"Red-headed Woodpecker"
 |
The World's Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!
Should the US have killed Osama Bin Laden?
I'm undecided on this one, though I'm swaying towards the view that he shouldn't have been killed, instead just prevented from killing others. Was it right to kill him? What are the positives and negatives of his death?
Morally what was the right thing to do? was it a lesser of two evils?
How similar were/are the motivations of Al Qaeda and the US, they are both convinced that they religion is right are they not?
Tags: 9/11, Al, Bin, Osama, Qaeda, USA, bin, ethics, killed, laden, More…
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Robert E Silver Jr on -
Don't see the problem with the killing of Bin Laden really. He decleared war on the United States, He was an unlawful combatant under the Geneva Convention. He was also not a head of state. So there for he was unprotected under The Geneva Convention and the Laws of Landfare. As far as the motivations of the United States are concerned, I can not even begin to look at this from a religious stand point. We where dealing with the terrorist commander who was leading the terrorist organization who commited the the most ruthless attack against the United States. Targeting mostly civilians and not Military Personel. The killing of Bin Laden had nothing to do with religion. In my view, it was more to bring a closure to September 11th, and to send a message to Al Qaeda. Also remember, that the Navy Seal who killed Osama Bin Laden could of been a Theist of any Religion or even an Atheist. The US is after all very deverse.
-
Permalink Reply by Secular Forces 2013 on -
Koresh. Hello. McVeigh HELLO. yeah fck that bush family fellow conspirator; what?! I vote, I paid taxes; and hate on their bitch asses; xtian/islam rightwingers we of the freethought west love the east!
G r e y d o n S q u a r e
4
POTUS!c'mon!
-
Permalink Reply by Allen Hanford on -
I understand that sentiment but realistically, this guy was a murderous nutcase and the world is better with him out of it. People are free to react in whatever way they choose. For me, it was a relief to finally have the job done after that idiot Bush squandered world support and all those years on Iraq and its nonexistent threats to out security.
-
Permalink Reply by Allen Hanford on
-
True, Al Queda is still in operation, but I would challenge the idea that Bin Laden's death did nothing. While we certainly failed to strike when it would have made the most difference, letting him live created the perception that we're impotent and that individuals can make us live in fear without reprisal.
In the long run our best bet is to stop interfering with other cultures. If we don't give them reasons to hate us, they'll take care of extremists by themselves.
-
Permalink Reply by Allen Hanford on
-
Al Queda is not a culture, but the populations of muslim countries are and we need to address the reasons why they support or at least tolerate the actions of extremists. These actions aren't justified, but the resentments that allows them to thrive are. No matter how many of them we kill, this won't go away until these cultures aren't being victimized by a much larger, more powerful and richer country.
-
Permalink Reply by Allen Hanford on
-
As I said earlier in the thread, I was all for killing Bin Laden. I don't think it will generate significant resentment; most would agree that he had it coming.
The resentments I spoke of were related to the U.S. interfering with the self-determination of smaller countries.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Jameer Logan on -
It would be very interesting in deed as these countries seem to rely on black gold for there economy. They are able to get food for their country, by trading oil. Things will definitely change when the oil runs out.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Park Bierbower on -
I'm pretty sure serial killers, in the US, still get a trial once they are apprehended. How despicable a persons actions are doesn't rationally justify denying them due process. That should really be the end of this.
-
Permalink Reply by Allen Hanford on
-
No trials for anyone who gets killed in a war.
-
Permalink Reply by Park Bierbower on
-
If its a war then the Geneva Convention applies and you can't kill anyone who is unarmed.
-
Permalink Reply by Allen Hanford on
-
If he was unarmed, then you're probably right. Still not feeling the guilt over it, though.
-
Permalink Reply by Park Bierbower on
-
yeah, I guess the question should really be a two-parter~ "are we complete hypocrites who violate our own laws and morals? Yes. Do we feel bad about it? No."
Thats pretty much why we have a 'war on terrorism' to begin with.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
CONNECT WITH ATHEIST NEXUS
Latest Activity
- Top News
- Everything
Steph S. replied to Loren Miller's discussion Latest Activity?"I agree Loren - that list looks very good.
I hope those items get fixed soon."
Steph S. commented on Steph S.'s group Birding, Birders and all things Birds"Beautiful bird Dominic - I'd have to research that one.
Tony that Hawk-headed Parrot is very cool.
Wonderful - thanks."
Mr Peterdactyl replied to matthew greenberg's discussion Pope Francis says even Atheists go to Heaven"I think this Slate article may be most appropriate. Perhaps il Papa would approve, though I, too, "
don't give a flying…"
Loren Miller replied to Loren Miller's discussion Latest Activity?"Okay ... the MP3 player is back, videos are back and photos are back. Only thing which seems to be missing is member profile information at this point, though the issues that Steph pointed out earlier may or may not have been addressed."
Ian Mason commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends"Glad to hear from you Joan and to hear that you're chugging along. That's a really good quote that I'm going to steal.
Thanks for your supportive comments, friends. It can be hard to see loved ones suffering on a downhill path. Your…"
Photos
© 2013 Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.
