Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU to think that is was quite distateful

194 replies

ModreB · 03/05/2011 19:01

For Obama and effectively the rest of the US Govt to watch live coverage of Bin Laden being shot dead?

At least Hilary Clinton looked pretty horrified here

OP posts:
CheerfulYank · 03/05/2011 21:55

Modre what about the picture was not appropriate? No one is smiling. No one looks happy.

queenceleste · 03/05/2011 21:55

Obama has gone down in my esteem with this action.
It smells strongly to me of simple popularity seeking from him.
Surely bin laden is much more potent dead than alive, particularly killed by swooping yanks.

bin laden's no loss to me or the world imo, but it seems an act that will have more negative consequences for more people than good. So what if Obama goes up in the polls for a few weeks.

wannaBe · 03/05/2011 21:59

cheerful no, exactly, they would have been executed on the spot. possibly they would even have had explosives strapped to them and been used as human bombs.

If people recall, the plot to blow up aircraft over the atlantic involved explosives concealed in baby bottles. Children were going to be sacrificed without any consideration.

But hey carry on mourning the death of the instigator of all that. Sanctemonious is an under statement. Hmm

CheerfulYank · 03/05/2011 22:09

Would you rather that the soldiers died trying to capture him?

scaryteacher · 03/05/2011 22:09

Sending in a team of special forces was the cleanest way to do this and the one with the least chance of collateral damage. Had they fired a TLAM at the compound then many others would have been killed, and there would have been no guarantee OBL was dead. He was a legitimate target. What would be the point of putting him on trial anyhow? He wouldn't have recognised the court, so it would have been a waste of time and money. NATO would not have organised his trial either - that's outside their remit. They are a military alliance.

One of the heads of the hydra has gone, we now need to start dealing with the rest, and I wouldn't be shedding any tears if Abu Hamza or Choudry appeared as stiffs one morning. We should be able to deport people who get London the nickname Londonistan and who preach hatred.

CheerfulYank · 03/05/2011 22:33

The funny thing is, the backlash to all of this is actually making me more patriotic. I don't rejoice but I am thankful that I live in a country that sees that mass murderers must be stopped by whatever means necessary.

Xenia · 03/05/2011 22:37

People have very different views on this matter but anyone who thinks going abroad to kill without trial which is what Obama has done and what foreign terrorists have done in the UK and US and elsewhere is right is definitely wrong.

Thankfully we live in a country where people can preach views we don't like. I hope many of us would die to ensure England remains a land where there is free speech.

winnybella · 03/05/2011 22:49

Totally agree, CheerfulYank. What happened was the best thing that could be done, really. Trial would be pointless and as wannaBe said, would potentially bring on kidnappings etc in order to free him.

winnybella · 03/05/2011 22:51

Xenia-seriously, are you comparing killing someone responsible for thousands of murders to terrorists blowing up innocent civilians ? Hmm

izzywhizzyletsgetbusy · 03/05/2011 23:02

bin Laden incited, instructed, and provided the finance for his deluded followers to summarily execute and massacre innocent men, women, and children, primarily because they were of a different religious persuasion.

I have no illusions that the world is a safer place with him out of it, but I'm certainly not losing sleep over the manner of his death - and if I have any regret it is that he died instantly.

For those lamenting the fact that he was not captured alive, get over yourselves... and consider how many more innocents would have been kidnapped, tortured, and beheaded by fanatics determined to win the release of their idol.

As for the legality of the exercise; there are times when it is necessary to fight fire with fire and, in my book, this was one of them.

For the record, I do not believe in an eye for an eye and I am well aware that there are degrees of culpability but, at the present time, I would support any political party that sought to restore the death penalty for murder solely because in the UK a life sentence for this most heinous crime can mean no more than a few years' incarceration before the murderer is released.

differentnameforthis · 03/05/2011 23:58

I wonder how many on here (against what happened) remember kateandthegirls?

differentnameforthis · 04/05/2011 01:35

it disturbed me that he had ordered the assasination and made the decision to sit and watch it in live stream

If that disturbs you, does this?

it disturbed me that Osama Bin Laden had ordered the assassination of THOUSANDS of INNOCENT people, including children and made the decision to sit and watch it in live stream

Because there is NO doubt that he would have had cameras on board to watch it in real time

The latter should disturb you more.

CheerfulYank · 04/05/2011 01:37

Personally, I was always taught that if I could not face what I had done, it wasn't the right thing to do.

Obama faced what he did. End of. No one in that picture looks thrilled. No one is smiling.

CheerfulYank · 04/05/2011 01:38
differentnameforthis · 04/05/2011 01:40

It wasn't like he wanted to watch teh footage at a later time so that he could ensure that correct protocal or whatever. It was like they were sat around some kind of sport. It was horrific.

More horrific than Osama Bin Laden ordering the killing thousands of innocents? And then watching as they died? And probably having a good old laugh at their expense? Lets not forget that HE ordered his death the moment he ordered all theirs.

I am pretty sure that it would have been far more heavily criticized for the president to be playing golf, or squash at the time of Osama's death. Would that have made you happier?

differentnameforthis · 04/05/2011 01:50

People have very different views on this matter but anyone who thinks going abroad to kill without trial which is what Obama has done and what foreign terrorists have done in the UK and US and elsewhere is right is definitely wrong

Osama killed without trail thousands of people, including children. The difference being his victims did not need a trial.

He had a say in how/when he died. He knew that if he didn't surrender, he would be killed. He decided to die, there & then. He got to decide his fate. But not before using one more life to prolong his just a little longer.

At least he got to choose how/when he died. The people on the planes, in the towers, the fire fighters etc, the commuters in 7/7...they didn't get asked to surrender first. They didn't choose how they died. They didn't choose when they died.

Morloth · 04/05/2011 02:58

I think when you order the death of someone (regardless of who that person is/what they have done) then you have an obligation to watch if at all possible.

Deliberately taking someone's life is a big thing, if you can't stomach it then don't order it.

To look away when it is your doing would be pretty close to unforgiveable IMO.

Morloth · 04/05/2011 03:02

Looking at the photo I can see no joy or glee, just determination at something that they believed had to be done.

I am glad he is dead, by all accounts he was a bastard, yes it may make things worse but fuck him, I can't imagine celebrating someone's death, that seems a bit unbalanced to me, but I can imagine feeling satisfaction.

izzywhizzyletsgetbusy · 04/05/2011 03:42

Howdy CheerfulYank, and I wish I had a 'like' button for your comments too.

"At least he got to choose how/when he died. The people on the planes, in the towers, the fire fighters etc, the commuters in 7/7...they didn't get asked to surrender first. They didn't choose how they died. They didn't choose when they died."

After reading your mighty powerful statement differentnameforthis, I can only hope that those who can't see the wood for the trees will give some thought to bin Laden's victims and hang their heads in shame.

Xenia · 04/05/2011 12:01

" People have very different views on this matter but anyone who thinks going abroad to kill without trial which is what Obama has done and what foreign terrorists have done in the UK and US and elsewhere is right is definitely wrong" I wrote.
Then someone else
" Osama killed without trail thousands of people, including children. The difference being his victims did not need a trial."
{I've no idea what that means. We don't try victims]

"He had a say in how/when he died. He knew that if he didn't surrender, he would be killed. He decided to die, there & then. He got to decide his fate. But not before using one more life to prolong his just a little longer."
[Well that doesn't go to the important moral and legal issue of whetehr we want state sanctioned kilings without trials which is what terrorists and Obama seem to go in for]

Just because someone commits a wrong doesn't mean we ought to rush off out there and commit similar wrongs. Virtually no religion on this planet or anyone with a decent moral code believes in that and any of us who think the rule of law matters even if we didn't subscribe to the view that an eye for an eye is wrong, would be against it too.

Let us lament and make clear this was not done in our name and we believe it fundamentally wrong.

mayorquimby · 04/05/2011 12:13

Joe Biden could be watching corrie there.

CheerfulYank · 04/05/2011 19:35

Who knows what point of the mission they are watching? It doesn't say that it's the moment of his death, does it?

Xenia , what do you think should have happened? Honestly.

differentnameforthis · 05/05/2011 00:02

^Osama killed without trail thousands of people, including children. The difference being his victims did not need a trial."
{I've no idea what that means. We don't try victims]^

The point I was making was that HE was offered a trial (when asked to surrender), his victims weren't offered the choice of whether they died or not. He just killed them. Over 3000 of them. They didn't a choice, he did.

And I know we don't try victims, I was trying to point out that HE (a terrorist) had far more choice than the innocents he blew up. Maybe I didn't word it well.

differentnameforthis · 05/05/2011 00:04

Let us lament and make clear this was not done in our name and we believe it fundamentally wrong

No. As I said, he was asked to surrender. He would have known that his refusal meant death. He decided to die that night.

Thousands of people didn't decide to die on 9/11 or 7/7

takethisonehereforastart · 05/05/2011 00:15

I think they had to watch the footage at some point and perhaps watching it live meant they could give orders as the events unfolded.

They said he was given a chance to surrender so perhaps at the start they were hoping to be watching his capture live, rather than his death.