his way to attempt to damage/destroy not only the United States, but other societies as well. If you wish to forgo the burdens of society... why should you get to enjoy the protections of society?

[Pali]

Bin Laden wasn't an anarchist... he believed in an Islamic Afghan state.

By the way, aren't you guys mostly Christians? Aren't you supposed to turn the other cheek, love your enemy, all that jazz? Did I miss the part where Jesus made an exception for bin Laden?

EDIT: By the way, since the subject was brought up... my objection to capital punishment is primarily rooted in the imperfect nature of our justice system. So long as the possibility remains that we may be convicting innocent people, I must oppose the death penalty, as I will not risk the death of innocents.