3 ms·

Here's a question for anyone who thinks the same way as this blogger: If the news had been "Osama Bin Laden has been captured" don't you think the same celebrat

Here's a question for anyone who thinks the same way as this blogger: If the news had been "Osama Bin Laden has been captured" don't you think the same celebrations would have taken place? I'm 99.9% sure they would have. Another question: Do you think the U.S. wanted Bin Laden dead when they did this? I doubt it. He's an intelligence gold mine alive while he's nothing but a martyr that strengths the other side if he's dead. So there's almost no chance we set out to kill him. So in the end this isn't "an eye for an eye" and it isn't blood lust.

jrsmith1279 15y ago
Very true. He's dead because he resisted, not because that was the plan. The news is reporting that he attempted to 3 separate women as human shields before he was shot in the head. I'm not sure how true that is since the media does often make up stories, but if it is true then that's reason enough to kill him.
jtheory 15y ago
I'd have celebrated if the news had been "bin Laden" captured -- particularly if the end result would be that he would spend the rest of his life sitting around in prison, waiting to die peacefully of old age. No martyrdom, and an excellent vindication of American values & justice. That would have truly been a shot-not-fired heard 'round the world. And of course, celebrating that is not blood-lust. But instead, we shot him in the head, and represents a failure (for the reasons you mention, but also because it's very much "an eye for an eye"), and celebrating that is much harder for me to do. We'll have to wait and see what measures they took during the raid, to enable taking him alive, but from what I've read so far they didn't take any.