Anyone would. Its an endless cycle. Unless the US just gives up and appeases Al -Qaida. That will never happen, so much hate being transferred from one side to the other. Its hard to be objective in life and death matters like this.
Good, so you should have no problem with it, then. ... that doesn't mean you just say f*** it and kill somebody without a trial, if at all possible. Yeah, and we shouldn't be doing that, either. That's why we don't let the victims decide the punishment. My personal opinion, which is tainted and bias from being a party to the incident, is purposefully removed from the equation in our system of justice.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/grbSQ6O6kbs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> What's done is done, no amount of p***y footing around will change it. He should have turned himself in, he fought this country, and knew the consequences. Now he is gone, and the world is better, and we saved the $$$ of a long trial and having to feed this puke. Good riddance....today, is a day of celebration !!!! Even the Bulls in Barcelona are celebrating today ! DD
I have had family members and friends killed by terrorists, and I've never wanted absolute vengeance. I've wanted them brought to justice, and I'd hope that others who've experienced the same hurt and pain would want the same.
The thing is, when you talk and pretend to carry yourself with high morals, you cannot just kill and deny trial. Does batman stoop to the level of the joker? Even Mcveigh got a trial. If we lived in Glorious motherland, this would have been ok. We could have even raped their women. =/
It's unfortunate that idiots like DaDakota and Red Redemption are doing their best to obscure a tricky issue and redirecting the discussion.
That's what I was thinking. Many of these terrorists probably view the US government as aiding and supporting terrorism against their people. And since we're a government "of the people", Americans are therefore aiding and supporting terrorism against their people. And so, according to this rationale, its fair for them to think we have forfeited our rights to live and should be targeted for killing. Which, of course, is why they are terrorists.
The redirection is the moronic viewpoint that this guy has some sort of right to trial when he is in Yemen fighting a war agaist this country. He died figthing - BIG ****ING DEAL !!! If he turned himself in, then I would be happy to put him on trial, personally, I am glad we saved the money and media attention. If he wanted his constitutional rights, he could have turned himself in.... Oh well... DD
This is where we disagree. It's reported he was killed while driving in a car with someone else, not on any battlefield. The controversy around the targeted assassination of Awlaki was just that- the authorization was to kill him wherever he was found, battlefield or no battlefield (if he was in a battlefield, obviously he's fair game). Additionally, the accusations against Awlaki were only accusations. I dont doubt that he was plotting and contributing to terrorism around the world, but our government accusing him of being a terrorist is very different than him being convicted of actually being one in a court of law. As we all know, many people were accused by our government of terrorism, held in Gitmo, and eventually exonerated.
Why do you always oversimplify issues down to your black and white moral code? Don't you think that's a bit irresponsible?
Dead or Alive - means...well...Dead or Alive. Again, he could have turned himself in...... <iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/3GwjfUFyY6M" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> DD
Because I think that arguing about whether the guy deserves his constitutional rights is just stupid. You have a bunch of psuedo intellectuals trying to argue points of the constitution, when this guy was in a foreign country fighting against the USA. He had ample opportunity to turn himself in, he chose to continue on a path of terrorism. He made his choice, and the only thing the Ivory tower is good for in this discussion is if it had a missile launcher on top of it to take this PUKE out. It is a good day, the guy died....... Action speaks louder than words. DD
Yemen is kind of a battlefield- the president was recently almost killed in a missile attack - a low grade civil war has been simmering there for decades between the gov't, tribal leaders and islamists/AQ types. Again, if you had no problem with the Bin Laden raid, this isn't really much different. Awlaki hasn't exactly been shy about taking credit for being an AQ recruiter and his role in various attacks.
I'm sorry, but the term 'low grade civil war' is one I'll have to disagree with. Civil unrest does not equal war, and many countries around the world could equally be classified as falling into the category of 'low grade civil war' because of ongoing violence. Also, his presence in a country that experiences civil unrest doesnt make him a soldier. As for the Bin Laden raid, I personally would have preferred we arrest him too and take him to court. The only concession I would make is that it was reported Bin Laden went down fighting and attempted to shoot the soldiers, in which case I dont fault them for firing back and taking him out.
I don't get this silly ideological argument. If the US was at war with, say, Nazi Germany, and an American citizen decided to defect to Germany and take up shop with a special Nazi task force dedicated to killing as many Americans as possible in inhumane ways, what would the US be expected to do? Fly into Berlin, walk up to his house and arrest him? Knowing fully well that not only could they not safely do so, he would unleash the fury of Nazi security forces at his disposal to shoot US agents? When a policeman encounters a mass murderer on the street, and says "you're under arrest", and the mass murderer responds by reaching for his gun, and the policeman draws his gun and kills the guy with a lethal headshot, has the policeman subverted justice? He did deserve a right to a fair trial, didn't he? How is this any different?
That hasn't been the way in America for most of its history, and isn't the idea or principles our nation was founded on.
