He was directly responsible for the murder of thousands of people. Why the fuck does anyone have any sympathy for him? Tell the families that suffered loses that his death shouldn't be celebrated. Seriously, if you can't see the side of patriotism (his group was at WAR with the US, it wasn't that he was a civilian criminal. He was an enemy general.) at least see the side of humanity.

He wasn't solely responsible for it. There's still thousands of terrorists out there. Maybe celebrate when all the terrorists are gone from the world? I'm not saying I'm going to miss the guy, but the idea of celebrating someone's death is really stupid.

Yeah, it's not entirely clear what defense, if any, there was. I have heard that the helicopter "broke down" from mechanical difficulties, and they destroyed it on the way out prevent enemies from getting their hands on US technology etc.

The whole raid took place at 1am, and Osama was said to have been surrounded in his bedroom. He used a woman (not his wife) as a body shield, and they were both killed. It is highly likely that there were others in the compound that had guns, but given the fact that no American's were injured, and I believe the total deaths is under 10, something like 4-5, it seems that the place was mostly empty. Seems to me like there wouldn't have been much risk in at least attempting to extract him from the compound.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on May 3 2011, 10:56 pm by DevliN. Reason: Fixed a typo. "Osama" not "Obama"

Using that logic, wouldn't it have been proper to celebrate after the terrorists crashed into the WTC? I mean, they died, right?

Yeah and try telling Quebecers like me to enjoy speaking english and befirend everyone from Canada and the USA after what they did to the French colonists.

Seriously, no matter what he did, cheering purely because someone died is dumb and just shows that human nature is as terrible as it can get. I do think that the soldiers and their family should cheer, becuase they should logically come back to the country...

Fisty - This was death of only terrorists. Completely different. This was bringing justice.

Dem0n - Just like hitler wasn't soley responsible for 12 million dead. He still deserved death.

You vastly overestimate the America's reaction to his death. Despite what the media you watch would have you believe, I don't know anyone who celebrated his death and the majority of people simply felt a small bit of justice and that was it.

Your sweeping generalizations are ridiculous. You can't judge 300 million people off the actions of very few without a serious mishap in logic. The irony here is that your prejudice says more about you than what the people who posted "YEAH, JAPAN, THAT'S PAYBACK FOR PEARL HARBOR" says about anyone else (nothing).

You can't celebrate any victories until total victory? Eliminating all terrorists from the world is impossible.

Are you kidding me?

I find your moral decry against the people who feel relief that the man who orchestrated the deaths of their family and/or friends more morally deprave than the actions of the people you judge.

Ah yes, I remember now. You're the Quebec nationalist.

Ah man Quebecs got the bomb

Unfortunately this is all a big misunderstanding. It is in fact President Obama who is dead.

Fully agreed with Kaias.

You guys didn't get my sarcarm, I obviously don't mind speaking English.

Kaias, I don't say that feeling better since he died is bad, or unjustified, and yeah I'd be surprised if everyone in america was jumping all around when they got the news, but you can't say that those that cheered and jumped around are having a healthy reaction.

You're right, you only said that it was "dumb and just shows that human nature is as terrible as it can get".

I feel the entire situation was handled perfectly. No Americans were killed in the operation; they went in and assaulted the compound instead of bombing it, allowing for a clean confirmed kill as well as preserving the wealth of data at the scene (which is more valuable than killing Osama, in my opinion). No innocents were killed collaterally either

Obama revealed the information a week after the operation went through, allowing time for DNA testing, and then the body was promptly dropped in the sea. You could fault the US for killing Osama instead of giving him a fair trial, but it would've been a mock trial anyway, as no jury would not convict him. You would then have a lot of unhealthy capital punishment drama, he would still be seen as a martyr and Al Qaeda would only react by harming innocent people to force the US to release Bin Laden. It was also crucial that the body was dealt with immediately, as no one had a chance to demand it. Because he was dumped in the sea there is no body or grave site for his followers to make sacred or symbolize his martyrdom. It's rare to see this level of competency; this is the second time Obama has made all the right calls in a tricky situation such as this (the first being how he handled the pirate-hostage situation).

Someone brought up that Osama was unarmed: I don't know (or care, honestly) if the orders were to kill on site; I would guess they were to kill or capture and the decision left up to the Seals who were operating/interpreting the situation. I will say that against an organization infamous for suicide bombing it is impossible to know if the person is truly unarmed. Considering all the information Bin Laden had there, the place being rigged for detonation was always a possibility.

It's also speculated that some of the documents released by Wikileaks concerning Guantanamo Bay may have forced the US to act immediately. Apparently they could have tipped off Osama that the US had been tracking some of his couriers, which was how they pin pointed Bin Laden's location. Source.

Edit: Couple more details: One of his wives charged them- they shot her in the leg. She wasn't used as a meat shield and didn't die, contrary to Lanthanide's post. They were also apparently on capture or kill orders. Source
Edit 2: I misread about the week latency time, that was how long ago the mission was approved, not operated. My point remains unchanged.

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on May 4 2011, 8:52 pm by Kaias.

I would +1 if I could. Good read, and some of that is news to me. Thanks for sharing.

That's interesting. But I wonder if the details will change again?

Actually I said a woman, not his wife, was used as a shield and killed. And I have since heard a different version of the story myself, where the woman used as a shield was in front of another male, and not Osama himself.
Here's a thread with the reports listed: http://helzhalfacre.yuku.com/topic/35436/Osama-died-hiding-behind-a-woman

And yes, in this particular case I don't think that arresting and charging Osama would have necessarily been the correct course of action, for the reasons you list, I just wanted to highlight this as an issue that was worth discussing. Certainly the fact that the orders were "capture or kill" I think is sufficient, although I have also heard reports that when Osama refused to go willingly, they simply killed him.

Also the operation didn't go 100% smoothly. The helicopters flew in very very low to the ground, using a path that took advantage of known radar gaps. When they got to the compound, the air was hotter than expected and one of the helicopters was too heavy to stay aloft, and crashed. Seems like they were cutting it very very fine if an air temperature difference could down a helicopter like that.

Reading this thread makes me glad my topic was moved to serious discussion. It's incredible how silly some intelligent people can be.

http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-world/osama-unarmed-when-shot-dead-us-admits-20110504-1e71d.html
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/05/04/6583764-cia-denies-bin-laden-was-captured-before-his-killing?ocid=twitter

...what? What does this have to do with anything?

EDIT:
Also just read this on Slate. Interesting way of looking at the conflict of whether or not Osama was armed, and whether he was supposed to be killed or captured: