As DB says, it was to prevent his burial location from becoming a shrine. Even the body of water in which he was buried was kept secret.
Me too. But, I would have been pleased to see Hitler and Stalin killed, too. And I was not bothered at all that the Iraqis killed Saddam. However, you seemed to be arguing then that prison would have been better for these animals (back in the Saddam was executed thread):
Then, in reply to this exchange:
You posted the following:
Interesting that you regard OBL as so evil that his assassination thrills you. Yet, you would have been perfectly satisfied to see Hitler, Stalin and Saddam spend their lives in prison for their crimes against humanity.
What’s the difference, for you? Is it that Obomber gave the order to kill OBL, and that makes it A-OK with you? 
The Left’s darling, Michael Moore, is disgusted with the assassination of OBL…
Ouch! That’s pretty harsh, dude!
[quote=“Tigerman”]
The Left’s darling, Michael Moore, is disgusted with the assassination of OBL…
Ouch! That’s pretty harsh, dude![/quote]
There you go again Tigerman. You just repeat. Rinse and repeat.
The Left’s darling? really?
Me too. But, I would have been pleased to see Hitler and Stalin killed, too. And I was not bothered at all that the Iraqis killed Saddam. However, you seemed to be arguing then that prison would have been better for these animals (back in the Saddam was executed thread):
Then, in reply to this exchange:
You posted the following:
Interesting that you regard OBL as so evil that his assassination thrills you. Yet, you would have been perfectly satisfied to see Hitler, Stalin and Saddam spend their lives in prison for their crimes against humanity.
What’s the difference, for you? Is it that Obomber gave the order to kill OBL, and that makes it A-OK with you? [/quote]
Once again:
I oppose the death penalty. Saddam was captured and brought to trial, found guilty and HANGED (a barbaric 19th century practice, in the 21st century) by the US. Yup. The US. The Iraqi government was a puppet state of the US. WE HANGED him after a trial.
In the Osama raid, the mission was either to capture or kill Osama, given the circumstance. Turns out circumstances warranted a kill. (I would have expected the same on a raid of Saddam’s palace, or Hitler’s bunker, etc.) It’s like cops going after a criminal. You want to catch them, but sometimes you have to shoot to kill.
Had we captured Osama, I would expect a trial, and would not want him executed, but instead thrown into the bowels of a supermax prison.
Do you understand the difference??
Moore makes some good points, initially. Gets his ass badly tangled up towards the end, though.
[quote=“Chris”]In the Osama raid, the mission was either to capture or kill Osama, given the circumstance. Turns out circumstances warranted a kill. (I would have expected the same on a raid of Saddam’s palace, or Hitler’s bunker, etc.) It’s like cops going after a criminal. You want to catch them, but sometimes you have to shoot to kill.
Had we captured Osama, I would expect a trial, and would not want him executed, but instead thrown into the bowels of a supermax prison.
Do you understand the difference??[/quote]
That’s a mighty fine hair to split isn’t it? I actually don’t disagree or agree with your opinion on this but, what have you heard that makes you confident a kill was warranted? Every thing I’ve heard (from the media of course) is that he was unarmed and in the presence of women and childeren and that he ‘resisted’. I mean resisted how? Only put one hand up? Dove for a weapon? Said “hey guys common cut it out”? Frankly, I think the operation has meant as a execution from the get go.
[quote=“Tigerman”]
The Left’s darling, Michael Moore, is disgusted with the assassination of OBL…
[/quote]
So what? There are differing opinions out there in Liberal Land.
Mike Malloy wasn’t happy with the killing either; Randi Rhodes, Cenk Uygur and Thom Hartmann are fine with it.
My opinions jibe most with those of Randi Rhodes, though sometimes I disagree with her too.
Liberals do not march in lock-goose-step.
The Iraqis, not the US, hanged Saddam after a trial. The US captured Saddam alive and handed him over to the Iraqis. But, that was when Bush was POTUS. We got CHANGE with Obomber!
Are you being disingenuous? 
There was no goal of capturing OBL alive. Saddam at least got a trial, even if the judgment was known to all beforehand. OBL was
executed
on the spot. No trial. No review of the evidence. No defense. He was
executed
by Obomber. That was the goal and the team that went in did it in admirable fashion.
OBL was unarmed. What prevented Obomber from capturing OBL?
:roflmao: But, nonetheless, you are
thrilled
that we killed his ass.
Do you have a clue?
The US has acknowledged that Bin Laden was unarmed when shot dead in Monday’s raid by US special forces in Pakistan.
The team was told to accept a surrender only if there was no threat whatsoever… that if there was a risk that he had a bomb under his cloak, they could kill him…
[quote=“senior congressional aide briefed on the rules of engagement”]
[OBL] would have had to have been naked for them to allow him to surrender…
[/quote]
OBL wasn’t naked when they found him. There’s your circumstances that warranted a kill…
Apples and oranges… Yeah… 
Saddam got a trial by the Iraqis. Osama bin Laden got a summary execution by US forces.
Oh well, who has time to think about OBL? Unemployment is back up to 9%… 
[quote]He was executed…[/quote]A trial would not have changed that.
It might have.
And a trial would have been dangerous, for all sorts of reasons.
I’m glad the killed his ass on the spot. Just wish they would have capped his knees and then shot him several times in the gut… but, I’m satisfied with the quick assassination.
(Right-wing bluster… right-wing bluster…)
OBL was unarmed. What prevented Obomber from capturing OBL?[/quote]
The circumstances at hand, which neither you or I are privy to. He may have gone for a gun, he may have taken some threatening action. Who knows? There are as many stories as there are witnesses, which is always the case.
These are trained Navy Seals who know what they’re doing.
:roflmao: But, nonetheless, you are
thrilled
that we killed his ass.[/quote]
Yes. So what? I am thrilled this evil man is no longer around to pose a threat to humanity.
Apple. Orange. They are different.
(Right-wing bluster… right-wing bluster…)
Yes. And their mission was to kill bin Laden. Not to bring him to justice. To execute him on the spot.
I don’t like that. Better dead than running around, but I’d rather he were put in the dock.
If you don’t like it too, at least have the fortitude to choke down that bitter pill.
Obama also chose to not seriously pursue a criminal investigation of torture under Bush.
I don’t like that either.
But Obama’s not a purist, not an ideologue, not so much interested in pouring resources into a good fight that might prove long, hard, and unsuccessful. He’s into pragmatism and efficiency.
Bin Laden’s execution was pragmatic and efficient. Just desserts, but not justice.
Bombing the compound was the original plan. It was rejected only because evidence of bin laden’s death would likely be obliterated. I don’t see how anyone can doubt the human target part of the mission was all about a kill (and gathering DNA evidence of it).
Not optimal if your goal is to deliver anything but (very) rough justice. Works fine for me, although I do think deterrence, as a side effect, was also sub-optimized. There is probably no greater punishment for non-American bad guys than the likelihood of a decades-long cohabitation with the real dregs of the American experience, i.e. the boys of Leavenworth. I reckon death is infinitely preferable.
Whatever happened in that compound in Abbottabad, and whether what happened was right or wrong, Obama did what he said he would do:
[quote]We will kill bin Laden.[/quote]–Barack Obama, October 7, 2008
Funny. I would have expected suiyuan to be here calling you out on your partisanship… I guess he only calls out right-wing partisanship…
[quote=“Chris”]The circumstances at hand, which neither you or I are privy to. He may have gone for a gun, he may have taken some threatening action. Who knows? There are as many stories as there are witnesses, which is always the case.
These are trained Navy Seals who know what they’re doing.[/quote]
Oh, you don’t have to tell me that the SEAL teams are highly trained and know what they’re doing. I admire the SEAL teams. Have admired them for a long time.
But, we all remember that the SEAL team that assassinated OBL, which is part of the Joint Special Operations Command was often reviled and criticized by Left-Wing mouthpieces when Bush II was still POTUS… what did the Left-Wing Mouthpieces call the JSOC?
Executive Assassination Ring
Cheney’s Assassination Ring
Yeah, that’s right! But, if the JSOC operates under and takes orders from Obomber, then its perfectly OK and they’re just trained Navy Seals who know what they’re doing
:yay: Obomber is awesome!
One more look at how the Left viewed these assassination teams when they operated under Bush/Cheney:
So, Chris… are the Left-Wing Mouthpieces gonna start calling for Obomber to be held accountable for this assassination? 
Oh dear. Liberal logic meltdown. Never attractive.
It’s not assassination if the guy is a leader of a military organisation at war with the US. Osama bin Wheelbarrow was exactly that, a leader of a terrorist organisation styling themselves as a military, so ergo he was fair game.
Now, if it had been a political head of a state, then it could have been considered an assassination. The prospect of it being described as assassination would increase dramatically if the person carrying out the killing was non-military.
Here, we have military vs self-declared jihadist organisation head, i.e. ‘military’. Not assassination at all. And not an extrajudicial killing.
Stop calling it assassination, folks. Not even close.
Hi fred.
So you have a religious wacko who believes that death at the hands of the enemy will grant him instant martyrdom and direct entry to heaven and 72 virgins. Isn’t killing him just giving him what he wants? He probably died with a smile on his face. Capture, trial and life imprisonment would have been a much more fitting punishment.
Nothing more than a blurring of the lines. Where does right wing stop and left wing start? Lots of grey area in the flux. This is more a question of justified action. Both sides of the political divide see it as just, no?