BF2S Forums Kucinich on Osama Bin Laden

Mason4Assassin444 wrote:

In the Dems Debate they were asked, "if you knew where Osama Bin Laden was and had twenty minutes to get to him, would you attack knowing that innocent people will be killed while getting to him?"
Kucinich was the only one that said no. He said that Osama needs a fair trail.


Why is his answer right or wrong?

His answer is wrong because killing him would vindicate the deaths of 3000 Americans and finish a chapter of history that should have been finished long ago but it's right because killing innocents when you know innocents will be killed is morally reprehensible, two wrongs don't make a right and killing Osama Bin Laden no longer really means anything - he's a dog without any teeth. On balance he's very much right. To go ahead with the attack would be to place more value on the lives of those who died on 9/11 than those innocents about to be killed in the operation, which is just plain wrong.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-06-05 07:45:25)

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

There are no innocent people.  These so called innocent people should have turned him over to authorities.  Their failure to do so revokes their innocence status.

Even when attempting to do so could mean they get beheaded, skinned alive, whipped, tortured, etc?

I wouldn't be running to the cop shop to spill my guts if I knew there was a distinct possibility of me getting my cranium separated from the rest of my body...

In Northern Ireland if you did something like that you could very well expect to get your head ventilated, at the very least lose a kneecap or two...

Inaction != Guilt

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-06-05 07:54:44)

the Few want a fair trial so they put on their kid gloves and pat Osama on the ass for being a bad boy

Judging by how you treat people at gitmo, and even normal citizens when it comes to crime. Yeah i'm sure that's what they would do once they've given him his trial.

---

However, it is likely that the people who are catering for him aren't doing it out of fear. So you could bomb him.

Last edited by Mekstizzle (2007-06-05 07:57:29)

Most likely he would be hiding in Pakistan. Just give them a heads up and they'll probably not bother with surgical strikes or even Laser guided bombs. They'll most likely just level the whole village. Of course, then they'll get the "honour" of taking him out and it would be funny if the worlds most terrorist infested state takes out the main man.

CameronPoe wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

There are no innocent people.  These so called innocent people should have turned him over to authorities.  Their failure to do so revokes their innocence status.

Even when attempting to do so could mean they get beheaded, skinned alive, whipped, tortured, etc?

I wouldn't be running to the cop shop to spill my guts if I knew there was a distinct possibility of me getting my cranium separated from the rest of my body...

In Northern Ireland if you did something like that you could very well expect to get your head ventilated, at the very least lose a kneecap or two...

Inaction != Guilt

Paraphrased and not verbatim, but...The only thing necessary for evil to thrive is for good men to do nothing.

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

There are no innocent people.  These so called innocent people should have turned him over to authorities.  Their failure to do so revokes their innocence status.

Even when attempting to do so could mean they get beheaded, skinned alive, whipped, tortured, etc?

I wouldn't be running to the cop shop to spill my guts if I knew there was a distinct possibility of me getting my cranium separated from the rest of my body...

In Northern Ireland if you did something like that you could very well expect to get your head ventilated, at the very least lose a kneecap or two...

Inaction != Guilt

Paraphrased and not verbatim, but...The only thing necessary for evil to thrive is for good men to do nothing.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." --Edmund Burke

On the other hand, I think that killing OSB is a "tokenary" act. From a media standpoint his capture would trumph if not cover any deaths accociated with his capture.

I think part of his answer, "Osama needs a fair trail",  is delusional. I feel this not because I have some compulsion to yell "go get a rope", rather this notion of the American legal system being able to applied universally is flawed, just as everyone should a muslim is flawed. I feel as though we act as though we have hit the zentih of civilized behaviour.

The trial comment is ridiculous but the knowingly killing innocent civilians thing isn't.

ATG wrote:

Tough one. I believe life in solitary is worse than death.

I want him to suffer.

Agreed that's better than making a Martyr of him, let him rot.

Last edited by paranoid101 (2007-06-05 09:30:29)

CameronPoe wrote:

The trial comment is ridiculous but the knowingly killing innocent civilians thing isn't.

My point. I understand the difference. Despite popular belief we are at war with Al Qeada. Not a "war on terror" .

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

There are no innocent people.  These so called innocent people should have turned him over to authorities.  Their failure to do so revokes their innocence status.

How does failure to apprehend a criminal forfit your right to trial and simultaneously sentence you to the harshest punishment our justice system allows?

CameronPoe wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

The trial comment is ridiculous but the knowingly killing innocent civilians thing isn't.

You know very well that it is quite impossible to fight a war without civilian casualties.  It simply cannot be done.  Chances are that even if they went to where he was with the idea of caputuring him, the ensuing fight would likely end up creating collateral damage anyway.

Sorry, but you can't not go after a major terrorist threat like Osama because some civilians may get injured or killed.

Osama 'Dialysis Boy' Bin Laden is no longer a threat to anyone. He has been reduced to the role of amateur film-maker and occasional radio personality.

Oh, but the news reports i keep reading describe an "active" Osama that is issuing orders and patting his men on the back via letters. Its difficult to say he is merely an occasional personality, because he is that to us -- the enemy.

In response to the original OP -- Its a bit strange that there are people that are willing to sacrifice the lives of innocent people for their cause when this is the same exact mentality they (extremist) use and we condemn it. haha talk about irony. Keyword here is innocent guys....for the death of one man. This would just show to the enemy the reality of our endeavors and possibly provide further confirmation that we truly are what they describe. So yeah have at it send the right message lol.

Last edited by Fen321 (2007-06-05 12:26:13)