Trying to care...
Posted on 05/03/2011 5:18:12 PM PDT by PilotDave
A major question lingers unanswered at the center of this story: Why was bin Laden killed? Michael Scherer has reported that the Navy Seals who landed at Osama bin Laden’s safehouse were not given orders specifically to kill, but were on a “kill or capture” mission. That implies they were prepared to accept bin Laden’s surrender. It didn’t work out that way. But despite earlier reports to the contrary, including from White House counter-terror adviser John Brennan, Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters Tuesday that bin Laden was in fact unarmed. (“Resistance does not require a firearm,” he said.) So, what happened?
(Excerpt) Read more at swampland.time.com ...
Obama and Holder would have had a huge problem because of their past policies which would lead to his trial in a US civilian court, another nightmare. Even if they tried him in a military tribunal you would have had a posse of Wall Street BigLaw attorneys representing him for free turning the trial into a circus while liberals worldwide would be constantly indignant over some perceived "human rights" violation or other.
Obama himself would turn any trial into a circus to promote his cause.
Even though this is not something your or I would have done in combat, this is one guy who had to be shot resisting seizure.
I am beginning to form the hypothesis that rather than a daring raid of sorts, the guards were paid off and they melted away. Our guys just walked right in and gunned Binny down, execution style.
Do you understand how the SEALs operate? They are told to do either a capture mission or a kill mission.....usually, there is no middle ground for them.
This was a kill mission, which means you kill the target.
Armed, unarmed, bomb under his tunic, it does not matter....your orders are to kill.
This is not a police action or a movie, and only liberals will try to turn it into one.
Trying to care...
I have no problem whatsoever with him being on a shoot to kill list. Can you imagine the disruption bringing him to trial would have caused in our nation?
They would have demanded he be tried in our criminal courts. It would have been a circus. This guy could have defended himself over the ten years. He relished taking credit for this attack.
While I understand where you’re coming from, there are exceptions to every rule.
Besides, he’s with his 72 virgins. Every good practicing Muslim knows that.
The reason he was shot was so that he would not be either a prisoner who would inspire terrorist acts to get him released, or a defendant in a trial where he could whip up support or embarrass the US. They didn’t know what to do with him alive, so boom, he’s gone. It MIGHT be the same conundrum that caused such a delay in acting in the first place.
You guys are so clueless, your will to drag the memories of those who died on 9/11 thru the mud, accused Navy SEALS of murder all because you hate the current president.
If this had happened under Bush all of you would be throwing a parade from NYC to Los Angeles.
The handwriting is on the wall.
The Navy Seals will be thrown under the bus.
People just dont see it yet. Carney gave some major clues.
All people here can see is a terrorist they wanted dead is dead.
Judge N is already talking about this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBXHY5jHK-I&feature=player_embedded
We don’t know Jack S### about how it went down until after the Seals had been formerly debriefed, and the transcript of that debriefing released. The News has horribly reported on this so far. - Guessing really.
Capturing Osama alive would have been a nightmare for America. Every two-bit terrorist in the world would take innocent hostages to bargain for his release. We'd be subject to every two-bit NGO talking about how we're mistreating that poor man. A decade long courtroom circus, replete with Islamic propaganda and efforts to turn Osama into a sympathetic figure.
We were going to put a missile through his head. We put a bullet instead. Either way, it's over.
Queasy fighter jock?
3000 unarmed civilians... never mind hundreds around the world. That’s why.
Bingo.
The best solution was to nail him.
Is there any evidence the SEALS were even involved? I wouldn’t expect their identities to ever be involved, so it would be pretty easy to have CIA spooks do the job, then claim it was a raid by the SEALS. Just saying...
Doesn’t make it legal.
There are troops on the ground that are getting murdered by the Taliban because of the Ridiculous Rules of Engagement under Obama.
If those soldiers have to abide by them and get killed because of it ..then so do these Navy Seals.
I am not blaming Navy Seals. They did what they were told.
But sadly, they will be thrown under the bus if Obama has his way if the it hits the fan.
They are already laying the groundwork.
“Dead or alive, you’re coming with me!”
Im actually supporting Zero on this single issue. The only way to oppose him is to call for the one worlders at the Hague to try him under” International Law” and those are about the only people in the West I despise more than the American Left. Gotta go with sovereignty and Zeros right to make that executive desision as CIC. Would have wanted Bush to do the same and the rats would be calling on war crime trials. I would rather avoid hypocrisy and stay consistent on my principles, though the knee jerk makes me want to find something to criticize.
He was shot through the head because he is a menace to the free world. Who gives a sh*t if he was unarmed; so were the people in the WTC, Pentagon and on Flight 93.
‘Our guys just walked right in and gunned Binny down, execution style.’
Don’t believe it, but it works for me!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.