Dead on. I agree completely with all of this. As I said to others "Good riddance to bad rubbish." Osama Bin Laden didn't give a shit about anyone, not the United States, not the Afghan people (by using the Taliban as his shield he ensured an invasion, and then as we invaded he ran to Pakistan), and not only his own sons and daughters who when they came of age he urged to become suicide bombers. As Alfred says of such types of irredeemable people: "Some men just want to watch the world burn."
Wow, those are facepalmingly astounding, even by the low, low standards of the blogosphere. Like all events, large and small, this is yet one more that can evolve into an opportunity for genuine insight (a la Tongodeon) or devolve into self-congratulatory, echo-chamber Rorschach test.
BTW, clicked on the link, and the guy retracted and apologized for his previous statement. Have to give him credit for taking responsibility for his words.
I do not regret that he was killed instead of brought to trial, not at all, because I think every single thing about trying to bring him to trial would have been worse than the expedient termination of his existence
( ... )
I'm torn on this; your individual bullet points are true, but I think it's important to stick to our principles even when it's inconvenient.
In the end, ObL was a human being, not a virus, and responsible for the deaths of thousands, not of millions. Do you feel the same way about other trials for parties to genocide? Nazis at Nuremberg? Saddam Hussein? Milošević?
I believe that principles are what allow the world to improve tomorrow, but expedience is what allows the world to operate today, and I usually only debate theoreticals in the past when it's for the purpose of fiction entertainment.
Oh hold on - by "I do not regret that he was killed instead of brought to trial" do you mean that you won't lose sleep over it, or that this was your preferred outcome?
I was assuming the latter. If the former, cool, I'm actually there with you.
But if the latter, I don't think it's debating past theoreticals to ask what your preferred outcome was for genocides.
I think it's possible to be excited that there's one less big trouble maker without being excited that he died. If he'd been captured instead, or renounced his ways and checked himself into a mental institution, or died quietly in his sleep, it would be roughly the same set of positive results.
Also, an interesting dichotomy: Saddam Hussein surrendered when the Americans showed up and offered to make a deal. Bin Laden fought to the end. Hussein's life goal was to stay in power, and clinging to life is part of that. Bin Laden's life goal was inspiring people to fight for a particular ideal, and being alive isn't as critical part of that.
"Every instinct that is found in any man is in all men. The strength of the emotion may not be so overpowering, the barriers against possession not so insurmountable, the urge to accomplish the desire less keen. With some, inhibitions and urges may be neutralized by other tendencies. But with every being the primal emotions are there. All men have an emotion to kill; when they strongly dislike some one they involuntarily wish he was dead. I have never killed any one, but I have read some obituary notices with great satisfaction." - Clarence Darrow, "The Story Of My Life", chapter 10.
I said it was attributed to Twain and linked to the "unsourced possible fake" section of Wikiquote. I've actually developed a knee-jerk reaction to checking famous people's quotes because it's surprising how many are misattributed.
Comments 29
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
In the end, ObL was a human being, not a virus, and responsible for the deaths of thousands, not of millions. Do you feel the same way about other trials for parties to genocide? Nazis at Nuremberg? Saddam Hussein? Milošević?
Reply
Reply
I was assuming the latter. If the former, cool, I'm actually there with you.
But if the latter, I don't think it's debating past theoreticals to ask what your preferred outcome was for genocides.
Reply
Also, an interesting dichotomy: Saddam Hussein surrendered when the Americans showed up and offered to make a deal. Bin Laden fought to the end. Hussein's life goal was to stay in power, and clinging to life is part of that. Bin Laden's life goal was inspiring people to fight for a particular ideal, and being alive isn't as critical part of that.
Reply
"Every instinct that is found in any man is in all men. The strength of the emotion may not be so overpowering, the barriers against possession not so insurmountable, the urge to accomplish the desire less keen. With some, inhibitions and urges may be neutralized by other tendencies. But with every being the primal emotions are there. All men have an emotion to kill; when they strongly dislike some one they involuntarily wish he was dead. I have never killed any one, but I have read some obituary notices with great satisfaction." - Clarence Darrow, "The Story Of My Life", chapter 10.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment