On OBL, USA and Murder

[HellsMaster]

Hello all

 

You all know it by know, OBL is "Dead" and presumably killed un-armed.

 

Know may people rage on him being a demon, a monster ect for what he has done.

 

Ok, so what DID he do? Let's keep it at plain mass murder. Kill innocent people.

 

Now, what rights do USA has to talk about Justice and killing a demon while themselves go in other countries and MURDER INNOCENT CIVILIANS. Is it me or its some kind of dry humor? They go and kill and un-manned armed (Which i am used to by now, USA seems to love that) and claim he was a Murderer while themselves killed numerous civilian in other countries.

 

Now here 2 comments i found:

Junadelacruz: So many civilians were killed in Afghanistan by the USA that Human Rights Watch and others were blocked when trying to collect casualty figures. The USA acts like the psychopaths glamorised in their B-films and then wants the world to admire them. When we despise them they say we're jealous! l wouldn't want their human rights abuses on my conscience.

 

 

Poppymarenge: How do we know he was a demon? He never stood trial. All I know is that the Americans went in and shot a man, in cold blood. They said this man was guilty but I've never seen any proof either way.

 

 

 

 

Please i want intelligent replies, un-biased, un-patriotic. If you come here to tell me TROLOLOL HOW DARE YOU DOUBT THE WORD OF THE GVRMENT then take your trolling away.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[juderodney]

Hello all

 

You all know it by know, OBL is "Dead" and presumably killed un-armed.

 

Know may people rage on him being a demon, a monster ect for what he has done.

 

Ok, so what DID he do? Let's keep it at plain mass murder. Kill innocent people.

 

Now, what rights do USA has to talk about Justice and killing a demon while themselves go in other countries and MURDER INNOCENT CIVILIANS. Is it me or its some kind of dry humor? They go and kill and un-manned armed (Which i am used to by now, USA seems to love that) and claim he was a Murderer while themselves killed numerous civilian in other countries.

 

Now here 2 comments i found:

Junadelacruz: So many civilians were killed in Afghanistan by the USA that Human Rights Watch and others were blocked when trying to collect casualty figures. The USA acts like the psychopaths glamorised in their B-films and then wants the world to admire them. When we despise them they say we're jealous! l wouldn't want their human rights abuses on my conscience.

 

 

Poppymarenge: How do we know he was a demon? He never stood trial. All I know is that the Americans went in and shot a man, in cold blood. They said this man was guilty but I've never seen any proof either way.

 

 

 

 

Please i want intelligent replies, un-biased, un-patriotic. If you come here to tell me TROLOLOL HOW DARE YOU DOUBT THE WORD OF THE GVRMENT then take your trolling away.

 

Let me get this right. You're saying that the U.S. went into Afghanistan and indiscriminately killed people (Al Qaeda did that on numerous occasions) that that their enemies were NOT hiding behind (Bin Laden was said to have been using a woman as a shield) for the sake of scaring the populace ( the objective of a terrorist). I'd like to see some proof of that.

 

Btw, saying we act like "psychopaths" is, in an of itself, giving your own bias. So how about some UNbiased stuff from you, first?.

Edited May 5, 2011 by juderodney

[evilneko]

Whether the man (and I use that term loosely) was armed or not is irrelevant. Killing him is the best thing we could've done.

 

And completely legal.

[RZ1029]

You all know it by know, OBL is "Dead" and presumably killed un-armed.

He is dead and he was killed when he held no weapon. Unarmed does not mean innocent. What he has done has carried and does carry the death sentence, both in the US and abroad. It was just delivered without all the paperwork, albeit about thirteen years too late.

 

Know may people rage on him being a demon, a monster ect for what he has done.

He is not a demon, he is something far worse.

 

Ok, so what DID he do? Let's keep it at plain mass murder. Kill innocent people.

Mass murder of innocent civilians, both Americans and his own people. In the hundred of thousands, all said and told, if I had to throw a number out there.

 

Now, what rights do USA has to talk about Justice and killing a demon while themselves go in other countries and MURDER INNOCENT CIVILIANS. Is it me or its some kind of dry humor? They go and kill and un-manned armed (Which i am used to by now, USA seems to love that) and claim he was a Murderer while themselves killed numerous civilian in other countries.

I assume you mean they went in and killed an un-armed man and claim he was a murderer. This is all true, and he is a murderer. There is no claiming about it, Osama bin Laden himself took credit for the September 11 attacks, in addition to being financially tied to the funding of numerous other attacks, both successful and unsuccessful. As for the killing of numerous civilians, proof please? Or should I go dig up my previous post in the "Who are the real terrorists?" thread Marharth made a while back. It's basically four pages worth of information reporting the civilian deaths.

 

Now here 2 comments i found:

Junadelacruz: So many civilians were killed in Afghanistan by the USA that Human Rights Watch and others were blocked when trying to collect casualty figures. The USA acts like the psychopaths glamorised in their B-films and then wants the world to admire them. When we despise them they say we're jealous! l wouldn't want their human rights abuses on my conscience.

No, they were blocked because that is a war zone. The US military cannot be responsible for a human rights group that wants to run around in a war zone to collect quasi-accurate figures while bullets are flying in all directions and car bombs can roll through a road block on any given day. Psychopaths? Those are men and women that give their lives to keep us safe at home, who are the reason most people even have the right to complain. Do they kill? Yes. So do cops, are they psychopaths because they protect people they are charged to protect? They are looked up to because they give selflessly, not because they kill people. Is war glamorized in films? Yes. Should it be? No.

 

Poppymarenge: How do we know he was a demon? He never stood trial. All I know is that the Americans went in and shot a man, in cold blood. They said this man was guilty but I've never seen any proof either way.

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here, so I'm going to assume 'he' is bin Laden. They went in and shot a man who was wanted dead or alive by the FBI, CIA, and numerous international agencies for terrorist attacks he either planned or funded. As for proof? He's been tried in absentia by military tribunals that were authorized by President Bush along with the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT Act). The very first charge ever filed against bin Laden was back in 1998 in Federal District Court, if I remember right, and was found guilty. Regardless of his involvement in 9/11 or (insert conspiracy theory here), he was a wanted man by the US government for the involvement in the bombing of an embassy.

 

Please i want intelligent replies, un-biased, un-patriotic. If you come here to tell me TROLOLOL HOW DARE YOU DOUBT THE WORD OF THE GVRMENT then take your trolling away.

Intelligent granted, unbiased is impossible in this case, as it's an opinion backed up by facts. I am a patriot, but I can be objective. You are allowed to doubt, but do so intelligently. I gave you facts, you give me facts to back your argument up.

[Aurielius]

Hellsmaster excerpt-

"Now, what rights do USA has to talk about Justice and killing a demon while themselves go in other countries and MURDER INNOCENT CIVILIANS. Is it me or its some kind of dry humor? They go and kill and un-manned armed (Which i am used to by now, USA seems to love that) and claim he was a Murderer while themselves killed numerous civilian in other countries."

 

Aside from the blatant bias of the opening statement, I find it odd that you can take the high moral ground of self righteous indignation given the operational conduct of the Légion Étrangères (French Foreign Legion). French units have been involved in Iraq and Afghanistan and their conduct has hardly been above reproach. a quick review of your country's involvements might be in order.

 

# 1990 the 2e REI, 6e REG and 1e REC were sent to the Persian Gulf as a part of Opération Daguet. They were a part of the French 6th Light Armoured Division whose mission was to protect the coalition's left flank. (Collateral Civilian casualties-196~ École Spéciale Militaire de Saint-Cyr )

 

# 2001-2010 : Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan

Elements of the Foreign Legion have been deployed to Afghanistan in support of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force. Foreign Legion units have participated in ISAF operations in the Kapisa Province and Subrobi Province.( Collateral Civilian casualties- 752~ École Spéciale Militaire de Saint-Cyr )

 

# 2002-2003 : Operation Licorne in Côte d’Ivoire

The events of November 2004 during which the French Army opened fire on hostile Ivorian protestors, put the Force Licorne in a delicate situation vis-à-vis the civilian population. The suspicious death of Ivorian's, in May 2005, caused the suspension, then the formal reprimand and transfer of the Division General Henri Poncet and of his Associate Operations General Renaud de Malaussène, as well as the suspension of Colonel Eric Burgaud, head of the 13th battalion of Chasseurs Alpins and a non-Commissioned Officer from this same battalion by the then Minister of Defense Michèle Alliot-Marie.

 

The phrase "People who live in glass house should not throw stones" comes to mind. Seems that French units are not above shooting civilians when they feel the need arises. J'attends avec amusement drôle votre réponse.

Edited May 5, 2011 by Aurielius

[marharth]

As RZ1029 said, there is a entire thread full of information regarding innocent deaths and such.

 

 

I would have preferred a capture and trial. Maybe not in the US, but at least a military trial in another country.

 

The reason I am saying that is he would have had a larger defeat to be taken down by the American justice system, something he hated.

 

Its perfectly understandable that he was killed though. If we attempted a capture, our troops could of been ambushed or he may of escaped somehow. Not to mention the huge publicity for a trial and the unrest it would cause.

 

As for your proof, he released a ton of tapes admitting to his acts. I am sure if he was held at a trial he would have been guilty.

 

 

 

This man was a part of the Bin Laden family (a wealthy oil family) and he was likely a very bad person before he was a terrorist.

[JimboUK]

I must admit I'm slightly uneasy with the summary execution, I can understand the reasoning behind it in Bin Ladens case but as someone opposed to the death penalty I can't support it. Should the U.S be condemned for it's actions? I think a few of us outside the U.S should look at little closer to home before attacking the U.S on this. Right now several countries including the U.K and France are openly trying to kill Gaddafi, we've already killed Saif al-Arab Gaddafi and his grandchildren, criticising the U.S government while several European governments are behaving in exactly the same way is a tad hypocritical. As Aurielius quite rightly says "People who live in glass house should not throw stones".

[grannywils]

Well said Aurielius and Jim-uk, and even you Marharth (sort of. Keep working on it).

 

I don't know you HellsMaster, or anything about you. But what you say is blatently rude, and totally without merit. While you are entitled to your opinion, your need to address an entire nation in such a manner speaks volumes about you and how much credence can be placed on your views; and how much respect you can expect for your opinions in return. You say, 'let's keep it at "plain" mass muder Kill innocent people' Interesting perspective. I personally hate war. But as many of my fellow posters have reminded me over and over, War is Hell. This man epitomized evil in my opinion, and that of millions of people around the world. He is no longer on this Earth, and that is just fine with me.

 

You can go on and play your hate America games until you turn blue for all I care, but do not try to justify his behavior or tell us (ie the United States of America) how to deal with a terrorist who has changed all of our lives forever (yours included). You are simply wasting your time.

[WrathOfDeadguy]

Honestly I'm beginning to see very clearly why some folks want the Debates section shut down. This is... what, the fourth or fifth blatant lets-bash-America thread in the past few months? The last one hasn't even left the front page yet- and it's always the same stuff- America murders civilians! America wants to conquer the world! America eats babies and kicks puppies!

 

Here's a neat little media trick to ponder:

 

- The first reporters on the ground will get their information from a civilian source, since the military will restrict access and not issue statements until it is sure an ongoing operation will not be compromised.

- It is difficult to be objective when bombs are going off in your neighborhood. It is even moreso when someone you know has become collateral damage.

- Hence, reports to the media via civilian sources will overestimate casualties. Those figures will likely not be corrected if the country the war takes place in has poor record keeping or a non-functional government.

- The word "casualties" refers to wounded, missing, killed, and homeless.

- The usage of the word in the media implies that everyone who is a "casualty" is dead.

 

Hence silly statements like "the US has killed hundreds of thousands/millions of civilians!" Well, no, we haven't. Certainly hundreds of thousands have been displaced, tens of thousands have been wounded, and entirely too many have been killed, with many thousands still unaccounted for. But those people are not all dead. They're not even all wounded. And it gets very tiring to keep hearing about all the wanton slaughter when this is one of the least bloody wars in all of human history. C'mon folks, you have the internet... surely you can do a bit of research before parroting sensationalist garbage?

[Kendo 2]

...HOW DARE YOU DOUBT THE WORD OF THE GVRMENT...

 

You don't have to make left-handed implications to the patriots here to question their governments. IT'S WHAT WE DO, no matter what party is in office.

 

...surely you can do a bit of research before parroting sensationalist garbage?

 

No, they can't. :wallbash:

 

Anyway...

Isoroku Yamamoto was a Naval Marshal General in the Imperial Japanese Navy during WW2. Just as he had planned, the First Air Fleet attacked Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941. We all know what happened there.

On 14 April 1943 US Naval Intelligence intercepted an enemy transmission detailing Yamamoto's whereabouts. U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox to "Get Yamamoto." On the morning of 18 April 1943 a squadron of American P-38s engaged Yamamoto's flight group and his Mitsubishi Betty was shot down over the Solomon Islands by First Lt Rex T. Barber. Yamamoto died in the crash.

 

Does anyone see the similarities between this brief history lesson and the death of Osama bin Laden?