We had time for due process for the perpetrators of the Holocaust.

[originalpckelly]

They killed millions of Jews and other minorities in their country.

If we could do it for them, why not Osama?

I know: revenge.

[Drale]

1. Plenty of Nazi's where killed trying to evade or escape

They where not all captured and even of the ones that where some of the killed themselves in prison.

[Distant Observer]

2. They were not FORMER AGENTS of our government.

[SidDithers]

7. ROFL...

:rofl:

Sid

[originalpckelly]

11. So we didn't support the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan?

That's a nice rewriting of history there. It makes it all look so innocent, when in reality, the real history shows what's really wrong here.

[roamer65]

56. Tim Osman.

Look it up.

[JVS]

63. Some would even become future agents of our government!

[SidDithers]

3. We engaged in a World War to capture them...

You'd prefer that?

Sid

[originalpckelly]

6. So then, what's Afghanistan?

[SidDithers]

10. Not a World War...nt

Sid

[originalpckelly]

18. So let me get this right...

you are more justified in giving someone due process if they do something worse than 9/11, like start a war that kills 60+ million people or systematically exterminate Jews, but not if you help organize an act of terror?

Wasn't WWII, if you had to make a judgment, worse than 9/11? Are you really implying that the deaths of 500,000+ Americans was somehow outweighed by 3,000+?

That's insane. And it's clear why you'd say it: hatred and the illogic is causes.

[SidDithers]

59. You've got nothing right...

Sid

[whatchamacallit]

16. LOL, back to school for Sid! (nt)

[TwilightGardener]

4. Did they surrender? Was the war over, or were they still devising ways to attack and kill?

[liberal N proud]

5. The perpetrators of the holocaust were not known as potential suicide bombers

Take no chances when dealing with an organization that uses suicide bombers to perpetrate their attacks.

[phleshdef]

8. We had time to shoot and kill many of them in the heat of battle too.

Red herring.

[atreides1]

17. Yes

We...you must be a WWII vet?

[phleshdef]

37. Don't play dumb. We always say "we" when we refer to actions by our country's military.

You know that as well as I do and you aren't fooling anyone by pretending not to. Ignoring your own common sense to express some grievance with my phrasing isn't going to advance any arguments.

[gratuitous]

9. Would. You. Be. Quiet?

God damn it, what's it going to take for you to just shut your mouth and wave your flag?

While this post is not made seriously, don't be shocked when a variation of it shows up.

[SpartanDem]

12. And killed plenty of them without a trial

[WinkyDink]

48. I believe the OP refers to the LEADERSHIP, as in : Nuremburg trials.

[seabeyond]

13. not a matter of revenge. but why dont you ignore what people say and appoint motive for them

because it really does not matter a persons reasoning, you have your position

[liberalpragmatist]

14. You really ought to read up on the history of the Nuremberg Trials

They were mostly show trials, involved lots of horse-trading with the Soviets, and let most mid-level functionaries off the hook where they went on to serve in the bureaucracy and government of postwar states.

Oh, and plenty of them were shot and killed in battle or, in some cases, executed.

[anneboleyn]

23. Amen. The film is a brilliant exploration of this issue, especially the show nature of the trial.

[Modern_Matthew]

15. Good thing we didn't make the same mistake. nt

[MichiganVote]

19. Short answer: He was shot. Dead. By a trained Navy Seal. And you are???

[whatchamacallit]

20. Booyah!

:puke: what happened to this place?

[MichiganVote]

28. Too many whacks.

[whatchamacallit]

35. eh... I didn't think I'd need the sarcasm thingy (nt)

[JVS]

39. LOL!

[MichiganVote]

45. Sorry too busy to respond to the 10 or so responses you have made to me tonight. Kisses!

[JVS]

21. Mossad seems to be able to get their men alive.

[MichiganVote]

27. No problem. When their populace is massacred Mossad can make that call. Here? No standing.

[joe_sixpack]

68. Not the best example

If you recall how they dealt with the Munich situation.

[JVS]

69. I'm thinking more along the lines of Eichmann.

Which is a more similar situation to that of Bin Laden.

[girl gone mad]

26. Someone who chose not to be cannon fodder for the empire.

:shrug:

[MichiganVote]

30. Good. Probably wouldn't have made it anyway. Choose another path grasshopper.

[Liberal Veteran]

42. That smacks of disrespect for generations of people who sacrificed for you to have that choice.

I'm sure that I am misunderstanding you.

[Drunken Irishman]

22. Are you saying the U.S. government wouldn't have shot and killed Hitler if they had the chance?

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Drunken Irishman]

29. You're the one who started the comparison by bringing up WWII...

So are you that nuts and outrageous that you'd compare these events to that of WWII?

[originalpckelly]

36. I am trying to show...

that a more heinous, more grievous wounding of the world received far more due process than is now being given.

If a man is not armed, then you can take him into custody.
If you call in a bombing or a cruise missile, there is no knowledge of the combatant's weaponry.

[Drunken Irishman]

44. My point stands...

Had American forces had a chance to assassinate Hitler, they would have.

THIS is not comparing bin Laden's actions to that of Hitler, of course. Had Hitler been responsible for only 3,000 deaths, I'd still feel the same way.

Some people just deserve to get their brains blown out like that.

[Wait Wut]

47. That old question, "If you could go back in time...

...and face Hitler before he killed millions, what would you do?"

Shoot him in the head. Without hesitation.


Next question?

"If you could go back in time and face Osama before 9/11, what would you do?"

Shoot him in the head. Without hesitation.

[originalpckelly]

49. I would give him paints, brushes, a canvass, and pay for him to learn more about art.

Why kill someone when you can simply prevent them from doing it?

[originalpckelly]

52. This was one cute little kid:

If only the world had taken better care of him. Perhaps he was sick and could not be saved, but then again what is to be said of the rest of the world that engaged in the war? One man did not kill 60 million people.

[TK421]

66. anyone who keeps their hairstyle the same from birth should be bombed in a shelter n/t

[Wait Wut]

60. Okay, that was cute.

But, no. You couldn't convince him, either "him".

Some folks in this world, such as yourself, don't understand hatred of a people. Whether that hatred comes from race, religion or eye color. It exists, unfortunately, and the only cure is children. But, we aren't allowed to tell parents how to teach their children tolerance and peace so there will always be a Hitler or bin Laden to screw things up for the rest of the world. Look at our own racists. Look at the hatred and bigotry and intolerance they preach to their children. I don't understand it, you don't, most of us here don't. To them, it's normal.

I understand your wishes. I just can't support them ideologically. Not in my lifetime. But, it doesn't mean that I don't work towards that goal.

[originalpckelly]

62. There will always be Hitlers and Bin Ladens, but do members of our species have to follow them?

That is the real question.

Alone, Hitler or Bin Laden wouldn't be able to kill 3,000 or the millions that died during WWII.

But you fail to see that.

[originalpckelly]

65. And here lies the real problem:

"I understand your wishes. I just can't support them ideologically. Not in my lifetime. But, it doesn't mean that I don't work towards that goal."

If you don't support those wishes, you can't work towards that goal.

[Wait Wut]

70. How very pessimistic of you.

I'm responding to both comments with this one.

You want things to change overnite. I see that as unrealistic and impossible, therefore, I cannot support your goal. I see things that can be changed over time and will promote things that work towards those goals...realistically. I promise you that I have been working towards these goals throughout most of my life. Probably a good 30+ years. You saying I "can't" is an opinion that I've already proven wrong over those years. Yes, I can. I can work to make this a better world without putting myself in a state of denial.

______________

I don't fail to see anything. They weren't alone. Hitler was pretty damned popular in Germany and bin Laden had his own following. What you fail to see is that we can't change human conditioning overnight. Going back in time and being super nice to either of them and handing them some art supplies wouldn't have changed a damned thing. Your Utopian view of things is pleasant, but unrealistic. Besides dealing with truly evil people in this world, there are also people with genuine mental illnesses that can not understand right from wrong, can not experience compassion. It would be impossible to know where these people would come from, how much charisma they have and what steps we would need to take to prevent them from becoming another tragic note in history. Sure, we can just hug everyone and make them all feel good, right? Wrong. Tell that to the victims of Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer, etc. There was no real compassion there. They were amazing actors, however.

The only option we have is to make small steps forward. Improving education, reducing crime, improving healthcare and mental healthcare and working with other countries so they do the same. Being blind to reality is not going to make the world a better place. Look, I've been in your position and I fell hard. The beliefs and actions in my life didn't seem to make a damned bit of difference. Now, I'm back. I'm doing the same things, but have a more realistic attitude. Progress is a series of steps and very seldom one action. Yes, people will die. Wars will happen. Injustices will be inflicted. But, I will forever promote the death of one man if it will save one child. I will forever have hope for

Geez. Sorry this was so long.

[dairydog91]

25. Just like when US forces first encountered the 12th SS in Normandy during 1944!

When the GIs made contact, they politely asked them to lay down their weapons, Mirandized them, and got warrants to search their ammo depots.

[originalpckelly]

31. "lay down their weapons"

They could have done that to Osama, but he wasn't armed.

[dairydog91]

34. You are aware that this was a war situation, right?

When you see a general, or a terrorist leader, or any major value figure, shooting immediately is a good option. Capture is a cherry on top, but absolute priority is to ensure that they do not escape. In Osama's case, it also avoids the risk of him blowing himself up and taking a few SEALS with him, which would definitely secure him ubermartyr status.

[Liberal Veteran]

32. And if it takes the deaths of 50 to 70 million people to pull it off?

Think what you are suggesting.

That's the estimate of how many people died as a result of WW2.

Do you really want to go there?

[elleng]

33. Because WWII was over; OBL's terror is not.

[Amonester]

51. BINGO (unfortunately)

I mean, how is that simple 'notion' to comprehend so difficult to understand HERE is beyond me...

[elleng]

67. Dunno, Amon.

Thanks

[Ohio Joe]

38. Do you really think...

Any GI would not have shot hitler where he stood?

[originalpckelly]

40. If they had orders not to.

Can you imagine trying that bastard, and making him listen to every single detail of everything that you could include in a trial?

The due process for these kinds of people is not guilt v. innocence, but a thorough explanation of the historical record, making them own it, and letting the world know that you're not a brutal nation. That you hold moral superiority to the defeated enemy.

[dairydog91]

43. "letting the world know that you're not a brutal nation."

I'm sure a Nagasaki mother whose melted baby was fused into her arms would disagree.

[originalpckelly]

46. Or the children of any other place who have suffered at the hands of our empire.

If there was true justice, they would have done the same thing to the allies.

This is why we need a world government to oversee the various nations.

[JVS]

41. Soviet orders to the troops in the area were to attempt to get him alive.

SMERSH was given the task of attempting this. I'm sure they'd have just blown off the order though, because Stalin was no stickler for being obeyed.

[DevonRex]

50. How many were killed and were never tried?

[MadHound]

53. Hell, we went beyond that, well beyond that

Many of those perpetrators of the Holocaust we didn't even try. Rather, we welcomed them into this country, gave them positions of power, honored them, and allowed them to shape this country.

[joe_sixpack]

54. That was after they had surrendered unconditionally

and their armies had agreed to stop fighting. Bin Laden and those he led, financed and supported, have yet to do that.

[apocalypsehow]

55. Ridiculous on its face. Do you imagine for a second that if Hitler had escaped to a country that was

harboring him, and that country refused to cooperate in putting him into our custody, that the Allies wouldn't have "taken him out" in the exact manner we did Bin Laden?

[LanternWaste]

57. Because the Nazi's surrendered?

If we could do it for them, why not Osama"

Because the Nazi's surrendered? :shrug:

[ProSense]

58. Having a hard time dealing with bin Laden's death? n/t

[originalpckelly]

61. Yes, because everyone knows that gay atheists and fundamentalist terrorists...

are in league with one another.

[ProSense]

64. You should have included that in the OP

for clarity.