CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Yes, The United States has suffered in the eyes of the world because of this. We talk about due process, but where is due process here? Even Saddam got a trial. Not to mention the fact that we have only made Bin laden a martyr in the eyes of his followers emboldening them further. He was unarmed at the time, he should have been arrested.
He killed thousands of people and was on dialysis from kidney failure.
We should have arrested him and not killed him at all. In fact, we should have kept him alive longer.
Then, we should have made him suffer pain equal to the thousands of lives he killed and the thousands more he totally changed.
Only then would his evil have been truly made up for. Only making him suffer for his actions would have granted retribution.
Killing him was an act of mercy! We saved him from the pain of his illness and the pain that he deserved! I think, ultimately, we gave him what he wanted. Peace.
His due process already occurred when he released the videos taking credit for the bombings of the twin towers. As good as a confession of guilt, either way it wouldn't be viable to hold him and put him on trial. And we haven't suffered in the eyes of the world, we captured the most elusive mass murderer of our time.
I dont really know what good arguments are on the killing him side, aside from satifying american bloodlust that was created by the events of 9/11 and perpetuated in the US media ad infinitum. The media protrayed him as as evil mastermind, they painted him to be like the bad guy in a hollywood movie, and too many americans can't seem to separate the fantasy from the reality.
One it would have been impossible to know if Osama was not concealing a weapon at the time, The Seals didn't want to take the chance that he was wearing a bomb vest. Two, we would have been in an even worse position, if Al Qaeda decided to take hostages to petition for his release, which certain terrorist networks have been known to do.
In dont want to start a big debate with you cause i know i dont have the time but i have to take issue with the concealed weapon or bomb argument, i just don't buy that, i dont think its a very convincing argument (maybe others will like those who want to belive their government is incapable of having any other motivation for killing him).
"Two, we would have been in an even worse position, if Al Qaeda decided to take hostages to petition for his release, which certain terrorist networks have been known to do."
You're good ill give you that, i mean you can rationalise your way outside of a paper bag, unfortunately it doesnt make it anymore correct, the fact is regardless of the minor risks invloved in capturing him they could have done so if they wished. Besides american has never been the kind of country that would tip toe around anything in order not to deal with the consequences, even you should be able to admit to that.
I can't beleive you think they wouldnt have captured him to save some potential hostages, how are you that delluded, i mean come on man.
I bet strongly that he wouldn't get a trial. He would either be hanged, or someone in the american crowd would shoot him.
I personally want to interview him. He said that he would bomb the train stations and i find that interesting and how he would pull it off. But i don't want others to get that same idea and be that kind of person.
Yes America should have arrested Laden which could have created more fear in terrorist. Killing them is easy as they themselves explode themselves as suicide bombers. But it is America's CIA who has created monster Laden to combat Russia which eventually turned Frankenstein against them. Now America is supporting Pakistan ,giving aids,but beware it is behind all terrorist activities in the world. So Killing Laden is like drop in the ocean. He was just a few metres away from Pakistan millitary base . How come they didn't had any idea? Even 50 km away from any millitary base is considered a high security area where close watch is kept. Our country India has been warning America from last 7 years that laden is in pakistan but America was giving money to same ISi which was helping Laden to safely hide and paying his bills from American Taxpayers pockets.
It is against all moral laws known to me to kill a man without a trial. Moreover, it's something that should never happen in a democratic and free society (among other things, what happened to innocent until proven guilty?).
US foreign policy is a very controversial subject.
Of course he should have been arrested, how can you even ask that question, i dont know where in american law it says your allowed to infiltrate another country and kill someone.
The real question is why did they kill him and not capture him, i dont want to be labeeled a conspiracy nut but he was obviously going to shed alot of light on his dealing with the cia and the formation of Al Queda, america didnt want that light shed because it obviously would have made them look quite bad.
All you americans who love to label me a nut job just think about what im saying for a second please, ask yourself if it is really that far fetched then consider how his death has been shrowded in such secracy.
I hate it when the U.S takes a huge action and no governing body bothers to question it. Osama bin Laden, may have killed lots of people and destroyed the World Trade Centre, but he wasn't the only who had to die, his son was killed, his wife was killed, his guard was killed and worst of all the brother of the guard was killed when he had his hands behind his back. No Pakistan authorities were informed of U.S armed forces entering their country and yet the U.S still thought it legible to continue the attack. For all we know Osama isn't even the head of this organisation just a face to put on it.
This is similar to the case of Julian Assange, who was the face of wikileaks. After Wikileaks published U.S secret cables, all of a sudden Julian is found with a rape trial on his hands and is chucked into prison. His crime? working with an organisation the U.S government didn't like. The published documents put a pin on many illegal actions taken by U.S ambassadors relating to the Iraq war etc.
Your source differs from the BBC report I heard on the radio. seeing how the BBC is more likely to be unbiased than an american news channel, I know which one I'll believe
Well if you're just recounting what you heard from memory, I'll take a tangible article over your memory. Of course, the article I cited certainly could be wrong. I think time will tell.
Definitely yes as the circumstances provided ample chances to capture him, run through a proper trial in an international court. This would have brought out the facts on who created Osama, why he went out of control from his creators. His capture and a proper trial would have done justice to all those innocent lives lost due to the atrocities of Osama as well as the atrocities created in the pursuit of Osama.
No, Al Qaeda could have held school children (or others) hostage to petition for his release. Not to mention that there would be no way of knowing whether Bin Laden had a bomb vest on or concealing some other weapon. Putting him on trial would have been a mess if we did manage to arrest him. The U.S. Navy Seals took the appropriate action.
It wasn't just to kill him though. He deserved worse punishment, and he also deserved to be treated like a criminal, not a super-villain.
As for the hostage possibility, well... if we kept him alive, we could have used him as a counter-hostage!
But that isn't even relevent. Al Qaeda is going to kill people anyway, and now that they're leader is dead, they're going to kill even more people out of anger and revenge. If we had treated him as a criminal and then made him suffer, then that might have been demoralizing for them. What's more demoralizing: seeing Jesus, which Osama was equivalent to in their eyes, geting killed or seeing Jesus be tortured slowly and kept alive just enough to not die from the pain?
I think the later.
And then we'd let Bin Laden live after he's been equally punished for all of the pain he's caused the good and the innocent.
I agree with you that part of his argument doesn't make any sense. Also the idea that we would use Osama Bin laden as counter-hostage ultimately means we would either have to release him or have school children murdered. How is that preferable to just killing Osama on sight?
It was actually a random comment. I said below that it was irrelevent because I was intentionally being silly. My actual point stands with everything else I said.
And I downvoted because I like having fun. :3 It's just an argument, so there's nothing to get upset about. It has nothing to do with self-gratification and trying to win a pointless argument, I just like giggling when I pretend to be a troll. ;3
If you responded to my argument you must have forgot to hit the submit button, or perhaps your response got eaten by internet fairies. For I see no such response.
I'm not upset, but as a general rule, the people who downvote me without comment tend to have nothing better to contribute due to their inability to form a coherent argument. You, on the other hand, seem to be an intelligent individual with whom I generally agree on issues.
You are the first person I have ever called out for such an act, because I actually suspect we could have a good discussion...
Firefox accidentally does that sometimes, I suppose.
My reply to your argument, was, in summery, I don't think we should adhere to how the extremist Muslim world feels. They aren't even Muslims, because real Muslims don't kill people. They're going to kill people no matter what we do, so what I believe is that we should do what's right, I.E., make Bin Laden suffer for his actions and let him naturally die of kidney failure when we're done with him.
Then again, it's been awhile in my mind since I replied, so I may have been off in the summery and my memory of your argument. Oh well.
Thank you for the compliment. I'd say the same for you, but I choose not to judge people by a few comments I noticed. I'm saying I think you're dumb, but I've met a lot of people who were polite and used fansy words, only to loose their frickin minds when they stated their opinions.
I'm sure you're not that way though. Surprises though are not something I like. ( braces self )
They aren't even Muslims, because real Muslims don't kill people.
Hence, why the real Muslims are not our enemy, despite what Republican pundits would like us to believe. The people OBL represented however, are. When we "adhere" to how the extremist Muslim world feels, we are doing so due to an understanding of cause and effect. They will kill and threaten us no matter what, you are right. In that context, however, whatever action appears to have the least negative repercussions is the one we should aim for. Of course, the prognosticatory skills of our politicians and military leaders is suspect, but they do what they can with what they have to work with.
make Bin Laden suffer for his actions and let him naturally die of kidney failure when we're done with him.
As I said in my original comment, I am opposed to the death penalty. But if he had been tried, he would have received it anyway. And your "make him suffer" stance may have earned us as much enmity from the rest of the world as killing him without trial has. The difference being that he would still have been a bargaining chip while alive, but one of little value to us and potential excessive loss of life may have ensued. Lose-lose-lose was what the situation was. At least by removing him from the picture, the families of 911 victims can obtain a sense of closure.
You make a good point. I have an equally good point floating around in my head, but I'm so tired that I can't mass all of the letters and words into a set of coherent, logical thoughts. Forgive me.
You are forgiven. And I do not expect anyone to concede, simply to listen. If your equally good point manifests in the near future, feel free to provide. Good evening, sir.
They would kill those children anyway. In general, Osama is not a criminal. We was just a criminal in they eyes of lots of people. To Al Qaeda, he was a hero. So what is he, criminal or not? He is both, or neither.
He was a monster from every angle. Islam forbids what he did like every other religion which condems killing of innocent people. The problem is not with Islam but with countries like Pakistan , taliban which support them. It doesn't matter from which community you belong or which purpose you show behind your henious acts.There is no justification for wrong no matter how many are following you. Truth stands tall all alone but evil has to end with all the numbers supporting it.
Personally, I am opposed to the death penalty, but I didn't exactly shed a tear when we took him out either. And we would have killed him either way.
The fact is, no matter what we did to him, it would have had reprecussions in the extremist Muslim world. Try him? I think you're right, hostages may have been taken. Kill him. He becomes a martyr and his followers plan to attack us (which, of course, they would have done anyway.) Let him live and be free, and he keeps putting out those hateful "kill the Western infidels" videos and whatnot.
So we did the one that ended his active threat the quickest, as well as one that increased our country's morale. A no-win scenario, but probably the best course of action.
