Cost of killing Bin Laden will be huge

on May 4th, 2011

Al Qaeda, al Qaeda leader, Barack Obama, foreign policy, Hilary Clinton, Navy Seals, Navy Seals Team 6, Navy Seals Team Six, Obama foreign policy, Osama Bin Laden, terrorism, war crimes, war criminals

Yesterday, Shewach Weiss, former Israeli Ambassador to Poland, said that if he were an American he would not celebrate that much after Osama Bin Laden’s death as it was done in New York City and Washington D.C. Something more dangerous may be coming soon. I sort of agree with that and remain critical of how President Barack Obama handled the entire situation. Eliminating Bin Laden in a way it was done looks to me more like a desperate struggle to rebound in the polls before the upcoming 2012 election rather than a serious fight against terrorism.

Think about it. Why Bin Laden was killed and not captured? The bullet which a Navy Seal put into Bin Laden’s head destroyed the best and most important source of counter-terrorism information that ever existed on this planet. Wouldn’t you like to know what attacks on the U.S. and Europe are being currently prepared by Al-Qaeda? Wouldn’t extracting that information from Bin Laden tremendously help to destroy all existing plots and terrorist networks around the world? What is more important for you: feeling better after Bin Laden’s death or preventing additional thousands of Americans from dying in the forthcoming terrorist attacks by Al Qaeda? Now after Bin Laden’s brain was recklessly splashed on a wall, the U.S. and Europe will have to spend billions of dollars to gather intelligence information from other sources. We may only hope that they will do it in time to prevent more deaths of innocent people.

The White House confirmed that Bin Laden was weaponless and not defending himself when assaulted by the U.S. troops. We all know that he was a cripple who had serious health problems and couldn’t really defend himself in any physical fight (at least that’s what the FBI’s “Most Wanted” website was saying about him). Bin Laden’s 12 years old daughter who witnessed the entire raid testified that U.S. troops captured her father alive and then in front of her executed him by shooting in the head. At the same time, President Obama was watching the situation live in his decision room and did not reverse his order “shoot-to-kill”.

But what is my argument you will ask? Am I not happy that Bin Laden is dead? Well, I do feel emotional relief that the guy is out but from a practical perspective his death doesn’t really change that much. Do I feel more secure traveling through New York City? No, I don’t. Do I feel more secure riding on a subway? No, I don’t. To the contrary, I feel that the threat is even worse than before and definitely not buried at Sea with Bin Laden.

My problem is this: how can Barack Obama and the Democratic Party fight against rendition and water-boarding while George Bush is in office, but conduct extrajudicial killings when they take over the White House? Let me put it even more bluntly. The World War II criminals killed millions of people, including millions of Americans, and they were captured and put to trial in Nuremberg. Saddam Hussein, who killed hundreds of thousands of people was also captured and put to trial. So were much more dangerous than Bin Laden: Radovan Karadzic and Slobodan Milosevic. Nevertheless with Bin Laden the White House decided differently: the guy had to be eliminated because trials are not for the Bin Ladens of the world.

I was really bewildered when I heard attorney Barack Obama and then attorney Hilary Clinton announcing publicly that “justice has been done”. Really? Because I respectfully disagree. What separates civilized nations from savages is the rule of law, that’s why we put on trial the worst criminals ever, including Hussein, Milosevic and others. We just don’t take a weapon and conduct an extrajudicial death penalty by putting a bullet in somebody’s head. Something like that is not justice, it is medieval-style revenge: eye for an eye.

President Obama needed to have at least one achievement before the upcoming 2012 elections and he finally got it. He failed in job creation in the U.S., he failed in the health care reform which is criticized even by top Democratic lawyers as unconstitutional and he failed to show leadership in many different security crises around the world. But at least he succeeded in killing Bin Laden (please do not confuse it with succeeding in the war on terror). Now he has something to sell to the American voters….

@SebastianAulich