Revenge or Justice?
Revenge or justice? That was the question posed by gentle 
ACertainDoeBear. I think the answer to the question is "no": Neither revenge nor justice would be the proper motive here.
Here's how she put it, in part, and my response. (Her full comment is visible here. ACDB, I hope you'll forgive my reusing an answer and featuring your question. I intend no criticism, and found your comment thought-provoking.):from the Pondering-Peace-Dept.
I'm still trying to decide which interpretation I like better, revenge or justice? I can find evidence for both and both emotionally resonate for me...
Usama bin Ladin declared war upon the US, and followed this up with a series of attacks taking thousands of lives. The military losses are unfortunate, but part of the nature of such wars. The intentional targeting of civilians moves this into a different realm.
Usama bin Ladin, military commander of forces arrayed against us and who was responsible for the deaths of more than a dozen innocents in Morocco just three days before, was taken out as part of a military operation. It is unfortunate, but there is no doubt that we treated him fairly. Nor can there be any doubt that he would have tortured to death any Americans he could reach, unless they were worth more ransomed than the fun of sawing them apart. Both have happened to innocent civilians on a regular basis at his quite-public command.
Usama bin Ladin was not killed because "his behaviors didn't fit" -- he was killed because he attacked and killed, including innocents, and promised to keep doing so.
We can end all wars tomorrow. Simply surrender. I don't like that option.
Ideally, we should be strong and known to be strong, possessed of implacable resolve and known for it, and possessed of impeccable fairness. Most who would attack us would not try under those circumstances, and the strength would not be used.
The only problem with this is that UbL made it abundantly clear that if the US military was too hard a target, he'd kill innocents -- even Muslims local to him -- until he got his way.
Under those circumstances, helping him on his way -- to whatever sort of Hell he believed in -- was a reasonable course of action.
Obama is, to a certain extent, corrupt; it is a great pity how common this is. Perhaps even worse, it seems to me, his own ideals are bad ideas for the country in many cases. But in this instance, though there were problems in execution, he did the correct thing.
Many people are talking about "justice" or "revenge" or even "closure" -- but the reality is that Usama bin Mohammed bin Ladin was a military casualty of the war he started and prosecuted so vigorously.
The war goes on -- but he will do no further damage. And the process has exposed to the jihadists that their own infrastructure is compromised. (That exposure is one of the "problems in execution" I mentioned.) It will make the other Muslim Brotherhood factions cautious, and Zawahiri and the rest of al Qaida likely to be circumspect for a while.
They are quite happy to send brainwashed pawns to their doom -- but rather less inclined to be martyrs themselves. They respect effective force arrayed against them, as we've repeatedly seen.
===|==============/ Level Head
ACertainDoeBear. I think the answer to the question is "no": Neither revenge nor justice would be the proper motive here.
Here's how she put it, in part, and my response. (Her full comment is visible here. ACDB, I hope you'll forgive my reusing an answer and featuring your question. I intend no criticism, and found your comment thought-provoking.):from the Pondering-Peace-Dept.
I'm still trying to decide which interpretation I like better, revenge or justice? I can find evidence for both and both emotionally resonate for me...
Usama bin Ladin declared war upon the US, and followed this up with a series of attacks taking thousands of lives. The military losses are unfortunate, but part of the nature of such wars. The intentional targeting of civilians moves this into a different realm.
Usama bin Ladin, military commander of forces arrayed against us and who was responsible for the deaths of more than a dozen innocents in Morocco just three days before, was taken out as part of a military operation. It is unfortunate, but there is no doubt that we treated him fairly. Nor can there be any doubt that he would have tortured to death any Americans he could reach, unless they were worth more ransomed than the fun of sawing them apart. Both have happened to innocent civilians on a regular basis at his quite-public command.
Usama bin Ladin was not killed because "his behaviors didn't fit" -- he was killed because he attacked and killed, including innocents, and promised to keep doing so.
We can end all wars tomorrow. Simply surrender. I don't like that option.
Ideally, we should be strong and known to be strong, possessed of implacable resolve and known for it, and possessed of impeccable fairness. Most who would attack us would not try under those circumstances, and the strength would not be used.
The only problem with this is that UbL made it abundantly clear that if the US military was too hard a target, he'd kill innocents -- even Muslims local to him -- until he got his way.
Under those circumstances, helping him on his way -- to whatever sort of Hell he believed in -- was a reasonable course of action.
Obama is, to a certain extent, corrupt; it is a great pity how common this is. Perhaps even worse, it seems to me, his own ideals are bad ideas for the country in many cases. But in this instance, though there were problems in execution, he did the correct thing.
Many people are talking about "justice" or "revenge" or even "closure" -- but the reality is that Usama bin Mohammed bin Ladin was a military casualty of the war he started and prosecuted so vigorously.
The war goes on -- but he will do no further damage. And the process has exposed to the jihadists that their own infrastructure is compromised. (That exposure is one of the "problems in execution" I mentioned.) It will make the other Muslim Brotherhood factions cautious, and Zawahiri and the rest of al Qaida likely to be circumspect for a while.
They are quite happy to send brainwashed pawns to their doom -- but rather less inclined to be martyrs themselves. They respect effective force arrayed against them, as we've repeatedly seen.
===|==============/ Level Head