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.