[PUG] Osama Bin Laden is dead Part II

[not sure]

Justified or not, should we we celebrating killing someone?

I don't believe it needs celebration, reflection perhaps. However, my request still stands. You are free to refuse.

 

[the]

I have felt bad everytime I have killed someone and everytime I have killed someone collectively as (a nation, state, group what-have-you). Some things are done not because they are ideal but because they are the best choice you have at the time and unfortunately sometimes killing is the best evil of a few evils.

 

[jyrffw54]

I don't believe it needs celebration, reflection perhaps. However, my request still stands. You are free to refuse.

No, I understand. We can call it a killing.

I, myself, am not sure whether the killing was "justified" or not.
I was just quoting the masses in that statement.

 

[bickelz]

not believing in violence, meaning shunning it, never condoning it, in that case neither side would be justified..... this is reasonable.

Believing both sides to be equally evil because they both use violence,...... this is reasonable

Believing the US is worse because it's hypocritical........This is not reasonable.

Why not? We say they are evil for doing x, y and z and then turn around to do the same exact thing. We say they scare us for certain reasons yet we do the same shit they do. That's hypocrisy. We don't even realize that we do this crap and even if we do, we justify it with god.

I feel that's a very reasonable argument.

Look up how people are reacting on youtube. There are 14 year olds there who are like "fuck that mofo. Hes going to burn in hell. Piss on his grave he's scum" yet they don't understand what they support. Is it propaganda that we tell our children that the USA is #1?

 

[Candice_XX]

i am not at all concerned about the details of the politics involved,
because i am busy wondering how angry bin Ladin's people are and what they are gonna try to do to us.

I don't know, I really hope nothing, but I am sure that later they will hide in Iran.

 

[Jill Hives]

I have felt bad everytime I have killed someone and everytime I have killed someone collectively as (a nation, state, group what-have-you).

You been killing a lot of people lately?

 

[A Humble Dreamer]

What about forgiving?

I was watching the news, when I saw some reporters discussing a newspaper article about this. The paper seemed to be broadsheet (as opposed to speculation-filled tabloid papers), but the headline said loud and clear; "He died cowering behind his wife." Now, I think that no matter who that is directed at, the inhumanity and bluntness of that statement is shocking to say the least. The fact that the media not only use this, but use it to advance their own wealth, is just wrong. So what I'd like to ask all of you is this; Yes, he is suspected of being the cause of thousands of innocent deaths, but does that give us the right to execute him and then spread his last moments around the world, in such a cold-hearted manner? Would it have been better to forgive him? (as difficult as that would be for those who lost someone close to them because of him). Surely allowing someone to repent and be forgiven is better than killing them and creating more anger?

 

[Phage]

Nearly ten years and billions upon billions of dollars to kill tens of thousands of civilians in response to 3000+ civilian deaths is completely asinine and irresponsible in my opinion. To celebrate this like a victory makes me angry.

Hooray, an asshole is dead, and his death has done absolutely nothing to end the fruitless "War on Terror." If anything, I could see it reinvigorating American civilian support for armed "intervention" to continue in Afghanistan and to be started elsewhere.

I agree with you, bamf. Saddam is dead, Bin Laden is dead, but people are still being killed. And people who probably don't even know what's going on with their government.

 

[Septemptus]

I was watching the news, when I saw some reporters discussing a newspaper article about this. The paper seemed to be broadsheet (as opposed to speculation-filled tabloid papers), but the headline said loud and clear; "He died cowering behind his wife." Now, I think that no matter who that is directed at, the inhumanity and bluntness of that statement is shocking to say the least. The fact that the media not only use this, but use it to advance their own wealth, is just wrong. So what I'd like to ask all of you is this; Yes, he is suspected of being the cause of thousands of innocent deaths, but does that give us the right to execute him and then spread his last moments around the world, in such a cold-hearted manner? Would it have been better to forgive him? (as difficult as that would be for those who lost someone close to them because of him). Surely allowing someone to repent and be forgiven is better than killing them and creating more anger?

I don't think you can really expect people to just forgive him, because murdering thousands of people isn't just something that qualifies for that, considering he hasn't shown any remorse either. Furthermore even if he would be forgiven, I don't think the terrorists would appreciate it at all. They would see it as a weakness and turn it against us. But on the other hand I don't find killing him to be an answer, because if people wanted him to pay for what he has done, then putting him in prison for the rest of his life would surely be the better option, instead of giving him a short exit.

 

[A Humble Dreamer]

To Septemptus - Your right, killing so many people is an act that is almost impossible to forgive, but let's say, if he served his time and was forgiven, and was genuinely sorry for what he did, that would create space for understanding to grow between 'us' and 'them', which would probably be the first step in the right direction to resolving this conflict with minimal conflict. Would agree with this?

 

[Chamomile]

[MENTION=3900]Chamomile[/MENTION] but this was a fresh body. Idk how exactly the arid climate would create problems with degradation or contamination. I know fully well about genetics and how dna works as well but that's a substantial margin of error given the gravity of the situation. It's all a bit suspicious.

Assuming there are 3 billion base pairs, 0.1% of the genome equates to 3 million base pairs error ad between 20 and 25 genes. That's a whole different human i'll have you know. And considering Osama used body doubles the whole thing seems fishy. I mean, we're talking about the number one most wanted person in the world for ten years.

I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist but to most Americans, 99.9% seems more accurate than it is. Why would they say 99.9% and not just say the dna evidence confirmed it was him."We're pretty sure we got the guy so now we're gonna throw him into the Atlantic". It whatevs.

I see what you're saying, but the odds of someone else in that compound having a DNA match 99.9% is pretty insanely low. Especially factoring in that intelligence indicated he was there. The odds of them striking somewhere they're fairly sure he is and getting a false positive on a guy that happens to look like him is astronomically low. If it was a random bombing and they just happened to check DNA and it said a match, I'd be suspicious. I'm not sure what you mean about his body doubles, they structurally look like him, but that wouldn't make any difference in DNA.

The arid climate is more ideal than many climates for preserving DNA. It helps in preventing DNA from being unusable. Damp or moist environments accelerate decomposition. I respect that its suspicious to you, I just think the reason for the suspicion is a little reaching. If its not him, I highly doubt that its due to a mistake.

 

[DevilDoll]

This says it all for me:

"I mourn the loss of thousands of precious lives, but I will not rejoice in the death of one, not even an enemy. Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that." - Martin Luther King, Jr.

 

[Norton]

Yes, he is suspected of being the cause of thousands of innocent deaths, but does that give us the right to execute him and then spread his last moments around the world, in such a cold-hearted manner?

Yes. Damn straight it does. So many victims here. The best way to deal with a bully is to hit him hard and fast before he hurts you. The best way to deal with a terrorist is to kill him with overwhelming force. (I thought I was finished with this thread, but I guess not.)

Hundreds of thousands of innocent people die everyday. Most from old age, many from poverty, hunger and disease. And, here, on this thread, people decry rejoicing the end of one ignominious mass murderer. Tolerance of intolerance is intolerable. I just can't find it in myself to be tolerant of the likes of Bin Laden and his ilk.

 

[myself]

Yes. Damn straight it does. So many victims here. The best way to deal with a bully is to hit him hard and fast before he hurts you. The best way to deal with a terrorist is to kill him with overwhelming force. (I thought I was finished with this thread, but I guess not.)

With your logic, you justify the actions of all those who view america as the big bully.

If I was trying to bring down a big bully using your methods, you can bet I'd try to get my hands on some weapons of mass destruction.

Can't you see how our hate/rage/fear is used against us by our own gov't?

They keep us in this terror trance while they commit terrible acts at home and abroad.

In truth...the best way to deal with a bully is to teach him not to be a bully.

If you can't find the space in yourself to forgive, how can you expect to be forgiven?

 

[bickelz]

I'm not sure what you mean about his body doubles, they structurally look like him, but that wouldn't make any difference in DNA.

Well, yeah, I'm not a dumbass. He was known for using doubles though. A double could look structurally the same but with a different genetic code. That's all I'm saying.

If its not him, I highly doubt that its due to a mistake.

Hence my suspicion. It's not something I'm saying I believe but why come out and say it was 99.9% accurate when you could just say it's him? Just round up to 100% and we're good but they chose to leave some error in the statement. It just seems dumb. I mean, why even report a number? Just say it's him.

 

[Chamomile]

In truth...the best way to deal with a bully is to teach him not to be a bully.

If you can't find the space in yourself to forgive, how can you expect to be forgiven?

When the bully thinks you are pure evil, a threat to everything they stand for, and that his purpose is to destroy you, you really, REALLY think they would ever listen to you? That's just unrealistic. Personally forgiving them is each person's business and is irrelevant to the type of bully that thinks you are a spawn of Satan. Forgive them all you want, but it is imperative to protect yourself while doing so because it is not mutual.

Forgiving someone and bending over are two highly different things.

 

[Chamomile]

Hence my suspicion. It's not something I'm saying I believe but why come out and say it was 99.9% accurate when you could just say it's him? Just round up to 100% and we're good but they chose to leave some error in the statement. It just seems dumb. I mean, why even report a number? Just say it's him.

.1% of wiggle room has nothing to do with the government having any doubt. A member of the scientific community would never, ever stake their reputation and all of their credibility on saying anything is 100% and that number is up to the scientific community alone. The more vague you are, the less wrong you can be. That is purely a disclaimer. The scientific community decides that percentage, not the legal system or the government. If they just said 'its him.' Everyone would say, 'how do we know?' So why not give a number the first time around?

 

[Norton]

Can't you see how our hate/rage/fear is used against us by our own gov't?

I don't hate, I'm not full of rage, and I'm not afraid. Killing terrorists before they kill us is purely a rational response to an existential threat.

In truth...the best way to deal with a bully is to teach him not to be a bully.

False. I know that's what some say, particularly those who are insulated from brutal reality. Most bullies are so twisted and distorted, they're incapable of learning. I taught my kids to defend themselves aggressively and they developed reputations that repelled bullies. Likewise, terrorists know now that we will pursue them and kill them even if it takes ten or more years. That's called self-defense, something worth paying for. Our Navy Seals are heros. Congratulations to them. In the face of Islamo-fascism, all democratic nations should have such capable forces.

 

[Nixie]

With your logic, you justify the actions of all those who view america as the big bully.

If I was trying to bring down a big bully using your methods, you can bet I'd try to get my hands on some weapons of mass destruction.

Can't you see how our hate/rage/fear is used against us by our own gov't?

They keep us in this terror trance while they commit terrible acts at home and abroad.

In truth...the best way to deal with a bully is to teach him not to be a bully.

If you can't find the space in yourself to forgive, how can you expect to be forgiven?

Hum, I always appreciate your thoughts myself even if I see them as rather shortsighted in many ways.

The events in the middle east are a terrible muddle to say the least. The US has been involved in more ugly things than can be counted when it comes to the middle east. We supported the Shah of Iran who was a dictator and helped him train his death squads and then wonder why when he was overthrown the people hate us. Most people don't realize that many of the weapons used to kill Americans in the middle east were sold during Reagan's era. Cause selling weapons and big defense contracts made California rich and the Shah just loved buying weapons--to the point that his country was driven to extreme inflation. Of course when Iran wasn't our friend anymore, we started fooling with Iraq. Part of the reason we are hated is our own doing. The US has always been tinkering with this area. I would venture to guess that since gas is steadily climbing--the US will always be interested in the middle east.

I am very cynical about such things the report of Bin Laden's death. There is a segment of the US population who are going YEE HAW because they are "proud" Americans. I would have figured this would come up closer to election time to be a true benefit.

I also believe in Norton's view to a certain extent. I think Israel has demonstrated the tactic to their benefit over the years. It does breed a continuous cycle as mentioned by myself. There are better ways but until we get the kind of magnetic, charismatic leaders who can guide us to a new era--force will be met with force. Oh yea, we also have a tendency to kill those magnetic, charismatic leaders who can change the world too...

 

[bickelz]

.1% of wiggle room has nothing to do with the government having any doubt. A member of the scientific community would never, ever stake their reputation and all of their credibility on saying anything is 100% and that number is up to the scientific community alone.

Ok, but this isn't a study being published in a journal, it's the army.

The scientific community decides that percentage, not the legal system or the government.

The government chose to release the margin of error, not Gil Grissom.