Posted on 10/20/2011 10:33:17 AM PDT by milwguy
Nauseating is my response.
Signs of things to come with the new regime, whatever it may be.
And the Usurper couldn't resist making yet another announcement to the nation (really, to the world) and taking a victory lap. It's scary to me. Does he think he is president of the "arab world?" He acts like it, starting with that speech in Cairo. Ubama will become a hero to the new regimes, even though he took a lecturing tone today. They know it is taqqiya.
OBL was unarmed and was essentially under our control in his bedroom. We could have captured him very easily if that was our objective. From the LA Times:
"After saying Monday that the American operatives who raided the Pakistani compound had orders to capture Bin Laden if he gave himself up, U.S. officials Tuesday added an important qualifier: The assault force was told to accept a surrender only if it could be sure he didn't have a bomb hidden under his clothing and posed no other danger."
I have no problem with shooting OBL in cold blood. Capturing him would have been counterproductive and serve only the interests of AQ. I also support the disposition of his body. Much of those same arguments would apply to Qadaffi. A trial could have lasted a long time--the UN wanted him handed over to the International Court of Justice in the Hague--and holding Qadaffi could have prompted further loss of life thru actions to rescue or release him. It has allowed Libya to move on and extinguish any possibility that Qadaffi could somehow return to power.
But taking someone prisoner, then killing them out-of-hand when captive is not something I condone. Once in custody, I feel we should be more humane than giving our forces a green light to outright murder. Do we really want lower ourselves to the level of these pigs in our thoughts and actions? I would hope the Geneva conventions still mean something here in the western world...
This has happened before in the case of Mussolini, Nicolae Ceaușescu, and many others. Libya was essentially engaged in a civil war. Qadaffi was fighting the now legitimate government of Libya using lethal force. He was committing a treasonous act. I assume that he could be shot on the spot--no trial necessary, as an unlawful combatant. I don't know if the Geneva Convention covers civil war.
We are not lowering ourselves at all. Qadaffi was executed by the legitimate forces of the officially recognized government of Libya. Our laws do not obtain and I doubt that Libya will be denounced or condemned by the international community for its actions. Personally, I would have no problem putting a bullet in this despot's head using my own gun. And the same goes for OBL.
OBL was the ostensible leader of the terrorist world. Ghaddafi was a broken, fallen, on-the-run, tin-pot despot who no longer had control of his country let alone power over anyone but his immediate forces. He certainly wasn’t a threat outside Libya. And at the point where he was shot he had become -not a military target but- a prisoner of war. The two circumstances are very much the same, yet it’s only Bin-Laden’s ongoing world-wide menace that can give a rise to his killing as being righteous. Ghaddafi had no such standing at the time.
You can believe what you want. I will believe what I will. I’m glad the man is dead. I’m not happy with America having to condone the outright killing (quite possibly with his own weapon) of a has-been, worn-out schmuck.
He got what he deserved. He was a evil man. He killed and oppressed his own people. He killed innocent Amercian citizens. Does not bother me at all. Not in the least. Should have happened a long time ago.
Agreed, but in essence this was an international version of a mafia hit.
I agree with all of the above even in hindsight. We did whatever was necessary to ensure our national survival and to win the war. We became more circumspect and concerned with legal issues when prosecuting the wars in Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf War, Iraq, and Afghanistan. The big difference is that we didn't feel that our national survival was at stake in these other conflicts. We have the luxury of being able to adhere to international law, worry about collateral damage, and to extend constitutional rights to enemy combatants. The results have been mixed in terms of achieving our objectives and minimizing the loss of US life.
IMO the Nuremberg War trials were a mistake and set terrible precedents. We are transferring national sovereignty to international organizations and institutions ceding our rights under the Constitution.
You can believe what you want. I will believe what I will. I’m glad the man is dead. I’m not happy with America having to condone the outright killing (quite possibly with his own weapon) of a has-been, worn-out schmuck.
It really isn't a matter of us condoning anything. It is a matter for the Libyan people to decide how it wishes to mete out justice to a brutal despot who has inflicted immeasurable harm to the country and its people for over 40 years. I could care less if he was summarily executed by the government's militia any more than I care about how Mussolini was killed. Justice was done in both cases. No Stalinist show trial is necessary to fulfill some misplaced legalistic standard of what constitutes justice.
Qaddafi was a threat to the outside world whether it was in Berlin, above the skies of Scotland, or with his nascent nuclear weapons program. Death at the hands of his own people was fitting and just. The fact that it was quick and sure was better than he deserved and certainly better than most of his victims received.
When governments support gangs of thugs the government becomes one with them. Such is how matters stand today. We hear high sounding justification for murder by those who wish to reconcile mob rule with social justice. He was killed by a frenetic mob, friend, nothing more. Do you honestly believe Obama will not formally support the efforts of union and other thugs to do his will?
Are these same people that praised the return of the bastard that did the plotting that killed 258 people over Lockerbie Scotland..Is he still a hero if so why kill the other murdering bastard and then leave this one..because they are as much animals as Gaddafi
One man's mob is another man's government militia. I don't think you are operating in the real world. Do you understand what has been happening in Libya over the past 8 months? There was a civil war. The rebels have been fighting against Qadaffi and his loyalists, including the military. The rebel fighters have been supported by NATO who have provided air strikes, intellligence, weapons, money, and recognition. The UN has sanctioned such efforts.
The "frenetic mob" you disparage was part of the now official government of Libya recognized by the international community, including the US. The new government doesn't have an organized military force replete with uniforms, insignia etc. They are the irregulars who have been on the frontline against Qadaffi's forces. They beseiged Sirte and forced Qadaffi to flee in a huge 80 truck convoy that was intercepted by a French jet and a US drone. The "frenetic mob" engaged in the battle attacked the convoy on the ground and eventually got Qadaffi and administered justice. They did what NATO has been trying to do for months, i.e., kill him.
Do you honestly believe Obama will not formally support the efforts of union and other thugs to do his will?
They are already doing his will. I just don't buy the nonsense you are spouting that these "thugs" will take to the streets and assassinate people opposed to Obama. It is quite clear that Obama is trying to energize his base and distract the voters away from his policies and record and blame the rich and the Republicans for the country's woes. I don't think it will work.
I would appreciate learning more about you. Please consider posting on your “about” page.
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.