You can't do much about the first and the other two are pretty much part of a natural process.
Osama bin Laden killed by US forces in Pakistan
- Thread starter Spymaster
- Start date
You can't do much about the first and the other two are pretty much part of a natural process.
Another cardboard bogeyman is 'taken out.' Everybody clap and cheer.
'Make 'em laugh, make 'em cry...'
dylans
overlord of all acorns
Thing is its not about OBL. I couldn't care less about him. It's about us. Its about the kind of governmental and institutional corruption that is caused by waging a ten year war on terror that has torn up the rule book about constitutionality and rule of law etc. The killing of BL is not something that occurs in isolation or something that has no effect on other things. For example the fact that we don't care about OBL means we don't care about how he died, means we don't care about the truth of the events of that attack, means we are allowing Obama to present a narrative that may be other than the truth and if we allow that in this case then without realising it we allow it in other far more important issues.
For example, as I have posted elsewhere, there is a growing divide between the US and pakistan. A divide that may have massive regional and world implications. As such the truth of certain facts relating to the US Pakistan relationship are important and by allowing Obama to spin a propaganda version of events during the assault we may allow Obama to fit into that narrative a less than truthful account of events that led up to it, like the knowledge that both Pakistan and the USA had about the presence of high level Al Qaeda operatives in the country and the timing of the assault, the possibility that Pakistan tipped off the USA about his presence, the possibility that the assault was deliberately timed for now to suit political interests etc.
(and Streathamite, I know that you know this.)
For example, as I have posted elsewhere, there is a growing divide between the US and pakistan. A divide that may have massive regional and world implications. As such the truth of certain facts relating to the US Pakistan relationship are important and by allowing Obama to spin a propaganda version of events during the assault we may allow Obama to fit into that narrative a less than truthful account of events that led up to it, like the knowledge that both Pakistan and the USA had about the presence of high level Al Qaeda operatives in the country and the timing of the assault, the possibility that Pakistan tipped off the USA about his presence, the possibility that the assault was deliberately timed for now to suit political interests etc.
(and Streathamite, I know that you know this.)
dylans
overlord of all acorns
And the story changes for the third time.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/05/osama-bin-laden-not-armed
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/05/osama-bin-laden-not-armed
weltweit
Well-Known Member
What makes you think the UK Guardian will have the definitive version?
And why does it matter?
weltweit
Well-Known Member
All you are reading, and reacting to, is speculation.
The only people who actually know what ocurred in that compound are the special forces soldiers, perhaps their immediate supervisors and perhaps some of the civilians that were there.
Yuwipi Woman
Whack-A-Mole Queen
If they turned him in its only because he missed a protection money payment.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Yeah, they also hit an innocent in Paris, iirc. Shame about that.
Not forgetting the many times they've stormed the wrong apartment in Palestine...
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Well we've pretty much agreed that this was an assassination, the world knows it and generally doesn't seem to care.
All you're doing is jumping on successive US accounts and shouting "it's changed!". The fact is that information about what happened is probably leaking out in dribs and drabs, individuals haven't been briefed on what and what not to say etc., so no cohesive output has been arrived at yet.
We know he wasn't armed, we're pretty sure he was executed, most of us are more than comfortable with that, so yeah, who cares about the detail???
I think you're in (quite a small) minority, Dylans.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
he usually is
1%er
Well-Known Member
Some people seem to think it is alright to break International law when it suits their view of the world, but scream blue murder when it doesn't.
Who is the arbiter who will judge when and where it is correct to break such laws, where the Israelis justified in killing people on the freedom flotilla because they had an honestly held belief that weapons could be on one of the ships that could have resulted in the death of their citizens?
Where and who draws the line?
Who is the arbiter who will judge when and where it is correct to break such laws, where the Israelis justified in killing people on the freedom flotilla because they had an honestly held belief that weapons could be on one of the ships that could have resulted in the death of their citizens?
Where and who draws the line?
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Yuwipi Woman
Whack-A-Mole Queen
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
1%er
Well-Known Member
You may be correct, but Governments like that in the UK and the USA claim they are better than those who do break the law, I am just highlighting the hypocrisy of the whole situation and some posters positions on this shooting.
dylans
overlord of all acorns
The thing that strikes me most about this assassination is what it says about the West and more importantly the Wests overblown and frankly irrational fear of this organisation. Because when all is said and done. What has actually happened here? An increasingly irrelevent ex leader of an increasingly declining organisation has been killed. But look at the response of Western governments. They must kill him, a trial is out of the question. Why? Fear. No photos? Fear. No body? Fear. And what is missed entirely is the fact that it is precisely this overblown fear and panic that has served to amplify his organisation for years. Look at the panic riddled security alerts and calls for vigilance and hightened threat levels. The overwhelming expectation of retaliation. The way in which this killing is being treated as an equivilant to VE day. The way his body was treated as though it was infected with the plague and destroyed as quickly as possible as though holding onto it might pass on some contagion. The desire to not leave any marker or any sign of his ever existed. I am surprised they haven't returned to blow up the house where he was killed.
but its actually bollocks, the ability of AQ to launch a significant strike in Western Europe is massively diminished as is the ideological hold that his movement has over his "constituency" in the Muslim and Arab world. There have been no demonstrations of support for him of any size anywhere. He has no significant base of support and what he has is rapidly declining in the face of the mass movements across the Arab world. He is a has been and so is his organisation. And this is my point. By treating him as the embodiment of evil, by treating his death as the most significant event in the world and by overblowing the threat of retaliation, the West is actually crediting him with more respect than he deserves. He should have been arrested and put on trial like any other criminal because in the end that is what he is.
but its actually bollocks, the ability of AQ to launch a significant strike in Western Europe is massively diminished as is the ideological hold that his movement has over his "constituency" in the Muslim and Arab world. There have been no demonstrations of support for him of any size anywhere. He has no significant base of support and what he has is rapidly declining in the face of the mass movements across the Arab world. He is a has been and so is his organisation. And this is my point. By treating him as the embodiment of evil, by treating his death as the most significant event in the world and by overblowing the threat of retaliation, the West is actually crediting him with more respect than he deserves. He should have been arrested and put on trial like any other criminal because in the end that is what he is.
I think the Americans at least have pretty much abandoned the hypocrisy now. There's no attempt to pretend this killing was in any way legal.
Whilst I thought Dylans was, 24 hours ago, going bonkers on the proof thing, I do think he (and 1%er) have a point.
I'm not at all uncomfortable with the assisination of obl in isolation. Good riddance.
But in terms of the wider picture, where's the line drawn? Ex-pat Russians getting poisoned in London? People who orchestrate mass leaks of classified documents? Spies turned double agents?
Even if this doesn't become the thin end of the wedge in terms of US actions, it could put those of other states beyond the moral reach of others. For the foreseeable, they know they have the retort - "well, you did it to obl, so go mind your own business". And there's no doubt other factors - the possible terroritst 'recruitment benefit'.
It's a sketchy business in the broader picture, even if you don't give a shit (as I don't) about due process in for obl in isolation
I'm not at all uncomfortable with the assisination of obl in isolation. Good riddance.
But in terms of the wider picture, where's the line drawn? Ex-pat Russians getting poisoned in London? People who orchestrate mass leaks of classified documents? Spies turned double agents?
Even if this doesn't become the thin end of the wedge in terms of US actions, it could put those of other states beyond the moral reach of others. For the foreseeable, they know they have the retort - "well, you did it to obl, so go mind your own business". And there's no doubt other factors - the possible terroritst 'recruitment benefit'.
It's a sketchy business in the broader picture, even if you don't give a shit (as I don't) about due process in for obl in isolation
1%er
Well-Known Member
If that is the case, why did the USA attorney General need to make this statement?
Edit to save people looking it up:
Attorney General Eric Holder told members of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that the U.S. raid on bin Laden's compound was lawful "as an act of national self-defense."
Bin Laden "was the head of al Qaeda, an organization that had conducted the attacks of September the 11th," Holder said. "It's lawful to target an enemy commander in the field."
The raid "was conducted in a manner fully consistent with the laws of war," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters. Carney declined to offer specifics, but said "there is simply no question that this operation was lawful. ... (Bin Laden) had continued to plot attacks against the United States."
elbows
Well-Known Member
But its simply not the case that this stuff is always a slippery slope. In fact I would go as far as to say that the cause of human rights etc can be harmed if people to choose to make a loud example out of a case that people dont care about. I know that human rights are supposed to apply universally, but in practice if you actually want to win people over, pick a cause that people can get behind without getting too nasty a taste in their mouth.
The other day I made a point to you that actually one of the reasons they may not have wanted a trial, was because of sensitivities with Pakistan. I dont know why you think the truth of the matter would help with this issue, surely a variety of possible truths actually have the potential to make it worse, to make Pakistan more unstable, to make the US relationship with them harder?
Personally I am really into facts and learning as much as possible. However, when it comes to using the truth in order for the world to be forced to act in a more just and humane way, the truth is not enough. Also need enough people to give a shit, and struggle until the orders of power are forced to modify their behaviour to fit the new minimum levels of acceptability. And how often does that happen, all too often a few heads role, a few token gestures are made, and business carries on pretty much as usual after they've managed to 'draw a line under events'. Given that I see very little chance that their actions towards bin laden are going to cause the levels of mass outrage necessary to force change, I consider it a waste of time and energy. I cannot fake righteous indignation at the way this Osama execution was carried out, and I get grumpy with those that do, though it is of course your right.
In any case the final deadly results of scapegoating and evoking bogeymen come too late in the process to stand a chance of being thwarted, I tend to save my fears and cries for the very early stages when the scene is being set, the scapegoats first created and peoples fears stoked Remember the fear post-9/11 of what the US might be capable of, the scale of the propaganda on display, the atmosphere, the crudeness of the narrative. Everything that followed after that was almost inevitable, and in some ways Im almost glad they chose to use up all of the 9/11 effect in a couple of badly conceived wars. Sure Id much rather we lived in a sane world where the USA had actually heeded those who said 'look you've got a lot of good-will around the world as a result of the attacks, use that to your advantage and to set a new course, dont blow it on crude warmongering', but that isnt the nature of the beasts we are dealing with. And I dont fancy trying to take the beast to finishing school and then getting surprised or cross when it turns out that its still not house-trained.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
That's quite a misrepresentation which fails to take into account the weight of offences.
Is flying into a compound in Pakistan, then killing half a dozen people, worse than flying Jets into office buildings killing thousands? Is invading Kuwait worse than carpet bombing a retreating Iraqi column? Is detention without trial worse than taking up arms against your own countrymen?
Every side tries to claim moral superiority but the question's absolutely subjective. I'm more than happy for my government to execute terrorists, in fact I'd encourage it. I think we're morally obliged to kill those that have killed, or may kill, us. Dylans (and probably you) won't agree with me.
That's because you're both wrong and I'm right.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Or people we have never even heard of being killed by unmanned drones. I see far more mileage in making a noise about that stuff than about a man that had long since become 'evil personified' in the minds of millions, a lost cause.
Similar threads
