I wish Obama would stop saying he was going to kill bin Laden...

[kentuck]

If he knows where he is once he is in office, then just quietly get the job done. There is no reason to say such a thing for the world to see and, in the process, give some maniac one more reason to attack our country or attempt to kill another of our leaders. He doesn't need to prove anything. The majority of people voted for him. They trust him to do the right thing. There is no need for such inflammatory language, in my humble opinion.

[Bobbieo]

1. It's not easy to kill a dead man!

[kentuck]

2. You may be right but....

I still think it is unnecessarily inflammatory. Why not capture him and put him on trial before the Hague for crimes against humanity?? Would that not prove that we are a moral leader??

[dorkulon]

3. America doesn't recognize the Hague.

In fact, the Pres has standing congressional authorization to bomb the Hague if they take any of our people in.

[madokie]

9. In your wildest dreams maybe

but in the real world dick and w are headed to The Hague, and that you can bank on.

[dorkulon]

12. Actually, in the real world, I'm right.

http://www.state.gov/t/us/rm/15158.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4456801,00.html

And if Bush or Cheney are ever held responsible for their crimes, I'll eat my hat.

[madokie]

14. my question after looking at the links provided

is how will you season that hat?

the dick will prolly drop long before he gets there but w will make the trip.

[dorkulon]

38. Whatever.

I imagine you think Obama and the Dems will recognize the International Criminal Court, and send Bush packing to the Hague for trial. Well, it seems unlikely to me, but I would gladly eat my hat raw were it so. But my point is this: You came at me like I didn't know what the hell I was talking about with that "wildest dreams" comment. Well, I DO know what I'm talking about. The U.S. does NOT recognize the ICC, and the president IS authorized by law to attack them if they take any American in. Only one of us is dreaming here, and it ain't me.

[madokie]

41. Best I remember we are a government of laws and not of men

Treaties are law and to undo a treaty it takes a 2/3 majority. Big dick and w are not, can not make laws that will stand that will allow them to break the law. sorry but thats the way it works. At some point in time they both will be having their day in court at The Hague.

[dorkulon]

52. 2/3 majority, huh?

House vote: 382-40, 11 not voting.
Senate vote: 99-0, 1 not voting.

Anything else?

[AntiLempa]

43. and I'll eat my boots after a long day of work!

Dorkulon is right. Obama won't change much as far as military intervention goes and he won't recognize the ICC.

[tavalon]

13. I so hope you are right

[madokie]

16. I will be. one does not destroy a country and kill no telling how many

estimated in the tens of thousands and walk away as free men/women. I put women in there cause kondi will be right there with them.

[tavalon]

20. I want to have that level of optimism but with all the respect I have for Obama

and I have come to have huge respect for him, I see a big problem with his determination to not dwell in the past, to be looking forward. Good sentiment but it's the kind of sentiment that allowed for not taking down the Nixon administration as well as those who were involved in the Iran Contra abomination. I worry that he will want to let it go and if the President doesn't give tacit agreement, I think the World Court wouldn't choose to have such an international incident. If we weren't one of the biggest bullies on the block. I mean, really, if Hitler had won, do you really think the Nuremberg Trials would have happened? The victors are not subjected to such a fate.

I want you to be right, more than you can imagine and I will do anything I can to make it happen. I just have doubts. Call me a doubting Teresa.

[madokie]

22. Nothing wrong with that

Mr. Obama knows as sure as I and you know, that we have to deal with this in an honest, open and sane way. Which all leads me to believe he will deal with this. I trust our President elect to do whats right.

[MellowDem]

49. LBJ? n/t

[Vickers]

40. "congressional authorization to bomb the Hague"

I know we aren't a party to the ICC, but can you link to a specific Congressional authorization to bomb The Hague (the entire city???)?

Thanks.

[dorkulon]

51. ...

SEC. 2008. AUTHORITY TO FREE MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES AND CERTAIN OTHER PERSONS DETAINED OR IMPRISONED BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT.

1. AUTHORITY- The President is authorized to use all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any person described in subsection (b) who is being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court

http://www.state.gov/t/pm/rls/othr/misc/23425.htm

Obviously, it's not likely they'd bomb the whole city, but it would be arguably within the scope of this law. What's clear is this is authorization to use deadly force.

[truedelphi]

5. If Bin Laden was not dead, David Frost would have expressed some type of

Interest in Bhutto's statement about his death. But Frost acted like nothing of interest was said, during that part of their interview.

[JDPriestly]

7. Maybe Obama knows that and plans to embarass the Bush

administration by "discovering" that Obama's demise has been know to the Bushies for quite some time. Just guessing. I have no evidence for this.

[rosesaylavee]

17. I think this may be it. Obama is pretty smart.

I feel quite certain that there is little he says or does that doesn't have a purpose.

[malaise]

19. Bingo n/t

[leftstreet]

4. What you said

I cringed when he said that.

[aquart]

6. It wasn't just me, then.

That's when I turned the channel. Let him do what he has to do, but he can't sell that crap to me.

[Cattledog]

8. Turned the channel?

Sometimes you have to hear and listen to things you don't like. That's what being an adult is.

[MrSlayer]

10. Actually, he said "capture or kill" not just flat out kill.

And he will be President of all America, not just the smart people. "Kill Osama" resonates with other Americans who do not agree with us otherwise. And really, killing him wouldn't be a bad thing. I think it would be great if President Obama comes up with him within the first six months.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

34. There is something that I would like returned to our country. The rule of law. Innocent until proved

guilty.

Do know that Bin Laden isn't even on the FBI list for those involved with 9/11?

I believe it's a moot point anyway. I think Bin Laden is long dead. Before she was assassinated, Bhutto of Pakistan was interviewed by David Frost and said that Bin Laden had been killed. And if she was wrong, kidney disease got him.

[uncle ray]

36. actually he HAS just said "kill Osama Bin Laden".

that moment stood out to me when i saw him speak in Pueblo.

[ima_sinnic]

11. really--it makes it appear that he thinks bin Ladin is actually still alive somewhere

is he that misinformed? or is he just playing a game?

either way is messed up.

[INDIA]

27. Nobody knows for sure, and nobody includes you. And I guarantee...

that Obama knows a lot more than YOU on the subject. He's being briefed with classified intel briefs. YOU read teh internetz.

[ima_sinnic]

30. I will bet any amount of money on the FACT that he is dead

and has been for about 6 years now.

[ladjf]

15. I don't get that either. At best, it's just political rhetoric. If he really

wants to "get an arch criminal" , he should go after Bush with all "political guns" blazing.

[xiamiam]

18. i think its politics but dont like it either..bin laden has been dead for a long time imo

years and years...so the "we will kill him" rhetoric is confusing and always surprising when coming from Obama..even when he said it during the debates I thought it strange...but I'm with you, kentuck, the inflammatory language is unnecessary...but the hawks love it..i guess...

[Snazzy]

21. bin laden, wherever he is, if he is, is not in Iraq

Big picture folks.

[JVS]

23. You ever read Al Franken's "Why not me?"

It deals with similar issues.

[tomp]

24. me, too. we need bin laden alive, to answer questions....

...just like we needed sadaam hussein. dead men tell no tales.

[Enrique]

25. i don't see how it's inflammatory

I think 9/11 gave any president a free pass to use that kind of rhetoric.

[kentuck]

26. Obama should speak softly and carry a big stick...

Osama bin Laden is worshipped by millions of Muslims. One must be careful of the martyrdom one might create with blusterous bravado. Chances are that is the reason we were attacked on 9/11 in the first place.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

28. I Fail To See Any Problem With It Whatsoever.

And are you telling me that his NOT saying it would give bin laden LESS reason to attack us? It doesn't matter a damn thing what Obama does or doesn't say as it relates to bin laden's desire to attack us. Get real.

And since that terrorist fuck is responsible for so much death and though likely dead may still in fact be alive, I fail to see any problem whatsoever with Obama speaking strongly about finding him.

Inflammatory language. What a joke. Yeah, let's not offend the puwr wittle tewwowists. :eyes:

[kentuck]

31. No, that is not what I am saying??

I am saying that we have to be aware of the feelings of millions of Muslims, not bin Laden, and how they might react to such statements. Just as they took out the Northern Alliance leader, our ally, just days and hours before the attack on 9/11. And after the reports that Colin Powell had offered the Taliban $46 million dollars, according to two French Journalists. And how we warned them that they could get a carpet of gold or a carpet of bombs. Then we got hit on 9/11. This all followed our arrogant disregard for the Israeli/Palestine problem which was simmering at the time and which George W Bush chose to ignore. I would not want us to make the same mistake again. I have no problem taking out bin Laden without our fingerprints and without taking responsibility for it. Keep them guessing. "We will kill your leader" hardly seems like a good starting place for a foreign policy, in my humble opinion.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

33. It's A Ridiculous Argument.

He's a terrorist. He's as bad a terrorist as you can get. I don't give a fuck whose feelings are hurt by us stating we want to catch or kill him. Anyone who has their feelings hurt by such a statement can kiss my ass.

[kentuck]

35. And when they assassinate your leader first....

then we can turn their sand to glass? I think I have heard this argument before? All talk and no walk.

[moodforaday]

45. You can't catch or kill a dead person.

Read this before you engage your rah-rah mode again:

http://www.juancole.com/2008/11/afghan-article-says-us-bin-ladin-hunt.html

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

50. If You're Going To Jump In The Middle Of A Subthread, At Least Be Intelligent Enough To Read It.

If you had, you would've seen this part: "and though likely dead may still in fact be alive".

Likely dead. But that is not known for fact. He may still be alive. And that point is moot anyway as it relates to the OP. Obama's words are perfectly fine and appropriate.

Bye now. :hi:

[Evoman]

29. It bothered me when Kerry used to do it too.

I don't find it inflammatory.....it feels more like bluster and posturing (even though it may not be). Just get it done...wanting to seem like the big man for threatening to kill a washed up old terrorist hooked up to a dialysis machine is dumb.

Lastly, I would rather he say, "capture bin Laden and bring him to trial" than "kill him".

[bunkerbuster1]

32. As did I.

And I cringe when I hear Obama playing to the cheap seats with the same dopey line, today.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

37. I think it's important to project "strength"

even though it's transparent and lame, a lot of Americans need to hear Obama say these types of things. I wouldn't pay much attention to it.

[Gregorian]

39. It certainly doesn't jibe with the other 99% of his context.

This is bothering me quite a bit. Why do we need to defend and or rearrange Afghanistan? And Bin Laden? Let him go. That's over. Or to put it in another way, how much is it all worth? Now keeping the peace may be one legitimate reason to spend time in a country. But I fear Bush broke us. We can't afford to be doing that for a while.

My answer to all of these is BATTERY TECHNOLOGY. Do it. Let Russia take the damned country over. What is the point?

My feeling is that perhaps Michelle Obama has a word or two to say.

[old mark]

42. I wish we would kill the guy and get it over with.

Sayine we are going to do it for 8 years is a little stupid.

mark

[noiretextatique]

44. i agree with you...it's bizarre

i wish he's top saying that too. it's unseemly.

[shellgame26]

46. it's because the Dems have

been labelled as being 'soft on terrorism'. It's a stupid myth of course pushed by the republicans and MSM but the Dems feel they have to talk tough to dispell that myth.

[tom_paine]

48. Well said and the probably is the reason. n/t

[tom_paine]

47. Interesting perspective which gives me pause.

Initially, I ws quite supportive of that kind of talk by Obama because it IS about time we tried and injected him or just killed him on the spot if he "resisted arrest" (which you have to figure he would).

I have not fully changed my view based on your words, kentuck, but they most certainly have given me pause.