Greenwald: Killing of bin Laden: What are the consequences?

[tekisui]

Source: Salon

The killing of Osama bin Laden is one of those events which, especially in the immediate aftermath, is not susceptible to reasoned discussion. It's already a Litmus Test event: all Decent People -- by definition -- express unadulterated ecstacy at his death, and all Good Americans chant "USA! USA!" in a celebration of this proof of our national greatness and Goodness (and that of our President). Nothing that deviates from that emotional script will be heard, other than by those on the lookout for heretics to hold up and punish. Prematurely interrupting a national emotional consensus with unwanted rational truths accomplishes nothing but harming the heretic (ask Bill Maher about how that works).

I'd have strongly preferred that Osama bin Laden be captured rather than killed so that he could be tried for his crimes and punished in accordance with due process (and to obtain presumably ample intelligence). But if he in fact used force to resist capture, then the U.S. military was entitled to use force against him, the way American police routinely do against suspects who use violence to resist capture. But those are legalities and they will be ignored even more so than usual. The 9/11 attack was a heinous and wanton slaughter of thousands of innocent civilians, and it's understandable that people are reacting with glee over the death of the person responsible for it. I personally don't derive joy or an impulse to chant boastfully at the news that someone just got two bullets put in their skull -- no matter who that someone is -- but that reaction is inevitable: it's the classic case of raucously cheering in a movie theater when the dastardly villain finally gets his due.

But beyond the emotional fulfillment that comes from vengeance and retributive justice, there are two points worth considering. The first is the question of what, if anything, is going to change as a result of the two bullets in Osama bin Laden's head? Are we going to fight fewer wars or end the ones we've started? Are we going to see a restoration of some of the civil liberties which have been eroded at the alter of this scary Villain Mastermind? Is the War on Terror over? Are we Safer now?

Those are rhetorical questions. None of those things will happen. If anything, I can much more easily envision the reverse. Whenever America uses violence in a way that makes its citizens cheer, beam with nationalistic pride, and rally around their leader, more violence is typically guaranteed. Futile decade-long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan may temporarily dampen the nationalistic enthusiasm for war, but two shots to the head of Osama bin Laden -- and the We are Great and Good proclamations it engenders -- can easily rejuvenate that war love. One can already detect the stench of that in how Pakistan is being talked about: did they harbor bin Laden as it seems and, if so, what price should they pay? We're feeling good and strong about ourselves again -- and righteous -- and that's often the fertile ground for more, not less, aggression.

more: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/05/02/bin_laden

[Broderick]

1. yep n/t

[Solly Mack]

2. K&R

[Angry Dragon]

3. Perhaps time to step back and think of where this country is going

[Poll_Blind]

4. Recommended.

PB

[ProSense]

5. Oh brother

Whenever America uses violence in a way that makes its citizens cheer, beam with nationalistic pride, and rally around their leader, more violence is typically guaranteed. Futile decade-long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan may temporarily dampen the nationalistic enthusiasm for war, but two shots to the head of Osama bin Laden...

Thanks for the RW fear mongering. The same thing happened at the end of WWII

Does Greenwald believe that capturing bin Laden would have resulted in less anger by his followers? Or does he believe bin Laden should have just been left in peace?

Ludicrous!

[elias49]

7. Greenwald? Don't know. Me? Capture & trial would have been better.

IMO.

[ProSense]

22. That doesn't answer the question.

Would capturing bin Laden have resulted in less anger by his followers?

Try him, convict him, and then what: life in prison or execution?

They would have be determined to try to free him, to attack. Where would he be sent? What if he escaped?

[elias49]

32. Your concerns don't persuade.

Send him to Guantanamo, I suppose. Can't imagine how his followers would get to Cuba, sneak up on the prison, break in, break him out.
I dunno. Violent and dangerous men rarely escape max security...that's what it's all about!

[ProSense]

33. Hmmm?

"Send him to Guantanamo, I suppose. Can't imagine how his followers would get to Cuba, sneak up on the prison, break in, break him out."

Still doesn't address the question: Would his followers be less angry?

[tekisui]

10. Don't try to compare this to the end of WWII

That brought the troops home, out of harms way and ended the hostilities around the globe.

It really isn't comparable. I am glad that we got bin Laden. I sincerely hope that Obama uses this as a turning point in bringing all of our wars to an end. However, I except they will continue through at least his first term.

[originalpckelly]

16. No, they didn't.

I seem to remember that the developments from that war directly caused the worst terrors of the next 40 years.

[tekisui]

17. Excellent point.

[elias49]

21. I'm not comparing to WWII

Never crossed my mind.
But I truly believe whatever 'closure' is possible would have been better facilitated by seeing the man, imprisoning the man, talking through the whole stupid 10-year mess.
This James Bond assassination shit is just that...made for TV, jingoistic crap.

[tekisui]

23. That is how I feel as well.

It also sets a precedent. We assassinated Gaddafi's son and bin Laden in the same week.

We will become numb and accepting of routine targeted assassinations.

[originalpckelly]

14. WWII worked out real well for us.

One of our allies became our enemy in the next war: the Cold War.
And when we saw an opportunity to bring the USSR down, we used Muslim extremists to do it.
And then they became our enemy in the next war: the War on Terrorism (TM).

[closeupready]

18. Completely agree. OBL picked a fight with us, and lost.

End of story.

[RaleighNCDUer]

28. You do understand that the end of WWII

was at the END of WW II.

What's ended here?

Did people dance in the streets when Rommel or Yamamoto were killed?

Making a martyr of bin Laden only enhances his stature. Arresting, trying and imprisoning him - as we did with the 'Blind Cleric' would show the world that we are a nation of law, and undercut the ideology behind bin Laden.

How is presenting him to the world as a martyr better than presenting him to the world as a criminal thug?

[ProSense]

31. Did Americans cheer?

I have a memory. I didn't forget the cold war and I'm not in denial about the events of the past half century.

The fact that Greenwald is trotting this out to make his bogus fear mongering point about Americans being happy bin Laden is dead doesn't change the fact that this is typically how Americans react to the news that something bad has come to an end.

"How is presenting him to the world as a martyr better than presenting him to the world as a criminal thug?"

Yeah, that applies to his followers, the "world." Also, people around the world were unsure that bin Laden was a terrorist?

Under which scenario do you envision Osama's followers, those who would escalate attacks for capturing or killing bin Laden (even after a trial), would view him as a "criminal thug"?

[RaleighNCDUer]

34. Come on, you can do better than that.

You say that something has ended, but then YOU gin up the fear about continuing attacks by his followers. So what has ended? If the attacks would continue with him alive, or the attacks would continue with him dead, then why not take him alive?

"Did Americans cheer? I have a memory." That's nice - so what the fuck do you remember? Did people celebrate the deaths of enemy generals in the middle of the war, or did they say with some relief "one down, several million to go"? Did they act as if Rommel's death ended the war? Did they figure that it was just a matter of tying up loose ends when Yamamoto was shot down?

"Under which scenario do you envision Osama's followers, those who would escalate attacks for capturing or killing bin Laden (even after a trial), would view him as a "criminal thug"?"

As for "his followers" - the couple thousand who are Al Queda - they haven't been able to carry out significant attacks for years, while bin Laden was alive. What makes them such a threat now that he's dead? Frankly, we did the organization a favor by killing him - who generates more recruits, an ineffectual living leader or a mythical martyred one? His current followers are not going to change their minds either way - what we need to do is cut into their recruiting base. That organization can only survive if they get new recruits, and the example of him as a captured, humiliated felon - a criminal thug - would garner far fewer recruits than a martyr would, because a martyr doesn't have to live up to his own myth.

YOU are mythologizing bin Laden. Just the way the Bushies did to gin up support for their wars.

Whose side are you on?

[ProSense]

35. Hmmm?

"So what has ended?"

bin Laden!

"As for 'his followers' - the couple thousand who are Al Queda - they haven't been able to carry out significant attacks for years, while bin Laden was alive. What makes them such a threat now that he's dead? Frankly, we did the organization a favor by killing him - who generates more recruits, an ineffectual living leader or a mythical martyred one? "

So capturing him, trying him and convicting him would have made him less of a martyr? He is a more effective leader dead than alive?

Nonsense.

[WilliamPitt]

6. Nothing bad would happen if we arrested him.

Right?

Right?

[dionysus]

8. aw, douchewald's upset.

:cry:

[tekisui]

12. aw, attack the messenger.

:eyes:

[bobbolink]

9. "We're feeling good and strong about ourselves again -- and righteous -- and that's often the

fertile ground for more, not less, aggression."

Exactly.

Thanks for posting this. Not that it is likely many will hear.

[alcibiades_mystery]

11. The formula for writing Greenwald columns is simple

1) Select event during Obama administration
2) Show how it is bad
3) Imply alternative would have been better


After writing is completed, go say mantras at your homemade Hillary Clinton shrine.

What an assclown.

[LoZoccolo]

13. Glenn Greenwald: automatic unrecommend n/t

[snot]

15. Not sure I agree with everything here, but yes, it worries me that so many US citizens

cheer this death as if "in a movie theater when the dastardly villain finally gets his due."

(Edited to add: I for one am THANKFUL for Greenwald, one of few truly independent thinkers left in journalism.)

[tekisui]

19. That is my sentiment, as well.

I am glad they got him. I hope it marks a turning point to bring Obama's Wars to and end.

But, the cheering, bloodlust and death celebration is creepy in its jingoism.

[SidDithers]

20. Greenwald. LOL...

:thumbsdown:

Sid

[LoZoccolo]

24. Here's the link to contact the editors of Salon.

http://www.salon.com/about/letters/index.html

[LoZoccolo]

25. Yumbdy-dumbdy dibbity-dilly-dally.

[oberliner]

26. Very few people as clueless as this author

Virtually everything written in the first paragraph is simply not true.

I've seen a variety of different reactions from a variety of different people - including more than a few who think it is unseemly to celebrate any man's death.

This is a "litmus test event" only in the minds of people like Glenn Greenwald who look for that sort thing when it isn't there.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bobbie Jo]

27. Unrec.

[cliffordu]

30. One of the consequences is listening to Greenwald bloviate, but