 |
Hello again, Rick:Quote:
Originally Posted by ITstudent2006
That's not the right question... Obviously, we were right before we had the might. So, we don't succumb to what the world thinks is right, because the world is WRONG. Might's got nothing to do with it.
excon
Quote:
There was no trial, no capture, no explanation of past actions, just his death.
It's not like these were ambiguous . He declared the "Islamist" equivalence of war on the US with his 1998 Fatwah .
Al Qaeda's 1998 Fatwa | PBS NewsHour | Feb. 23, 1998 | PBS
From that point on until this week he waged war on the US . This is a no brainer unless someone gets into those grey areas where right and wrong get blurred... and definitions of war and law enforcement twisted beyond recognition .
Once he made this declaration of war, and began acting on it, he was a legitimate military target.This was simply cutting the head off the snake.
Is al-Qaeda a nation state ? Not in the classic Westphalian sense. But the Westphalian era is a brief moment in time . The truth is that until they were broken up and forced to change to a decentralized loose group of cells ;there was command and control... and Bin Laden was the top of the organization.
Just for fun --Quote:
Originally Posted by redhed35
Where would he have been jailed?
Where would he have been tried?
Who would have been his defense lawyers?
Sentence of life in prison or execution?
Who would have taken him as prisoner and where, or executed him?
Same as Saddam?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
And the same people who call for a trial would then accuse the US of conducting a show trial. Obama wanted KSM tried in civilian court and passed judgement on him before a venue was selected... and told the world he would be either convicted or held forever anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
The scary truth is that the US does not take prisoners in this war anymore because POTUS waffles on detention. So his answer is to shoot to kill .
I'm sure there would have been a flurry of defense lawyers vying for the case, known serial murderers have defense lawyers, some of the best.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
If the americans captured him I'm sure they would have held tight and put up one hell of a fight to try him in america,and keep him there as long as possible,ironically he would have been 'safer ' there,or at least kept alive until trial ( I can feel the ice shift beneath my feet!) the trial would have been one for the history books.
Eventually I suppose he would have been tried in the Hague, under international law as to what would become of him is anyone's guess, from the dredges of memory I recall a american defense lawyer made a case for a german officer based on the fact that even though he sent the order to kill thousands of jews, he did not directly have any involvement in the deaths i.e, the direct torture and killing of jews in any camps, however in saying that, at the time of the geneva convention there was an absence of any precedent, I would have to Google a while to make an educated guess as too whether he would eventually be killed anyway.
This is all a little too PC for me. I have strong feelings about what muslim terrorists have done throughout the world.
I see nothing wrong with celebrating the death of tyrants and there are people who have good reason the celebrate the death of this tyrant. I will not critise them
I don't think there is anything wrong with celebrating bin Ladin's death. Yeah, he was human , but he did inhumane things.. and that kind of cancels out the human part.
Whether that's the right question or not is superfluous. What matters is that's MY question. Might has everything to do with it. At what point is the line drawn? Just because might is majority does that make them right?Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
The reason I brought this up was because a coworker had said (another paraphrase)
"Well, if we got a poll, on who thought what he did was right and what he did was wrong, it would be split (or close to it)"
Now, even if we included the radical Islamics in this poll, I feel the vast majority would see the wrong that was done by OBL. Now, this made me think, just because the majority thinks something does that make it right?
I realize this has nothing to do with my original question and to be honest I am one who see's the wrong that was done but it made me think...
IT,
It isn't even about right or wrong morally. It isn't about majority and it certainly isn't about might. What OBL did was mastermind an act of WAR on this country. He had thousands killed... and NOT because they provoked it they were simply going about their lives. This is a FACT. If there is a split decision on whether these actions were right or wrong.. then God help us all.
And NO, just because a majority thinks a certain way... it does NOT make it right. I am a woman who believes that there IS absolute truth and there IS a right way and a wrong way. This is the biggest problem I see, no one believes that anymore. If there is no truth and no evil and no standard... we are all doomed.
Course I know you didn't ask me that question IT... but I couldn't resist.
I just wonder if he's enjoying his 72 hot babes.
1. This all started from a paraphrase which means I did not say it.Quote:
Originally Posted by classyT
2. The might vs right idea was from a co-worker, not me
3. You can say it isn't about this and isn't about that all day and too be honest it's not FACT, it's OPINION. In their eyes, he did right. In your eyes he was a monster...
NOTE: I am not pro OBL believe me, I simply like argueing.
Back in business...
This is not a fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by classyT
Quote:
Originally Posted by classyT
Please explain.Quote:
Originally Posted by BMI
Gladly.
1. Either of you do not know the extent of OBL's involvement in the attacks. To pin every murder on him and him alone is not based on fact, rather assumption.
2. You refer to the people in the towers not provoking the attack. I agree. However, you use them as a further argument about the evils of OBL. While the act (whomever responsible) was pure evil it is not only those in the tower that were defenceless but the thousands of Iraqis/Afgahns who were killed as a result of the U.S led invasion of both countries. Furthermore, OBL would probably argue he had plenty of provocation to attack the U.S. right or wrong. He did not select the U.S out of a hat.
I include the second part because I read plenty of posts on here suggesting that the East's hatred of the West was brought about by nothing more than a whim. It most certainly consisted of more than that, to be fair. It also seems like the 'patriots' have no issues when the Americans do the Same thing overseas but judge very quickly when done to them.
Nevertheless, the original point:
BMI injures his foot. He seeks medical advice. The doctor asks him questions, he answers. The doctor performs tests. The doctor examines the results of said tests and shows them to BMI. The doctor says "BMI you handsome lad, you have a broken foot". This is a fact.
Conversely:
BMI injures his foot and asks his friend to look at it. His friend says "BMI you ugly son of a B****, it certainly looks like you've broken your foot". This is not a fact.
In summation: Establish the facts before shooting the doctor in the face and then you may report them as such.
OBL bragged about his causing the attacks on the Towers, and slapped his knee in glee that the Towers had completely collapsed when he had planned only that they would be destroyed from the points of impact and upward.Quote:
Originally Posted by BMI
He attacked first. Afghanistan and Iraq (which had nothing to do with OBL) came later.Quote:
2. You refer to the people in the towers not provoking the attack. I agree. However, you use them as a further argument about the evils of OBL. While the act (whomever responsible) was pure evil it is not only those in the tower that were defenceless but the thousands of Iraqis/Afgahns who were killed as a result of the U.S led invasion of both countries. Furthermore, OBL would probably argue he had plenty of provocation to attack the U.S. right or wrong. He did not select the U.S out of a hat.
He was quoted as saying he wanted to crush America's economy.
"We love death. The U.S. loves life. That is the difference between us two." ~Osama bin Laden
"Hostility toward America is a religious duty, and we hope to be rewarded for it by God . . . . I am confident that Muslims will be able to end the legend of the so-called superpower that is America." ~Osama Bin Laden
So you think our "invasion" of these two countries had NOTHING to do with OBL? Or are you saying these two countries in their entirety had nothing to do with OBL?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Again, bragging or reacting to the towers falling is not an admission of guilt concerning the murder of 3,000 people! Furthermore, these questions are for the courts to decide.Many heads of the mafia are 'suspected' in the death of pretty much everyone their 'crew' murders (and in many ways you could argue they are indirectly or directly involved), yet they are not convicted of every one. That is the judicial system, it was invented for a purpose. Seems, no seemed, like an appropriate event in which to use that system, no? Just because you didn't, don't fill in the blanks with comments that have no merit in your own country's courts of law.
Your second comment: Your child is being harassed by a bully for years and years. One day, he hits back. The bully proceeds to beat him up real bad!! You on board with that?
Also, what do you mean had nothing to do with it? Innocent people in the towers were killed, we know that. Innocent people were killed by the U.S military overseas, we know that. Who's better?
Lastly, I was quoted last week saying I wanted to strangle my ex-girlfriend.
Afghanistan, yes. Iraq, no.Quote:
Originally Posted by ITstudent2006
I talk about robbing banks everyday of my life. I talk about this to my family, friends and co-workers...
Then one day our local bank is robbed...
You're quick to point fingers at me but did I really do it?
I think that is the point BMI is trying to make! Correct me if I am wrong!
You believe in the WMD?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
"Bin Laden claims responsibility for 9/11". CBC News. October 29, 2004. Bin Laden claims responsibility for 9/11 - World - CBC News. Retrieved January 11, 2009. "al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden appeared in a new message aired on an Arabic TV station Friday night, for the first time claiming direct responsibility for the 2001 attacks against the United States."Quote:
Originally Posted by BMI
I have no clue what your question means.Quote:
Originally Posted by ITstudent2006
You said Yes to Afghanistan and No to Iraq. I was just wondering if you believed the invasion of Iraq was indeed for WMD?
Ok BMI. Have it your way. Just because he was behind taking down the twin towers and crashing planes on 9/11 doesn't make him a terrorist or our enemy. It was not an act of War on the United States. Osama was just a religious guy expressing his religious views. The USA was out of line to go after him and to kill him. To celebrate it was inappropriate. He was framed. Sorry, my mistake.Quote:
Originally Posted by BMI
:rolleyes:
Absolutely not!Quote:
Originally Posted by ITstudent2006
So the Iraq invasion wasn't for OBL or WMD... can I ask what you believe it was for?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Why do I feel like I'm being set up?Quote:
Originally Posted by ITstudent2006
What do YOU think it was for?
I am not setting you up. Simply conversing.
I BELIEVE it was a culmination of the threat posed to the U.S. and its allies by Saddam Hussein's alleged programs of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and the possibility that he would pass along those arms to al Qaeda (OBL) also to avenge his father's failure to achieve a lasting victory over Saddam and more particularly his desire to get back at Saddam for an alleged assassination attempt against former President Bush Sr. in 1993... I also, think as a society we wanted some form of revenge for what happened on 9/11. We didn't want to sit and just take it, so actions were taken to gain some form of justice.
Although the name of this war has changed many times and the motive behind it... I do believe OBL was a target/mission throughout the entirety from the beginning!
For the most part. But IT, don't rob the bank, I beg you:)Quote:
Originally Posted by ITstudent2006
I believe the invasion of Iraq was totally uncalled for, that we didn't give the inspectors enough time. I said that to my son and husband when Colin Powell was making his presentations. I still believe diplomatic tactics should have been used. President Bush invaded on the excuse that Saddam had WMD and, later, to bring democracy to the nation. We now know how those "reasons" have worked out.
lolQuote:
alleged programs
A month before the invasion the chief UN inspector reported that despite all the warnings ,resolutions and sanctions there was still no acceptable accounting of Iraqs known WMD program and weapons.
The US was attacked with anthrax shortly after 9-11 . As I stated on another posting... there was a huge gap in what we knew of the enemy who had just killed almost 3000 Americans.
I'll remind you that it was al-Qaeda that decided to make the Iraq battlefield the central front in their war against us. It is them that are responsible for most of the civilian casualties in Iraq as they were the ones that instigated the ethnic civil war in the country. The Iraq war ended as a front against al-Qaeda when the Sunni chiefs realized that Al-Qaeda was brutalizing them as much as the Shia ,and turned on them.
Iraq today is a free independent nation ;has had a number of democratic elections ,and is also free of the jackboot of Saddam's tyranny ,and free of WMD. The lead up to the war lasted over a year ;and the UN pursuit for accountability for Saddam's WMD program was a decade+ . How much time did he need ? Even when Clintoon did a 4 day bombing campaign in 1998 he still wouldn't come clean.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Again, who cares how many headlines you produce! Even if he did claim responsibility! He, as in his 'company' (he being the CEO, lets say) took responsibility. You have to adjudge what the extent of his involvement was.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
I'm amazed, there are tons of credible reporters from the East and West breaking down and researching what role OBL actually had within the organization. Some say he was just a figurehead, some an advisor, yet many agree he was not at all the head of any snake. I think many people would like to know that answer, wouldn't you? Instead, all we have is speculation that he was the biggest and baddest threat ever to humankind:rolleyes: Just like Saddam (the world is so much less violent, isn't it?) or his WMD's that, whew, they got to just in time! 'cause for a long time there I was re-evaluating my life's path and all that I could have done better!
Saddam got taken out because what he did was absolutely no different than a convict out on Parole taunting his Parole officer.
He did beg for a cease fire... and that meant he was on probation... not pardoned.
As far as OBL... I'm IRKED a photo of his dead corpse wasn't released so I could do the second best thing of defecating and urinating on it. First best would have been having a chance to do it to his corpse. But the line of people waiting to do that would have been really, really long.
I feel there is ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong with feeling that way given who he was, and what he has done... and what he was trying to do..
Ok ClassyT. Just because you believe everything told to you by your very own government which has never falsified any account of any historical event to ever take place on its soil, doesn't make you naïve. The United States is the friendliest nation towards all others and always has been. Bush was just a religious guy expressing his religious views. The USA is NEVER out of line and certainly didn't convince you that the WMD's in Iraq didn't exist, nor did they alter your opinion of their advance when it turned out they did'nt exist... oops (How come I feel like I just told a kid Santa does not exist?) You should most definitely celebrate death, your good enough;)Quote:
Originally Posted by classyT
You want him to have been flying one of the planes? Isn't architect good enough?Quote:
Originally Posted by BMI
Who's responsible for the house you live in? The architect? The general contractor? The construction crew? The roofers? The plumbers? The electricians?
Who originally designed it and plotted it out? All of those?
What are we discussing here? I get so turned around on these things:mad:
You know how threads develop a mind of their own and go places we never expect around here.Quote:
Originally Posted by ITstudent2006
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:00 PM. |