2006-06-21 13:53:01 · 11 answers · asked by gergy 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
yes he should because why should someone who caused so much havoc b allowed to live in society...that is my reasoning.
2006-06-21 13:57:50 · answer #1 · answered by afmooseluvrx3 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
First of all, Osama Bin Laden is just a figurehead and I doubt that he actually planned or ordered anything. He's a nutcase with lots of money and no real power.
Second, they are never going to capture him because nobody really cares anymore and a doubt that anyone is actually still looking. Dude has probably been hanging out in France all this time with a martini in one hand and some french chick's butt in the other.
Third, Saddam is STILL on trial. How long ago did we capture him? Does anyone even still remember what he's being charged with? And if he actually gets the death sentence, exactly who is going to execute him? And when?
2006-06-21 14:07:00 · answer #2 · answered by badkitty1969 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Killing him would make him a martyr automatically and both Al -Qaeda and the Taliban which has benefitted under his leadership
will step up attacks to avenge his death and contrary to what you heard on the media about his family disowning him, they'll want revenge and elements of the Saudi government will most likely finance such endeavors.
The flip side is that keeping him in jail will also invite terrorist attacks on US soil so instead of capturing him, we would be better off if Osama Bin Laden were killed on sight.
2006-06-21 14:07:30 · answer #3 · answered by bulldog 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, and the US should not have jurisdiction over him. He has planned attacks against several countries, not just the US. If caught he would be tried in International Court. The Internation Court system in place does not give the death penalty for anything (because it's fundamentally wrong). The American government does not let Americans be tried in International Court, so why should the US have any say in the International Courts proceedings and sentencing. Just because America has the biggest mouth doesn't mean its always right.
2006-06-21 14:06:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
First you need to prove that he committed a crime. The 9/11 omission report is full of scientifically unexplainable claims that doesn't stand the rigor of scientific trial. He is probably just a name, a bogeyman if you will, that the government uses to scare the $hit out of chicken-heart people. Lots of evidence point towards the government for the events of September 11.
Just because someone has more authority and power doesn't mean their version of the story is true: it just means they have more resources to get the story out to people.
2006-06-21 14:18:55 · answer #5 · answered by The_Dark_Knight 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He won't be taken prisoner he will most likely be killed by in the fight or by the bombardment. But if he was captured he is guaranteed the death penalty as he funded and hired people to kill 2,000+ people and he is a war criminal too.
2006-06-21 14:00:49 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think, ( and my family agrees), that when they capture him, he should be tied up and everyone in Iraq should get metal baseball bats and beat the crap out of him. It would be like on Little Nicky where everyday the devil gets to shove a pineapple up Hitler's butt while he is wearing a french maid's uniform. They both deserve excruciating pain.
2006-06-21 14:02:17 · answer #7 · answered by Amanda 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, because he planned the murder of many people on 9-11, and he won't change.
2006-06-21 13:56:33 · answer #8 · answered by merlin_steele 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
he will not ,..if he get's caught he will be trialed all his life just like Milosovan Sladovomich and Saddam Hussain the trials will never end untill the accused will die in their cells.
2006-06-21 13:58:09 · answer #9 · answered by I-C-U 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We made a mistake with Saddam and didn't shoot him trying to escape. Think about it.
2006-06-21 14:24:02 · answer #10 · answered by brat71825 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋