Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to wonder with what authority USA killed Osama Bin Laden.

342 replies

Mamaz0n · 02/05/2011 09:43

Since when has murder been justice?

Don't get me wrong, i think it is a good thing that he has died. I think that to imprison him would have caused massive uprising in violence and kidnaps etc.

But it bothers me that America has just decided that this man is guilty and therefore acted to murder him.

It is my (probably naive) understanding that you can't be extradited to a state that has the death penalty, so how exactly can Obama's order to kill Bin Laden be at all legal?

I have even just heard that the Pakistani government were not even aware that the USA were taking this action.

I am sorry but it sits very uncomfortably with me.

OP posts:
Original poster
Mamaz0n · 03/05/2011 09:58

well i'll leave it here. It is boring me.

It doesn't sit right with me for various reasons. some i can't even explain.

but i will tell myself that i am merely a bleeadin heart liberal and be done with it

OP posts:
vintageteacups · 03/05/2011 09:59

There's one point that I find a bit Hmm and that's how they apparently waited a week to confirm the DNA results yet still 'buried' him at sea 'within hours'.

Surely if they weren't sure it was him, they'd at least keep the body secure until they knew?

bemybebe · 03/05/2011 10:00

I am amazed that people who quote ME troubles as explanation/justification for OBL and al-qaida fight against the West forget that Osama's conflict with Saudi Arabia was much earlier than his fall out with the US and is very well documented. It is somehow missed completely on this thread.

The ME was a fantastically executed marketing/propaganda campaign and it is not surprising that people are so taken by it on both sides of this ideological front.

SherlockMoans · 03/05/2011 10:01

I did feel uneasy about the way some people in the US were "celebrating" his death - it is undignified and uneducated at best....but perhaps if my brother/father/husband had gone to work at the trade centre on 9/11 and I had never had the closure of burying a body I would feel differently.

The Pakistani authorities were likely not told because money talks in Pakistan and he would almost certainly have escaped before the forces got there.

I am glad he is dead - again would happily have done it myself given the opportunity and means but I am fairly sure there are 10001 even worse nutjobs ready to take up his position on behalf of the fundamentalists.

I have no time for the Mamazons of this world I am afraid...what were they meant to do sprinkle fairy dust over him and ask him to play nicely, I am fairly sure he would have been determined to be a martyr rather than captured - the US did what it needed to.....It just now needs to be a little more dignified about it.

bemybebe · 03/05/2011 10:06

'not amazed' earlier

Skifit · 03/05/2011 10:08

They needed to take out Bin Laden asap, with chance for his protectors to intervene and help him .
Well done US! Bin Laden was evil.

tryingtoleave · 03/05/2011 10:09

Give me a moment and I will find the equivalent article in additional protocol II which deals with internal armed conflicts. I would argue that is an international conflict though.

tryingtoleave · 03/05/2011 10:12

Article 13 -- Protection of the civilian population

  1. The civilian population and individual civilians shall enjoy general protection against the dangers arising from military operations. To give effect to this protection, the following rules shall be observed in all circumstances.
  1. The civilian population as such, as well as individual civilians, shall not be the object of attack. Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited.
  1. Civilians shall enjoy the protection afforded by this Part, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.
scaryteacher · 03/05/2011 10:14

Vintage - he was killed on Sunday, and they took the body to Bagram I think where they have enough kit to do DNA and have it compared with the samples held in the US (which would have been analysed and results on a computer presumably). Then I presume, they stuck it on a helicopter and took it to the US carrier, where the body was washed and prayed over and then buried at sea.

Best place for him.

vintageteacups · 03/05/2011 10:15

Thanks Scary

tryingtoleave · 03/05/2011 10:17

Article 13 -- Protection of the civilian population

  1. The civilian population and individual civilians shall enjoy general protection against the dangers arising from military operations. To give effect to this protection, the following rules shall be observed in all circumstances.
  1. The civilian population as such, as well as individual civilians, shall not be the object of attack. Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited.
  1. Civilians shall enjoy the protection afforded by this Part, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.
tryingtoleave · 03/05/2011 10:22

Sorry, am trying to answer an incessant stream of questions about why ninjas are barefoot.

Morloth · 03/05/2011 10:29

Why are ninjas barefoot? Seems a bit silly. I like a good pair of boots personally.

So all of you who think the US have acted 'illegally' what exactly are you planning to do about it? What's that I hear? Nothing?! Could that be because the US is a vast superpower who holds all the power and you are not? So they don't give a fuck what you think?

Which brings me back to Might Makes Right.

scaryteacher · 03/05/2011 10:33

As you can't reason with Jihadists; they won't adhere to any ROE or Geneva conventions etc; they don't give a fuck about dying, and don't care who they take with them, what do you expect the US to have done?

You can't engage rationally with people like that who won't play by the rules, so you deal with them. What makes you think that if NATO could have taken out Arkan and Milosevich during Kosovo they wouldn't have done so?

bemybebe · 03/05/2011 10:35

mamaz0n you have started a thread on a serious subject that impacts us all and now you are 'bored'?? Wow. Hmm

Original poster
Mamaz0n · 03/05/2011 10:39

im not bored with the subject. I am reading the more intellectual responses and challenging my own feelings and thoughts on the matter.

But i am seriously tired of repeating my own position, and re explaining that i am not a sympathiser

OP posts:
EightiesChick · 03/05/2011 10:44

Wonder if you like, but I have no problem with it. Good riddance. The US had stated clearly a while back that if/when they found him they would kill him. Agree with scary above - OBL would not have played by any fair 'rules' of conflict so nothing else was feasible.

Original poster
Mamaz0n · 03/05/2011 10:54

If they went in to capture him and resisted and was killed in the struggle, so be it.

But Obama stated that they set out to kill him. That "justice was served"

It just doesn't seem right.

Although I did smirk at one of the headlines this morning that read "bin bagged" which i had to tell myself off for.

OP posts:
MollysChamber · 03/05/2011 11:08

FWIW I agree with you Mamazon.

I'm surprised they were so open about their intentions.

I don't think that makes you or I an apologist or sympathiser. Far from it. I'm certainly not sorry that he's dead. Bit worried about what happens now though.

bemybebe · 03/05/2011 11:18

I think it is normal to question what our governments do. I also think it is normal to feel uneasy about a person being killed outside the legal process. We are conditioned to respect our laws.

He is not a civilian criminal. This person was a senior militant in a terrorist organization responsible for targeted mass murders of innocent civilians. His organization and he personally declared a war on the West and as such his organization and he personally are outside the US legal process.

What americans done in this light sits absolutely fine with me.

DarthNiqabi · 03/05/2011 11:23

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bemybebe · 03/05/2011 11:42

Darth your example of Guantanamo is very telling but NOT in a sense that you are trying to present here.

Guantanamo detainees were granted the protection of the US constitution in the court of law, Bush administration lost despite all the resources, so the legal system in the US is working fine.

lubberlich · 03/05/2011 11:50

Personally I am glad the lousy, overprivileged, pampered, despotic little shit is dead.
And I am a very drippy lefty who generally can't stand the gung ho neo-imperialism of the US.

Life does seem to be turning into one giant movie though.
The look on Hillary Clinton's face as she watches the live feed of the killing is surreal.

slhilly · 03/05/2011 13:29

Mamaz0n

"but he didn't die on a battle field. He died in a mansion in Pakistan. I'm not glued to sky news but surely i didn't miss the bulletin that said we/the US are at war with them?"

as I said in my previous post, OBL and others have specifically named as enemy combatants. The US has done this so that it can effectively declare war against non-state actors (ie individuals and organisations). This is novel but the situation is novel - non-state actors have in committed acts of war against the US. I think you're getting overly worked up about this, tbh. The mansion bit is irrelevant. Plenty of mansions get attacked in wars!

"They found out he was there and orchestrated an assasination without even letting the Pakistani government know they were there."
So what? Why should they let the Pakistani government know, given that doing so would have dramatically increased the likelihood that he would escape, what with the Pakistani government and ISI in particular being riddled with Islamists?

"As for dancing in the streets...what exactly do they think they are celebrating? OBL was not even in "operational command" anymore. He was a figurehead and a preacher, he was a hateful deluded man but by all accounts he was not actually organising the violence or acts of war. Those who ARE in command are still there. and they are now mightily pissed off to have had their "leader" killed in what they will consider a wrongful manner. They will be angered by the way his body was disposed of and that the entire west is now celebrating and partying over his death.
I see no reason to celebrate the fact that the west is now in a much greater danger than they were last week with OBL alive!"

  1. I can't speak for the people who are celebrating, but I imagine they're celebrating the fact that a man who personally orchestrated the deaths of thousands of Americans has been killed by Americans. I understand you may find this distasteful, but that's different from being inexplicable: it seems a fairly expectable reaction.
  2. The fact that OBL was not in operational command does not mean he was not worth pursuing. He was an important symbol and his survival despite pursuit was an important source of morale for AQ and sympathisers. His stepping back from operational control does not mean he stepped back from all control, either: he was AQ's master strategist and propagandist for many years, and those roles will have continued. And of course, he was being pursued not only for that but for the acts that he had previously been directly responsible for.
  3. Those who ARE command are already completely committed to their cause. They cannot be made materially more enraged by the fact that he has been killed, how it happened, how the body was disposed of, the West's celebration etc. Others can, but not the operational commanders. The impact on them is much more likely to be:
  • concern for their own safety
  • questions about whether a counter-strike is feasible and if so, how to execute
  • concern about the implications for recruitment and other operational aspects of how they work (eg rethinking comms security given that the courier system has been shown to be compromised)
As for others, the impact is tough to analyse, and not as straightforward as you imagine. I'm sure quite a few ex-sympathisers will simply see this as confirmation that the Arab spring is a more practical method for realising dreams of self-determination than attacks on Western targets.

"And as for the photos of them watching his death on a live feed. That made me sick."
I don't understand why it would be better for them to distance themselves from the results of their decisions. Indeed, the distancing of political leaders from the bloody results of their decisions has been raised as a Bad Thing many times.