In my humble opinion, I think that Osama should have been brought in front of justice, judged for acts of terorism, murder, whatever, put into jail or be executed, but only after a trial. He's only human, regardless of his beliefs, skin color or actions. He has the same rights as all of us do; even IF he nuked WTC.
That's a moral opinion.
Now I'm no politician, but I don't think assasinating a terorist leader won't have consequences on the americans (or/and on allied forces).
Maybe Obama doesn't pull the strings, however I think the whole scenario wasn't thought well.
It may be a facade for other stuff, but still.
That's a moral opinion.
Now I'm no politician, but I don't think assasinating a terorist leader won't have consequences on the americans (or/and on allied forces).
Maybe Obama doesn't pull the strings, however I think the whole scenario wasn't thought well.
It may be a facade for other stuff, but still.
Kazeko
<Member>
<Member>
Conspiracy Theory aside, executing someone isn't a good idea in an apparently democratic world. My people (Romanians) have a history of bad choices, 20 years ago we executed a tyrant and his wife (i.e. Ceausescu) and now the EU accuse us of murder, since we didn't exactly give them a fair trial, they were killed on sight, thus ending the communist era for my country.
I wonder if someone will have the guts to accuse the US for murdering Osama? (Not necessarily the EU--come to think of it, who has authority against the US?) But, sure, sure, by all means, pick on the little collapsing country but leave the US alone to do whatever it wishes. Take that for a democratic world!
All in all, murdering someone isn't a swell idea, regardless of that someone. How is the US better than Osama now? Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth?--yes, very diplomatic, indeed.
By this post I mean no disrespect to the American people, none, whatsoever! So don't consider this flaming in any way, because I think that the people always have too little to say when it comes to the decisions of their political leaders.
I wonder if someone will have the guts to accuse the US for murdering Osama? (Not necessarily the EU--come to think of it, who has authority against the US?) But, sure, sure, by all means, pick on the little collapsing country but leave the US alone to do whatever it wishes. Take that for a democratic world!
All in all, murdering someone isn't a swell idea, regardless of that someone. How is the US better than Osama now? Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth?--yes, very diplomatic, indeed.
By this post I mean no disrespect to the American people, none, whatsoever! So don't consider this flaming in any way, because I think that the people always have too little to say when it comes to the decisions of their political leaders.
Canoas
<Member>
<Member>
Canoas
<Member>
<Member>
Every single country, except for the Vatican, is in the UN. Do you really think US stands any chance against the rest of the world?
The biggest problem is the fact that the US have a permanent seat in the security council, but in dire situations that can be changed.
EDIT: Also, no country has authority over another. The only true authority is represented by military power, and in that any country loses against the majority of the world.
The biggest problem is the fact that the US have a permanent seat in the security council, but in dire situations that can be changed.
EDIT: Also, no country has authority over another. The only true authority is represented by military power, and in that any country loses against the majority of the world.
Kazeko
<Member>
<Member>
UN, UE are not countries, in regards to your observation. Although, that can only be applied if you don't take into consideration the 'behind the scenes' takes of the international politics. Sure, no country should have authority over another country but there is much more to that than meets the eye; there's more than military power that can persuade a country into doing another country's bidding, there are also important economic relationships, relationships that I think are more important than a country's military power--which isn't as scary as an economic blow.
And thank you Canoas, I haven't thought of the UN, and you are right. ^^
And thank you Canoas, I haven't thought of the UN, and you are right. ^^
OsmBear
<Member>
<Member>
Canoas
<Member>
<Member>
OsmBear wrote:
He's dead, get over it.
I wasn't going to mention this because it'll only add fuel to the fire, but Osama has been dead for at least 3 years.
Bin Laden has renal insufficiency. He needed to received dialysis quite often, it's impossible for him to stay hidden for 10 years. If he stayed at home for less than a week he would die do to kidney failure.
Also, Saddam Hussein's execution was shown as a trophy. I'm amazed than in Bin Laden's case his body was destroyed as quickly as possible, no one would do that.
It's also very convenient for Obama to finally put an end to Osama right when US's stay in Afghanistan was becoming too expensive and his ratings were dropping.
Just so you know, dialysis is a very risky procedure. I remember reading somewhere that around 25% of the patients receiving dialysis die each year. That means 5% of the people on dialysis survive 10 years. And I'm talking about people in hospitals in sterile rooms with clean water, not in a cave hiding from the entire world.
Sorry, but I just don't buy it. 10 years to catch a guy who needs daily dialysis? Seriously? Even if you're in a hospital you need a ****ing miracle to survive 10 years on dialysis. If Osama did survive that long while running away than I'm going to convert to Islam-ism, cause their God has got to be real.
You need to log in before commenting.
<Retired Moderator>