[LINK] bin Laden is dead

[Karl Auer]

On Tue, 2011-05-03 at 20:58 +1000, Darrell Burkey wrote:
> > For the record, I agree with Kim. I think the US has behaved no better
> > than the terrorists they claim to be combating. Not just in this
> > particular instance, but going back to 9/11 and beyond.
>  
> In _this_ instance, which is what's being discussed, I could 
> only agree with you had the US murdered 3,000+ innocent citizens 
> in the process of capturing him.

I think the US have done pretty much exactly that. Dubya went to war
with Iraq based on outright lies and as a *direct* result of 9/11. How
many died as a result of that?

> You and Kim both base your assumption on the belief that OBL was 
> murdered. There is no evidence to support that so I think what 
> we really are seeing here is plain old prejudice. I would have 
> expected much more from you Karl.

The facts appear to me to be that in search of a person they considered
to be worth capturing or killing at almost any cost, the US went armed
into a sovereign country without permission, blew open the door to
private property, shot and killed at least two people, removed the body
of one and dumped it at sea. The person sought had never been tried
(much less convicted), not even in a US court, not even in absentia. So
while "murder" might not be the right word, I do most certainly feel
that they stepped very far outside the law when they acted as they did.

> > And those "real facts" are going to come from where? There are no
> > uncompromised sources. We are left to debate what appears to have
> > happened.
>  
> Totally agree. IMHO Kim's posts have not shown respect at all 
> but rather he is making the point that only his view is the 
> 'right' view. So thanks for making my point.

Of course he thinks his view is the right one - as do I mine and as do
you yours. Doesn't mean we can't discuss them, does it? I'm under no
obligation to respect your daft opinions, though naturally I respect
your right to hold them.

> > Er - are you talking about bin Laden or the US?
>  
> Again, you are mixing issues. We all know about the evil things 
> most countries on this planet have done. This discussion was 
> about one event and to muddy that by trying to bring in other 
> events is a weak form of debating.

Not at all. "This one event" does not exist in isolation. It took place
in a context that includes the current Afghanistan conflict, the events
at Guantanamo Bay, a US president desperate for a lift, the running sore
of Iraq...

My original point, that you took issue with, was that the US was no
better than the terrorists it supposedly seeks to combat. Their
behaviour in other places and at other times, including very recent
times, supports this view, which is why I brought it up.

> > Sad that the US, in the end, could do no better than that.
>  
> And as I said to Kim, what 'better' way is that?' Please, 
> enlighten me. 

Wait and work. If necessary forever, until the guilty party or parties
can be captured, as we should capture any criminal. Try them, test the
evidence against them, and if they are found guilty punish them under
the rule of law. And if miscreants die of old age before we get them, so
be it; civilisation is about the long view.

If we discard the principles that make us different from people like bin
Laden, is there really any point fighting him?

Regards, K.

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Karl Auer (kauer at biplane.com.au)                   +61-2-64957160 (h)
http://www.biplane.com.au/kauer/                   +61-428-957160 (mob)

GPG fingerprint: DA41 51B1 1481 16E1 F7E2 B2E9 3007 14ED 5736 F687
Old fingerprint: B386 7819 B227 2961 8301 C5A9 2EBC 754B CD97 0156
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://mailman.anu.edu.au/pipermail/link/attachments/20110503/d65a3a8d/attachment.sig>