So... was bin Laden shot because he resisted — the official story — or because a live, captured bin Laden would have torn the Obama administration apart?The background to this is a question California Congressman Dan Lungren asked Attorney General Eric Holder during testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.
“That’s a hypothetical. I’m not sure it’s particularly relevant,” Holder said in response to a question from Rep. Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)....I would have liked to have had the full seven days of enjoying the fact that al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is no longer with us. Seven days before we started the Hot Wash. But, the Press must be satisfied.
“I think it’s fair to ask, since you opposed a military trial for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, whether you would have opposed a military trial for Osama bin Laden,” Lungren said.
Again declining to answer, Holder said that his position on military tribunals has often been mischaracterized. He noted that, on the same day in November 2009 that he announced a civilian trial for Mohammed, he announced that five other detainees would get military trials.
Any thoughts on this moment us question? Voting "Present" is acceptable in this case.
Regards — Cliff
2 comments:
History does not flatter those making an example of their enemies (heads on pikes and all) and it does not endorse the effectiveness of kid gloves either. Like burying/dumping the body at sea, there will be plenty of rhetorical rationalizations for it, but the realpolitik version will always be there behind it. Let's face it--things are simpler and safer with the man dead and literally gone.
I imagined for the briefest of moments that human nature could certainly lead an attacker to pull a hot-headed trigger, but then of course I realized that discipline and fidelity among Team 6 must be far beyond such things, and so unlikely as to make such a thought more humorous than anything else. No, there is no question in my mind--the decision to kill was premeditated, and chosen by "the decider".
I do reject, however, the partisan jab about a live Bin Laden tearing the administration apart. I think the administration would have been far better behaved than the rest of the country, not to mention the rest of the world.
An alive bin Laden would be a world class freak show and far more trouble than the intel he could provide.
That said, I've been in war. I have had my selector switched to fire twice in the short time we occupied Iraq in 1991.
The first time was guarding the Battalion surgeon against a slightly wounded Iraqi POW. I was told by a green beret that this POW was "high speed," so I did not want to take any chances that he may get bold after a shot of morphine. I looked him in the eye, showed him the weapon on "Fire" and then pointed it at his chest. Mr. "High Speed" likely lived to kill another day. I turned him over with so others, to the Brigade Intel Section.
The 2nd time was an unmarked vehicle coming down a road we were near. By the ROE, I could have lit him up. But, there was a slight chance it was friendlies who didn't have a panel marker and, more importantly, it posed no threat to me or mine. So off they went, with a wave by me.
I tell you this because, in those moments, I was judge, jury and executioner. Just as "Team Six" was on Sunday.
That is war.
Post a Comment