Like Tree139Likes

Bin Laden Found Dead?

Reply
Page 23 of 46 FirstFirst ... 15 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 31 ... LastLast
  1. #221

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    4,026
    Quote Originally Posted by Freetrader:
    No, you do not correctly understand me. In my opinion the killing of Bin Laden (based on what we know now - I reserve the right to change my opinion later) comports with the basic rules of law enforcement and the laws of war. If you disagree, please state why.

    We have had about 10 pages of hand wringing without anyone really addressing that issue.
    Freetrader...while I have no problems with the taking out of Bin Laden as they did it is laughable to say what you are saying:

    "comports with the basic rules of law enforcement and the laws of war." Do you write drivel like this to wind the posters up? This is insane thinking.



    If it was handled via law enforcement they'd have called the Intelligence service or the police in Pakistan.

    The US took matters in their own hands as they had no confidence in Pakistan to do this right - that is if we actually believe they were prepared to take him alive if he did not resist. As ex POTUS Bush said - he was wanted DEAD or Alive.

    Their actions are certainly not provided for in the laws of war, however the reality is that countries can and will act unilaterally like the USA did for their own, valid reasons despite the legality - just like they did here. More nations and people are cheering this than are upset.
    luckycat likes this.

  2. #222

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Back in California (finally!).
    Posts
    2,079

    Footy, this is about as close as we may ever get to agreeing, so let's agree to disagree on the legality part. In any case, it is a good question - if something is clearly extrajudicial (what the spooks would call "covert"), it is ever justified? In some cases, such as this one (assuming, again, it were illegal) the answer should be 'yes'.


  3. #223

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Gold Coast Marina
    Posts
    17,939
    Quote Originally Posted by Freetrader:
    While that is an interesting argument - I am surprised. I thought that you were a lawyer? If you want to go down this path, perhaps the word 'assassinated' would be more appropriate. I don't think anyone (except someone rather ignorant) would argue that killing Bin Laden was an illegal act.
    It happened in Pakistan. So - I wonder - what is the definition of this in Pakistan? A group of people break into a house and kill an unarmed man? If it were not the US government-sponsored staff doing it, would that not be classified as murder?

  4. #224

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Back in the US of A, home of the free...
    Posts
    862

    Well in a Western Society its called murder. In South Africa it would be called "A Normal Day"

    South Africa Crime and Courts

    Farmer Robbed and Murdered

    Murder Plot




    Quote Originally Posted by MovingIn07:
    It happened in Pakistan. So - I wonder - what is the definition of this in Pakistan? A group of people break into a house and kill an unarmed man? If it were not the US government-sponsored staff doing it, would that not be classified as murder?
    Last edited by HongKongFoot; 04-05-2011 at 11:00 PM.

  5. #225

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Back in California (finally!).
    Posts
    2,079
    Quote Originally Posted by MovingIn07:
    It happened in Pakistan. So - I wonder - what is the definition of this in Pakistan? A group of people break into a house and kill an unarmed man? If it were not the US government-sponsored staff doing it, would that not be classified as murder?
    Well, possibly if those were the facts. But the actual facts were that this it was a government organized and approved (by both the US and Pakistan) assault on a known para-military criminal and terrorist who was armed to the teeth. Spot the difference?

  6. #226

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Discovery Bay
    Posts
    5,016
    Quote Originally Posted by hullexile:
    Hitler was taken out by the US?
    No, and he didn't commit suicide either.

    Chuck Norris round-house kicked him in the face. That's why they never found his body.

  7. #227

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,377

    Freetrader I read only today that Pakistan had no knowledge of:

    - OBL's wherabouts; or
    - the USA's plans or intel.

    If this is indeed true, does your view change?


  8. #228

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Discovery Bay
    Posts
    5,016
    Quote Originally Posted by luckycat:
    Freetrader I read only today that Pakistan had no knowledge of:

    - OBL's wherabouts; or
    - the USA's plans or intel.

    If this is indeed true, does your view change?
    Number 1: If they admitted that they had known of OBL's whereabouts, they would be in a lot of trouble right now.

    Number 2: If they did, the news today would have been very different. People would possibly be berating Obama for letting OBL off again, the way Rumpy did several years ago.

    Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Go figure...

  9. #229

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Back in California (finally!).
    Posts
    2,079
    Quote Originally Posted by luckycat:
    Freetrader I read only today that Pakistan had no knowledge of:

    - OBL's wherabouts; or
    - the USA's plans or intel.

    If this is indeed true, does your view change?
    It's true that the US didn't tell the Pakistanis exactly where or when they would go in, for obvious reasons. But they had informed the Pakistani government beforehand (and I remember this) that if they had intelligence that indicated that OBL was in Pakistan, they would go get him. They were, at a minimum, acquiesent in the raid.

    I don't want to get any of the simple-minded folk out there confused: but let's try this as a thought exercise. Assume that the Pakistani's denied that OBL was in Pakistan, and refused to allow the US in to take him out? Would the subsequent US action be legal? Maybe. In that case the Pakistanis would be harboring a known terrorist and criminal and lying about it and the US by would have the right to protect itself by taking action. Arguably, simply having Bin Laden in your protection would constitute an act of war. This, essentially, was the argument used to take down the Taliban in Afghanistan. So, I think either way the US had a some pretty good arguments on their side.

  10. #230

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,377

    Yes, dreadnought, I agree. A difficult situation I grant, and all in all, the correct decision. Just a shame the USA didn't say it how it really is - a satisfying revenge attack for killing our people.

    Last edited by luckycat; 04-05-2011 at 11:29 PM.

Reply
Page 23 of 46 FirstFirst ... 15 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 31 ... LastLast