English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Looks like we're making progress somehow........

2006-06-12 06:44:52 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

10 answers

I believe that eliminating one of the highest ranking terrorists in the world was beneficial for humankind. BeachBum, you make some interesting points, but you need to look at the whole picture if you are to understand why killing Zarqawi was necessary.

America, for the most part, vehemently supports peoples’ right to stand trial when they are accused. And rightfully so. Even when the evidence is overwhelming, we still want the accused to have “due process” rights. You might argue that Zarqawi should be given the same right to due process. Clearly, there was an enormous amount of evidence against Zarqawi, including video footage of murders he committed with his own hands. So if we had multiple videos (that he released), of him sawing off the heads of his hostages, why not just bring him to trial to face justice? Almost undoubtedly, he would have been found guilty.

The reason why this was impossible is because Zarqawi made up his mind that he would never be captured. In fact, he announced that he always wore an explosive vest that he would detonate if he were about to be caught. So how do you bring that type of person to trial? You can’t just surround him and then handcuff him. He’ll blow himself up and take as many people out with him as he can. Even if we knew that he wasn’t wearing an explosive vest, do we have any reason to believe that he would come willingly? Or is it more likely that he would go out with guns blazing? Once again, Zarqawi publicly announced that he would never be captured: he would die first. How many people should die bringing this man to justice?

You may be able to understand this better if you think of an analogous situation that occurs regularly within the United States. When a criminal is armed with a weapon and is threatening people, he is often shot rather than being taken into custody. Obviously, it would be preferable to place the person under arrest, and to bring him to trial, but reasonable people understand that if a criminal has his hand on the trigger, and is posing a threat, it's better to take him out than to have a police officer or civilian killed.

Conversely, when a criminal doesn’t pose a serious threat, then he can be apprehended. Consider that Saddam Hussein was arrested and brought to trial. We didn’t find WMDs, but we did find mass graves of Saddam's political opponents, as well as mass graves with over 180,000 Kurds - so we knew Saddam was dangerous. If anyone ever ‘deserves’ to die for their crimes, then Saddam Hussein ranks near the top of the list. But rather than execute him on the spot, we brought him into custody because he didn’t resist. Over the past couple of years, Zarqawi was almost caught several times. All of the times he managed to escape, he got away with guns blazing. He'd have his driver or assistant give him cover fire while he slipped away. Zarqawi was not brought to stand trial because he refused to be captured, and consequently we did what we had to. Even though it wasn’t ideal, it was the only option he gave us.

Also as a side note, you seem to be confused about who Zarqawi was. You make claims about him targeting U.S troops because they are an "occupying power". But Zarqawi was a terrorist, who collaborated with Osama Bin Laden; he was not an Iraqi insurgent. Osama Bin Laden actually released a tape declaring that “Brother Zarqawi” was the official leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq. Zarqawi released a tape calling for his followers to murder the Americans, the Shiites, and the “infidel Sunnis”. The “infidel Sunnis” are simply those Sunni Iraqis who support Democracy in Iraq. Zarqawi wasn’t even an Iraqi, he moved to Iraq to fight the “infidels”, which include all of the Shiites (remember that they comprise 80% of the Iraqi population), the “infidel Sunnis” (these are the people that are the “right” branch of Islam, but who support Democracy), and the Americans. So your understanding for Zarqawi is misguided. He only spent part of his time fighting the Americans, and most of his time blowing up Iraqis.

2006-06-12 07:23:20 · answer #1 · answered by codemap 2 · 1 1

He has been many years Islamic radical on the grounds that the overdue Nineteen Eighties. He led a terrorist supplier in his dwelling nation. As an Islamist militant, Zarqawi adversarial the presence of U.S., Israeli and Western army forces within the Islamic international. In September 2005, he reportedly declared "all-out struggle" on Shia Muslims in Iraq and is thought in charge for dispatching countless Al-Qaeda suicide bombers during Iraq, and specifically to places with tremendous concentrations of Shia civilians. He hated all people who did not proportion his view of the sector, now not simply Americans. I am joyful he's useless,

2016-09-09 00:12:12 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

It baffles me that we in the USA celebrate the assassination without trial of high ranking insurgents.

I personally feel like a murderer because my tax dollars just supported murdreing this guy.

If this country was occupied - meaning we lost at a face to face war - I would not just give up my way of life and I know a lot of others wouldn't either. We would begin to fight back with our own insurgents. We would fight back in the only way that we could... which is exactly what those guys are doing.

What is wrong with everybody that they find it acceptable to keep killing those ppl over there when they are just defending an occupation of their country, culture, and beliefs. We all know now that there was no WMDs, the ppl never ask to be liberated, and Iraq had nothing to do with attacking this country on 911.

Wouldn't you defend your own country in this same way if the shoe was on the other foot?

Bush has made all of us murderers.

2006-06-12 06:55:07 · answer #3 · answered by BeachBum 7 · 0 0

It's a sad day when we have to be happy about somebody dying, even if it was someone as evil as him; but I am really content that we got him. Unfortunately it's one down and many more to go. But we are definitely making progress.

2006-06-12 06:51:59 · answer #4 · answered by tsg 2 · 0 0

not very 2 500lb bombs and only 8 dead should be 800

2006-06-12 06:50:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

DING DONG ZARQAWI'S DEAD!
HID IN A SHED
DROPPED BOMBS ON HIS HEAD
DING DONG, AL ZARQAWI'S DEAD!!

Does that answer your question?

2006-06-12 07:12:50 · answer #6 · answered by thewildeman2 6 · 0 0

He got his wish. But I highly doubt there'll be a bunch of beautiful, virgin women waiting for him.

2006-06-12 06:57:41 · answer #7 · answered by ? 1 · 0 0

I'm not giddy like some. Don't think it'll make any difference

2006-06-19 06:53:10 · answer #8 · answered by pastorcheesylube 2 · 0 0

There's a party in my mouth and everybody's invited!!!

2006-06-12 06:51:23 · answer #9 · answered by yars232c 6 · 0 0

Absolutely ecstatic. It made a better person of him....

2006-06-12 06:47:58 · answer #10 · answered by aboukir200 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers