Rules for Killing Rogues

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bubba_Switzler
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bubba_Switzler

Guest
The recent killing of Osama bin Laden raises interesting moral questions. The latest reports are that it was a pretty deliberate killing with little effort, if any, for capture. One can well imagine OBL being shot has he threw his hand up in the air to surrender.

The alternative would have been to capture and try him. But even an arrest would have been of dubious legality given that it occured in Pakistan. The standard course of action would have been for the US to request Pakistan to arrest and extradite him.

Here are a few articles on the subject:

frontpagemag.com/2011/05/04/osama-dead-and-targeted-killing-vindicated/

nationalreview.com/articles/266439/rules-killing-rogues-victor-davis-hanson

dw-world.de/dw/article/0,15048146,00.html

1001zones.com/2011/05/killing-osama-violates-international-law/

nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10723453

letters.salon.com/news/feature/2011/05/04/was_killing_bin_laden_legal/view/
 
How do you know they haven’t arrested him and buried somebody else’s body at see?
He would appear to be a good source of information.

Anyway, whats done is done. We cannot change anything that has happened.
 
Bubba_Switzler said:
The recent killing of Osama bin Laden raises interesting moral questions. The latest reports are that it was a pretty deliberate killing with little effort, if any, for capture. One can well imagine OBL being shot has he threw his hand up in the air to surrender.

The alternative would have been to capture and try him. But even an arrest would have been of dubious legality given that it occured in Pakistan. The standard course of action would have been for the US to request Pakistan to arrest and extradite him.

Here are a few articles on the subject:

frontpagemag.com/2011/05/04/osama-dead-and-targeted-killing-vindicated/

nationalreview.com/articles/266439/rules-killing-rogues-victor-davis-hanson

dw-world.de/dw/article/0,15048146,00.html

1001zones.com/2011/05/killing-osama-violates-international-law/

nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10723453

letters.salon.com/news/feature/2011/05/04/was_killing_bin_laden_legal/view/
Click to expand...
He held a woman as a human shield. He had no intent to surrender.
 
Nelka said:
How do you know they haven’t arrested him and buried somebody else’s body at see?
He would appear to be a good source of information.

Anyway, whats done is done. We cannot change anything that has happened.
Click to expand...
I knew the cospiracy theorist would be hard at work after this event. 😃 Nice! 🙂
 
Bubba_Switzler said:
Except, of course, that it continues:

voanews.com/english/news/asia/south/Pakistan-Says-US-Drone-Strike-Killed-8-Militants-121378019.html
Click to expand...
What continues is the charade Pakistan puts on for the world that it has control of it’s own sovereignty. Clearly it does not.
articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/03/world/la-fg-pakistan-christian-assassinated20110304
msnbc.msn.com/id/22406555/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/t/bhuttos-assassination-rocks-pakistan/
csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2011/0303/This-time-murder-of-Pakistan-minister-spurs-condemnation-from-Islamic-clerics

Didn’t this exact same argument get brought up during peace negotiations with Arafat who could not control his own people, or then again, was he all along? 2006 release of classified documents show a different light.

Our seals did right. Zero doubt in my mind. Now lets do our job and fix foreign policy.
 
Nelka said:
How do you know they haven’t arrested him and buried somebody else’s body at see?
He would appear to be a good source of information.

Anyway, whats done is done. We cannot change anything that has happened.
Click to expand...
Seriously, if the US was just going to lie about that sort of thing, they would’ve done it a long time ago.

Anyways, Osama was far too dangerous to leave alive. Eiether he is captured and tried, and sent to prison for the rest of his years. Any time one of his followers can bust him out. Unlike your run of the mill criminal, Osama has people on the outside with the means and the dedication to bust him out. Too dangerous to keep him in prison. Or he is captured and sentenced to death. This is just a waste of everybody’s time when they easily could’ve just shot him, which is what they ended up doing anyway. Plus any place they put the trial one would be a great terrorist target.

Also, if one believes in the death as justice, at all, then if anybody deserved it, it’s certainly him. He’s responsible for the deaths of thousands.
 
benidict said:
I knew the cospiracy theorist would be hard at work after this event. 😃 Nice! 🙂
Click to expand...
It’s not a conspiracy theory, I saw him the other day at the job centre saying he couldn’t work due to a bad back and my mate saw him move into a nice council house. 😃
kbwall said:
Seriously, if the US was just going to lie about that sort of thing, they would’ve done it a long time ago.
Click to expand...
They did lie.
 
Nelka said:
How do you know they haven’t arrested him and buried somebody else’s body at see?
He would appear to be a good source of information.

Anyway, whats done is done. We cannot change anything that has happened.
Click to expand...
The thought occurred to me. But when I heard that he was dropped off of the Carl Vinson, I figured that is perfect symbolism. What better ship, except perhaps the Cole?
 
Here is the crux:

If we dance at Bin Laden’s death, we proclaim that violence is a proper response to violence. But that is the message of al Qaeda; it has no place in our faith traditions. If we refuse to celebrate, we affirm the value of every life - a value which Bin Laden scorned.

There are all sorts of problems with this but perhaps the simplest problem is that, taken at face value, it is an assertion of a Christian duty to pacifism.

Self defense, for example, is generally acknolwedged (outside of pacifist circles) to be a proper (if violent) response to violence (or even to the threat of violence). Of course, we make distincitons about the exercise of violence but, nonetheless, it is, quite literally, a claim that in some circumstances at least, violence is a proper response to violence.

Of course, it is precisely the denial of such distinctions that leads to equating the killing of bin laden with the killing by bin laden, the moral equivalence of the two, which is an additional problem in the above.

There may be other reaons to abstain from celebrating the death of bin laden but the above strikes me as grossly misleading.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top