Quote:
Originally Posted by VEGANGELICA
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by captaincaptain
Bin Laden and a lot of his cohorts believed the same thing.
|
Exactly. That was my point: both Bin Laden and the U.S. government believed/believe it is okay to achieve goals by killing innocent people.
The question I'm asking is whether there was much moral difference between the actions of the U.S. and of Bin Laden. In my opinion the answer is no.
Quote:
Originally Posted by skaltezon
I feel the same way. A bullet to the head may have been a justifiable conclusion to a gun battle, but it smells like an execution all the same. If the SEALs were able to take away Osama's dead body then it seems they might have taken him alive, which would have been preferable. It's a pity that the woman who was killed received so little notice. Rejoicing in bloodthirsty revenge is the wrong attitude here.
|
Agreed. I read an article stating that Osama Bin Laden was unarmed when a U.S. SEAL shot him to death. The smell of execution gets stronger.
I am not alone in questioning the ethics of the U.S.'s actions, since others agree that justice should mean capturing the accused and bringing him to trial, rather than acting, as the U.S. did, as "policeman, judge, and executioner":
Quote:
"Unlawful killing"
The United States admitted that Osama bin Laden was unarmed when US commandos shot him dead.
While many western leaders applauded the U.S. operation, there were concerns that the United States was wrong to act as policeman, judge and executioner.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder defended the action as "lawful" on Tuesday, but some in Europe said bin Laden should have been captured and put on trial.
"It was quite clearly a violation of international law," former West German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt told German TV. "The operation could also have incalculable consequences in the Arab world in light of all the unrest."
Geoffrey Robertson, a prominent London-based human rights lawyer, said the killing "may well have been a cold-blooded assassination" that risked making bin Laden a martyr.
"It's not justice. It's a perversion of the term. Justice means taking someone to court, finding them guilty upon evidence and sentencing them," the Australian-born Robertson told Australian Broadcasting Corp television.
Bin Laden unarmed when killed: US | Asia-Pasific | World Bulletin
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty
Thoughts like this just make me shake my head. American forces finally find and take down a mastermind behind the worst attack in U.S. history and you're disgusted by it. I just find that unbelievable. Justice has been served and the world is a better place without this shithead breathing.
|
Dirty, please see quotes above about justice, and also tell me if justice was served when the U.S. killed a woman accused of no crime to get to a man accused of one.
Is the world *really* a better place now that Osama Bin Laden isn't breathing? Why?
I feel killing a person is NEVER an answer to a problem...especially since you can't kill an *idea* by killing a person. Kill all the terrorists in the world...and the ideas for which terrorists stand can still originate in another person's mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neapolitan
If one has to look for who really act unethical and look for who is consumed with bloodlust one has to look no further than the man himself, Osama Bin Laden. There were reasons they were looking for him and reasons they took him out - 2,977 reasons.
(I can't see it as justice, because nothing can turn back the injustices that took place during 9/11.) It was Osama Bin Laden who acted unethically, he wanted to mount a major spectacular event, and wanted to strike fear in people. ... His own actions put him on the Most Wanted Terrorists list. He is to blame for his own death. I see it more as something he brought on himself.
|
Yes, Osama Bin Laden *did* act unethically and in horrible ways, Neapolitan, but this does not, I feel, remove the onus from us to consider whether or not the U.S.'s actions were ethical...and I feel they were not.
Yes, Bin Laden's own actions put him on the Most Wanted Terrorists list. However, the
U.S. is to blame for his death, because someone from the U.S. military, authorized by the U.S. President, killed Osama Bin Laden.
I agree with you completely that justice is not served, because there is NO way to EVER BRING BACK the people murdered on 9/11 under Osama Bin Laden's command. This is one reason to avoid killing people if at all possible. There is no way to reverse a killing and no way the dead can have a second chance to live. No amount of revenge killing will bring her or him back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBig3
I think its good for folks like Vegangelica to think every life is precious. I'm not being sarcastic there; its a positive outlook. But the problem is the barbarians always win with that mentality.
...
Its ugly out there. I'm not saying killings the right thing to do. I don't think it is - thats why I think Bin Laden should have been taken out. Killing is a problem, but wanting to continue killing - for seemingly artificial reasons (we're not really the great satan) seems worse. I think Bin Laden is on par with Timothy McVeigh...should we not have executed him as well?
|
We are in agreement, Big3, that killing isn't the right thing to do...and I understand your point that you feel killing Bin Laden was the lesser of two wrongs...but that still doesn't make killing him RIGHT.
No, I don't feel Timothy McVeigh should have been executed. I oppose capital punishment. If Osama Bin Laden had been taken alive, placed on trial, and found guilty (as he surely would have been), I *also* would have opposed people killing him as punishment. I would have wanted him to live.
I disagree that barbarians always win if we follow the view that a human life is precious, since by *not* following that view we ourselves *become* barbarians. The only way to stop barbarians is to not act like them.
In my opinion the best (non-barbarian) solution to terrorism is the following:
(1) Try to understand the terrorists' motivations;
(2) Act defensively and do not use violent offensive actions;
(3) Focus on challenging the terrorists' motivating *idea* instead of focusing on killing the people who hold the idea;
(4) Acknowledge and admit one's own mistakes that have contributed to terrorists feeling angry;
(5) Finally, NEVER NEVER NEVER stoop to terrorists' level by using aggressive violence and accepting the killing of innocent people to achieve one's goals.
The U.S. has stooped, as it often does, to aggressive killing to try to achieve its political aims. The U.S. did this by preemptively attacking Iraq, unprovoked, leading to many thousands of deaths of innocent Iraqi civilians. The U.S. did this again when it killed Al Zarqawi: "six other people were killed in the attack,
including one woman and one child"
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi Killed in Bombing Raid - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News - FOXNews.com. Now, with Bin Laden, the U.S. uses violence again.