Was it wrong to not let Osama's family bury him?
After Osama Bin Laden was killed. His body was recovred and sank in the ocean so as to not make a martyr out of him.
Dead he can't do any harm. If people want to avenge him, they don't need to dig his body up to do it.
Yes, it was wrong.
Side Score: 22
|
 |
No, it was justified.
Side Score: 12
|
|
|
|
|
2
points
In my description I kind of took a side because I really don't see how just letting him have a normal burial could be wrong. He's dead, he can't do any harm anymore. They say he was buried at sea so that his followers wouldn't rise up and make a martyr out of him, but the simple fact that he's dead gives them all the motive they'll need, and maybe more motive because they will never again be near the person they held so much faith in. Side: Yes, it was wrong.
I agree yes if they allowed his family to bury him it would run a risk of his followers having a shrine of sorts but if they want to avenge him they will whether he has a grave or not, if anything not allowing his family to bury him runs the risk of creating more militants, his followers could argue that he was right and the west have no respect for Muslims beliefs, it could also cause other members of his family to follow his route to avenge him. Side: Yes, it was wrong.
There's also the question as to whether we can trust that he's actually dead... Most likely he is, but what kind of elitist bullshit is it that we, the American people, aren't allowed to see the "pictures" of his corpse or the video him dying? Just a couple of well-liked reporters and politicians that we can all trust? Getting pretty tired of this Empire crap. Side: Yes, it was wrong.
2
points
2
points
1
point
Also true. There is so much the government doesn't tell us. Perhaps he was publicly buried so we would all see someone being put in the ocean, but they actually caught him, and are brainwashing him into being there head influencer. Maybe he already worked for him, and saying they killed him was a scapegoat to get Obama accepted. Side: Yes, it was wrong.
|
2
points
But the government didn't own his body. After a person in America dies, their family get's the remains if the person isn't a donor or sold to science. So it'd be fair to give the body to the family, rather than making a public statement that they won't be burying it. Also, we are often on opposing sides, I want you personally to know I have no bad blood with you and still value your opinion. Side: Yes, it was wrong.
1
point
He is already dead. There is no talking involved. You do not need a body to make a shrine. There are many religious people who build a shrine to Jesus in their homes. The mere fact that he is dead, what he stood for, and what he died for makes him a symbol so giving his body to his family to honor in death wouldn't have made a difference of that. Side: Yes, it was wrong.
3
points
You don't add to a debates point. He's a cunt. is not a valid argument, it's just a statement. Even if that was a statement adding to the point, you did't answer how. But that doesn't add to the point so I ask, how is him being a cunt justifiable reason for them to not let his family bury him? Side: Yes, it was wrong.
|
