A reaction to bin Laden

When President Obama gave the order for the Seal team to infiltrate bin Laden's compound, there was a directive for him not to be taken alive. The mission was successful, and we are rightfully relieved that he has been found. However, there are three main discussions that have resulted.

First is the question as to whether bin Laden should have been killed. My opinion is no. America believes that it adheres to higher moral standards, and this should be demonstrated through a repudiation of execution and violence. Bin Laden could have been captured. While it would have required a more delicate extraction, it could have been accomplished. The result would have seen a terrorist and mass-murdered stand public trial. It would have sent shock-waves through the extremist community about the values of the West. For the rest of the world, it would have contributed to restoring the American reputation dismantled by George Bush. The Israelis did not kill Adolf Eichmann, a man responsible for the death of millions of Jews during the Holocaust. Instead, he was given a trial and was held accountable for his crimes against humanity and morality. America should have done the same for bin Laden.

Second, there has been the discussion as to whether torture helped in finding bin Laden. This is absurd. Putting aside the moral argument that torture is unethical, we should stress that it also doesn't work. Khalid Sheik Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times and revealed no relevant information. In fact, he gave falsified information that set the Americans in the wrong directions. John McCain, a Republican, argues that torture is ineffective. Seeing as he was tortured during the Vietnam War, it doesn't seem too intelligent to dispute him on the fact. Leon Panetta, the CIA Chief, reported that the information to find bin Laden (the parts found before Obama took office) could have possibly been found by another method. In the end, we have a policy that undermines our reputation and alienates the informers that are vital to retrieving information. Torture simply isn't the most effective method, and this is all without mentioning that it is morally abhorrent and reduces us to a lower ethical standard.

The last and least philosophical is whether it was legal to conduct this operation in Pakistan, as it breached sovereignty. While conducting a military operation in a sovereign country can be considered an act of war, or at least an act of aggression, we should not expect the Pakistani government to respond harshly. Al Qeada was denounced by the Pakistani government as a terrorist group, and it has since received nearly $20 billion from the Americans to help eradicate the members of the terrorist group still within its borders. It will miss the money more that anything else, as well as the pretense that it sided with the Americans. This argument will be hard to justify now, an argument supported by Richard Clarke, the counter-terrorism czar of the Clinton administration. However, while the trust relationship has been damaged, we should not expect Obama to declare war. It is a reminder that our allies in the region are at best untrustworthy, and that we should consider removing all troops that are still fighting, leaving only those serving to train the people of Afghanistan and Iraq.