I've been following this exchange and I find it interesting.  I wish tempers didn't rise, as there's some good stuff going on.  But some observations I think have been missed.

1.  You can't have your cake and eat it.  You can't argue that killing OBL is justified because as a member of Al Qaeda he's an enemy combatant, and at the same time detain suspected members of Al Qaeda and the Taleban at Gitmo without granting them POW status.  Either you are at war or you aren't, simple as that; you can't hop to and fro as suits you best.  If you accept that you're at war, it also grants the enemy rights under the Geneva convention.  Thus far the US has not wanted that, so arguing with that point in mind is a bit weak, really.

2.  If you accept that killing an enemy "military leader" in his home is an act of war, and thus acceptable, you open up your defences.  Under that presumption, any attempt on the life of the US commander-in-chief, for example, is justified.  Any roadside bombing on British and American forces is justified as an act of war.  Civilian casualties - even on your home turf - can be considered unfortunate blunders in an on-going armed conflict.  The rules of war require reciprocality, and you do not want that with this enemy.

3.  There are very few countries that accept pre-emptive strikes of any kind as national sef-defence, as has been apparently claimed in this case.  Furthermore, if you declare your intention to avenge an act of terror, and after 10 years find the person presumably responsible, it's a bit cheeky to claim self-defence.  If your first public announcement of the fact goes on and on about justice being served, it's outright ridiculous to even mention national security.  Monsieur de Robespierre was correct a few pages back: the US did what it did because it can, and justifies itself in any way it pleases; or not.

All in all, the premise of this thread is correct.  It's problematic to accept you're at war, and if you aren't the rule of law should apply.  As was said back there, it should be universal.  Even those who commit atrocities have certain inalienable rights; it's what makes Western Civilization great.  Sanctimonious or not.

Last edited by Sammy Ambrose (2011-05-06 01:53:18)

The Russkies have got them on the run too:

http://www.channel4.com/news/chechnyas-bin-laden-killed-by-russian-troops