What's new

Welcome to Japan Reference (JREF) - the community for all Things Japanese.

Join Today! It is fast, simple, and FREE!

Osama Bin Laden: Dead

Joined
7 Jun 2008
Messages
1,024
Reaction score
110
I still haven't heard any critic of the burial at sea offer a viable alternative for disposal of bin Laden's body. Nor have I seen him or her answer these questions:

Does a man who dispensed mass murder, leaving no remains for victims' relatives to bury and memorialize, deserve better consideration? Do his relatives deserve better consideration than the murderer's victims?
 
Joined
1 Nov 2005
Messages
402
Reaction score
36
To Rolandtheheadless,
Emperor Hirohito was responsable for the millions of people been killed in the Far East during WWII. My own father has been killed by Hirohito's Kempeitai and has no grave at all.
I can still see Hirohito walking next to Mickey Mouse through Disneyland with a big smile on his face.
There is no justice in our world. But thank goodness there are fine people in every single country of our earth.
 

Hezam

Out of Service
Joined
24 Aug 2007
Messages
2,539
Reaction score
120
To Rolandtheheadless,
Emperor Hirohito was responsable for the millions of people been killed in the Far East during WWII. My own father has been killed by Hirohito's Kempeitai and has no grave at all.
I can still see Hirohito walking next to Mickey Mouse through Disneyland with a big smile on his face.
There is no justice in our world. But thank goodness there are fine people in every single country of our earth.
i like your statement ! 👍
 

ArmandV

Eight Times To Japan
Contributor
Joined
18 Oct 2004
Messages
2,398
Reaction score
105
What Osama was really watching:
Osama2Bbin2BGamera-1.jpg
 

Tsuyoiko

DON'T PANIC!
Joined
11 Mar 2005
Messages
3,060
Reaction score
164
Does a man who dispensed mass murder, leaving no remains for victims' relatives to bury and memorialize, deserve better consideration? Do his relatives deserve better consideration than the murderer's victims?

This is one of a few similar statements on this thread by different posters, which I find rather troubling. This kind of thinking is based on vengeance, not justice. I don't think our actions should be based on getting "an eye for an eye", but on rising above the level of the criminal. By treating a criminal with the same disrespect he showed his victims, we become no better than him.

I find it very hard to believe that killing bin Laden was the only option. If his captors had the will, they could have taken him alive and put him on trial. That's how justice is done in the civilised world.
 
Joined
1 Nov 2005
Messages
402
Reaction score
36
find it very hard to believe that killing bin Laden was the only option. If his captors had the will, they could have taken him alive and put him on trial. That's how justice is done in the civilised world Tsuyoiko

America has done a wonderful job, has been very brave indeed!
But killing Osama bin Laden? No, I fully agree with you Tsuyoiko. A trial would have been wiser. We have a International Court of Justice in The Hague, the Netherlands.
But I hope that all will turn out well since the CIA found so much material from Osama bin Laden.
 

Hezam

Out of Service
Joined
24 Aug 2007
Messages
2,539
Reaction score
120
I still haven't heard any critic of the burial at sea offer a viable alternative for disposal of bin Laden's body. Nor have I seen him or her answer these questions:

Does a man who dispensed mass murder, leaving no remains for victims' relatives to bury and memorialize, deserve better consideration? Do his relatives deserve better consideration than the murderer's victims?
You know what ?

132882388630-1.jpg


This dead soldier has been sent to kill people in Iraq,Does he deserve this honor ?
 

Davey

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
5 Feb 2005
Messages
7,475
Reaction score
502
You know what ?
132882388630-1.jpg

This dead soldier has been sent to kill people in Iraq,Does he deserve this honor ?

Where does it say that he went to Iraq to kill people, source???. So in your imagination they have offices in the states with large signs:

"Want to kill people in Iraq? SIGN UP and you get a UF6B88 Super gun with it... "

Your post doesn't make sense at all, and I find it very rude as well.
 

ArmandV

Eight Times To Japan
Contributor
Joined
18 Oct 2004
Messages
2,398
Reaction score
105
One does not kill a mad dog out of vengeance, he is killed to prevent further atrocities.
 

Hezam

Out of Service
Joined
24 Aug 2007
Messages
2,539
Reaction score
120
Where does it say that he went to Iraq to kill people, source???. So in your imagination they have offices in the states with large signs:
"Want to kill people in Iraq? SIGN UP and you get a UF6B88 Super gun with it... "
Your post doesn't make sense at all, and I find it very rude as well.
Well,The US military killed almost 2 millions ppl in Iraq...Didn't they ?
This picture is for an american soldier killed in Iraq..
Why is it rude ?
 

Hezam

Out of Service
Joined
24 Aug 2007
Messages
2,539
Reaction score
120
He (RolandtheHeadles) asked why a man who killed many people deserves better consideration..so i asked him why do american soldiers who killed thousands of people deserve better consideration ?
 

Tsuyoiko

DON'T PANIC!
Joined
11 Mar 2005
Messages
3,060
Reaction score
164
One does not kill a mad dog out of vengeance, he is killed to prevent further atrocities.

If we take that "reasoning" to its natural conclusion, why put any murderers on trial? Just hunt them down and shoot them.

Was killing bin Laden the only effective means available? I find it very hard to believe that's the case. He could have been captured, imprisoned and put on trial. Actually, I fail to see why it's necessary to shoot criminals dead in all but the most extreme circumstances; it's possible to temporarily incapacitate people.

Also, I find it rather distasteful that a human being is being referred to as a "mad dog", regardless of his crimes. Name-calling comes from an emotional response, not a rational one. No matter how obvious the evidence against him, we have courts for a reason. Where do we draw the line between a criminal who is so bad he deserves to be killed on sight, and a criminal who deserves due process? The only acceptable answer is that all criminals are entitled to a fair trial.
 

noyhauser

先輩
Joined
20 Feb 2003
Messages
617
Reaction score
47
This is one of a few similar statements on this thread by different posters, which I find rather troubling. This kind of thinking is based on vengeance, not justice. I don't think our actions should be based on getting "an eye for an eye", but on rising above the level of the criminal. By treating a criminal with the same disrespect he showed his victims, we become no better than him.
I find it very hard to believe that killing bin Laden was the only option. If his captors had the will, they could have taken him alive and put him on trial. That's how justice is done in the civilised world.

I find this is a really short sighted point of view. Lets put aside the actual mechanics of his death... whether or not it was possible to capture him. Lets say they did. This isn't some common criminal, this is a war leader who has the capacity to wage war.

So once we put him on trial what happens? Basically we now we give him a stage on the world and daily you would have him using it to further his agenda. It would become a spectacle that would draw more attention to his cause. We saw something like this Slobodan Milosevic was at the hague. His popularity went from 8 to 20 percent, and he also built up support for the ultranationalist party back in Serbia. That's not to say that we should have killed Milosevic, he was in a completely different situation than Osama. He couldn't really use his position to continue to fight. If anything Osama would have become even more effective as a figurehead in court, inspiring others to continue the struggle. His death avoided more death and suffering across the world, particularly among muslims.

Personally my problem with your view is that its one of absolutes... that law must be applied in all cases and situations. Yet thats not he case here where this individual and his followers rejects the entire legitimacy of the system and even its laws. All of Al Qaeda's acts are aimed at attacking the west's legitimacy, this would give him another instrument to do it with.

Instead the US killed a combatant who they were in a state of war with. Legitimate and acceptable by me.
 

noyhauser

先輩
Joined
20 Feb 2003
Messages
617
Reaction score
47
If we take that "reasoning" to its natural conclusion, why put any murderers on trial? Just hunt them down and shoot them.
Was killing bin Laden the only effective means available? I find it very hard to believe that's the case. He could have been captured, imprisoned and put on trial. Actually, I fail to see why it's necessary to shoot criminals dead in all but the most extreme circumstances; it's possible to temporarily incapacitate people.
Also, I find it rather distasteful that a human being is being referred to as a "mad dog", regardless of his crimes. Name-calling comes from an emotional response, not a rational one. No matter how obvious the evidence against him, we have courts for a reason. Where do we draw the line between a criminal who is so bad he deserves to be killed on sight, and a criminal who deserves due process? The only acceptable answer is that all criminals are entitled to a fair trial.

No this isn't a criminal however. Its a war leader. As much as I really would love that everybody could be dealt with a fair judicial process, the reality of this world is that it can't. I wonder if you're ever been to a war zone. Frankly, its chaotic. The desire to wholesale impose fair judicial process is laughable dealing with groups like this. Where possible it makes sense and even to apply judicial instruments... particularly with individuals on our soil. But its impossible in all cases.

What you're asking is that we should go into highly hostile regions like the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and try to arrest all these individuals at great risk to our personnel. Actually its completely impractical and put our soldiers at unacceptable risk. Instead we are at war with them, which means killing is a possible option.

If you are the leader of a group who actively declares war against another state, goes and perpetrates grievous acts in this pursuit and exhort others to do so; I don't think you have any cause to expect that you have the right to expect due process... particularly when you claim such rights are illegitimate according to your beliefs.
 
Joined
7 Jun 2008
Messages
1,024
Reaction score
110
To Rolandtheheadless,
Emperor Hirohito was responsable for the millions of people been killed in the Far East during WWII. My own father has been killed by Hirohito's Kempeitai and has no grave at all.
I can still see Hirohito walking next to Mickey Mouse through Disneyland with a big smile on his face.
There is no justice in our world. But thank goodness there are fine people in every single country of our earth.

You're right, Ms. van Kampen. Hirohito also personally approved and signed the order for the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. He also approved the invasion of China, and every other significant action taken by the Japanese military.

He was shielded from justice by collusion between the US military occupation, conservatives in Japanese government, and his subordinates who were tried for their war crimes, and who personally took the blame to protect their Emperor.

But don't forget the role Emperor Hirohito had in destroying his own people. For instance, my father-in-law was conscripted by the Kempeitai, and sent off to the Philippines, where he contracted malaria. He was very ill when sent home, and finally died about ten years after the war, leaving a young widow and three small children.
 
Joined
7 Jun 2008
Messages
1,024
Reaction score
110
Personally, I'd have preferred to see bin Laden captured and put on trial in the US. The American people would never have accepted a trial elsewhere.

We don't know the real circumstances the Seals faced with bin Laden in his room. There were probably weapons in the room, maybe within bin Laden's reach. Did he make any threatening moves? Were the Seals worried that he or his room might have been wired with explosives?

Was bin Laden willing to be taken alive?

We are at war with al Qaida; and they were the ones who declared that war. In wartime, nations always wind up being as ruthless as their enemies. In Cormac McCarthy's novel, "No Country for Old Men," a Texas sheriff goes into retirement rather than become like the murderous psychopath he was chasing. A whole nation doesn't have that option.
 

Chidoriashi

In imagination land
Joined
2 Feb 2007
Messages
772
Reaction score
61
Well,The US military killed almost 2 millions ppl in Iraq...Didn't they ?

Hezam.. a source please>>

Here is what wiki says about iraqi deaths from the war (not direct kills from US soldiers. Death as a result from war in general and death directly from soldiers are two different things please remember that when you throw statements like that out).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War

Anyhow it gives various figures from various studies, in all likelihood the truth is somewhere in the middle, and none of those studies quote anything near 2 million.
 

Tsuyoiko

DON'T PANIC!
Joined
11 Mar 2005
Messages
3,060
Reaction score
164
So once we put him on trial what happens? Basically we now we give him a stage on the world and daily you would have him using it to further his agenda. It would become a spectacle that would draw more attention to his cause.

I think it's equally likely that his death will make him a martyr and draw attention to his "cause" in a different way.

What you're asking is that we should go into highly hostile regions like the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and try to arrest all these individuals at great risk to our personnel.

That's not what I'm asking at all. I'm saying that if the situation allows the wanted person to be captured and put on trial, then that's what should be done.
 

Uncle Frank

SECURITY
Admin
Joined
21 May 2003
Messages
11,167
Reaction score
1,147
A tactical point of view.

Police,SWAT,military all want to go home safe. The bad guy, whomever it might be; his life is not worth your own. Sometimes you have to shoot first and debate about the right or wrong of it later if you want to go home alive. The possibility that Osama had a suicide vest on where pressing a button or raising his hands would kill everyone in the room was very real. Also , the room/compound could have been wired with explosives. It is said that when he was told to "freeze/not move' , he did not and that was the reason he was taken out. In the heat of action , you can't spend time thinking out your reactions or you end up dead. Osama failed to follow directions, made an agressive move, training and reactions said he had to be taken out as a threat. The so called Monday Morning Quarterbacking is easy for those who were not in that room. You can speculate about "what if" in a million ways but his death was bought about by his own actions that night and years before.

Uncle Frank
 
Joined
19 May 2007
Messages
1,648
Reaction score
110
Who knows what was happening at the time. And on Franks sentiments...
NWS video.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tsuyoiko

DON'T PANIC!
Joined
11 Mar 2005
Messages
3,060
Reaction score
164
Police,SWAT,military all want to go home safe. The bad guy, whomever it might be; his life is not worth your own. Sometimes you have to shoot first and debate about the right or wrong of it later if you want to go home alive. The possibility that Osama had a suicide vest on where pressing a button or raising his hands would kill everyone in the room was very real. Also , the room/compound could have been wired with explosives. It is said that when he was told to "freeze/not move' , he did not and that was the reason he was taken out. In the heat of action , you can't spend time thinking out your reactions or you end up dead. Osama failed to follow directions, made an agressive move, training and reactions said he had to be taken out as a threat. The so called Monday Morning Quarterbacking is easy for those who were not in that room. You can speculate about "what if" in a million ways but his death was bought about by his own actions that night and years before.
Uncle Frank

Thanks for this explanation Uncle Frank. If that's how it really was, then I agree that shooting him was probably the most sensible course of action.
 
Top Bottom