Thursday, August 30, 2012

Mountains and molehills

Here's a story that's much ado about nothing. According to the New York Times and other purveyors of Serious News, Osama bin Laden may have posed no threat to SEAL Team Six commandos when they gunned him down. A new book on the raid -- authored by an operator who was there -- alleges Bin Laden was unarmed and defenseless in the final showdown. After an initial (probably fatal) wounding, the operators (supposedly) pumped a couple more rounds into his chest to make sure the Al Qaeda leader would meet those Seven Virgins in the afterlife. If true, the Times says it "raises questions" about whether this really was a "capture or kill" mission. Oh please. Is there someone out there who actually believes that this wasn't a targeted hit? More to the point, is anyone here crying a river over it? There was no chance bin Laden was leaving that compound alive. SEAL Team Six had a license to kill, and they acted accordingly on behalf of a nation out for blood. Yes, that doesn't make it right. Yes, there are legitimate moral issues here. And yes, in a perfect world, we probably should have captured the man (assuming it really was possible) and brought him home for his hanging. But either way, he was a dead man. In the end, SEAL Team Six just fast-forwarded matters and saved the taxpayers the cost of a trial.

No comments:

Post a Comment