Other Side Of The Coin - Would A Bush/Cheyney Killing/Assassination/Murder Be Justified/Legal?

After all the drama & celebration Osama in Laden's death what if the roles were reversed because many see Bush/Cheyney as terrorist & America as a terrorist group/nation.

America claims it's killing/assassination/murder of Osama Bin Laden was justified/legal because of 9/11.
America claims it was for the killing/murder of 3000 people in the WTC buildings
Now Osama never admitted to committing/planning/funding 9/11.
America never issued an arrest warrant for Osama in America or through interpol.
Some say because he approved of 9/11 so he is guilty,even though he wasn't directly involved in the act of killing himself.
America committed a black-ops mission in a foreign, sovereign nation without that nation's knowledge/permission.

I was wondering?

If the alledged terrorist/freedom fighters could/would commit a black-ops mission into America &
killed/assassinated/murdered George W Bush or Dick Cheyney or any of the key figures in the former Bush Administration, would it be legal/justified, because of Iraq/Afghanistan.
Bush administration killed/murdered 100,000 plus people in Iraq/Afghanistan
Bush administration committed/planned/funded/invaded Iraq/Afghanistan.
Some say because George W Bush or Dick Cheyney approved of Iraq/Afghanistan, that they are guilty even though they weren't directly involved in the act of killing themselves.

reply to post by acrux

Some say because he approved of 9/11 so he is guilty,even though he wasn't directly involved in the act of killing himself.

Actually he didn't approve as civilians are not considered legit Jihad targets.

I don't think assassination is justified at all. i also have a hard time with the death penalty. If Osama really was the master of all things terror, why murder him when you can torture and interrogate him?

reply to post by phishyblankwaters
I agree killing is never the answer. Osama should have been taken alive so he could face the charges/accusers in an independant court system like the Hague or World Court so it wouldn't be a miltary tribunal or kangaroo court..

Torture no. Interrogation by independant party (interpol are World Court)


I personally think they killed him because to much truth/backlass would come out if he had a fair trial.

My thoughts are no, this wouldn't fly with the US.

Though we can invade peoples home, yank them from their beds and slaughter them,
BUT, as soon as something broadcasts in the middle east, even if it has nothing to do with the US, we're all over them like we got something to prove.

reply to post by Butter

My thoughts are no, this wouldn't fly with the US.

Though we can invade peoples home, yank them from their beds and slaughter them,
BUT, as soon as something broadcasts in the middle east, even if it has nothing to do with the US, we're all over them like we got something to prove.

That is is the point I thought. So is what America did really legal/justified just because they say so & are currently the biggest kid on the block.

Why are you relating it to a non-current president?
Shouldn't your question revolve the current admin, as they pushed through this action?

Originally posted by acrux
After all the drama & celebration Osama in Laden's death what if the roles were reversed because many see Bush/Cheyney as terrorist & America as a terrorist group/nation.

America claims it's killing/assassination/murder of Osama Bin Laden was justified/legal because of 9/11.
America claims it was for the murder of 3000 people in the WTC buildings
Now Osama never admitted to committing/planning/funding 9/11.
America never issued an arrest warrant for Osama in America or through interpol.
Some say because he approved of 9/11 so he is guilty,even though he wasn't directly involved in the act of killing himself.
America committed a black-ops mission in a foreign, sovereign nation without that nation's knowledge/permission.

I was wondering?

If the alledged terrorist/freedom fighters could/would commit a black-ops mission into America &
killed/assassinated/murdered George W Bush or Dick Cheyney or any of the key figures in the former Bush Administration, would it be legal/justified, because of Iraq/Afghanistan.
Bush administration killed 100,000 plus people in Iraq/Afghanistan
Bush administration committed/planned/funded/invaded Iraq/Afghanistan.
Some say because George W Bush or Dick Cheyney approved of Iraq/Afghanistan, that they are guilty even though they weren't directly involved in the act of killing themselves.

edit on 12-5-2011 by acrux because: (no reason given)

If Israel / Mossad murdered them then YES it would be fine, as the world just sits back and does nothing when Israel and the US does murderous acts, as israel and US can murder anyone that thay see is a threat to their national security.
So yes it would be justified if someone threw Bush and Cheney's in a car and sent them to an early demise as long as they saw them as a threat.
So if it was my country and i was the leader, i would pass a law just as America and Israel have a i would murder anyone i did like.

reply to post by macman
If you want to use a current president in relation to the question to help you relate to it better feel free.

Its just the excuse was 9/11 so a payback excuse might be Iraq/Afghanistan

Please understand this is to be taken as a theoretical/hypothetical question only.

I DO NOT condone/advocate killing/assassination/murder/violence of any type. Legal/justified or whatever shape/form it may take.

reply to post by meathed

So if it was my country and i was the leader, i would pass a law just as America and Israel have a i would murder anyone i did like.

"I WOULD MURDER ANYONE I DID LIKE?"

With friends like you who needs enemies.



I suppose your answer makes sense in a way because America has stabbed in the back many former allies/friend.
Saddam. Gaddafi, Osama etc.

Of course it would be legally justified if it had occurred during the Bush/Cheney administration. They would just have one of their lawyers write a memo proclaiming it so.

Seriously, I believe the killing was legal and justified regardless of who is POTUS. Regardless of whether or not OBL admitted to 9/11 or not, he openly admitted responsibility for numerous other terrorist attacks that resulted in many deaths. Let's not forget that OBL already had a "capture or kill" order placed on him dating back to the Clinton administration.

Originally posted by acrux
reply to post by macman

 

If you want to use a current president in relation to the question to help you relate to it better feel free.

Its just the excuse was 9/11 so a payback excuse might be Iraq/Afghanistan

Please understand this is to be taken as a theoretical/hypothetical question only.

I do not condone killing/assassination/murder/violence in any of it's forms. Legal/justified or whatever shape it may take.

edit on 12-5-2011 by acrux because: (no reason given)

I understand where you were going with it. Just asking the question as to why current leaders/admin where not proposed for the current/recent situation.
I am on the same thought, as I do not condone any idea of killing any POTUS.

of course it would be justified . Legal? Maybe outside the US it is. They are WAR CRIMINALS who admitted to torturing , and as you may or may not know it is illegal to torture according to the Geneva Convention. If they travel to any other country really they will be detained for being criminals!

If they travel to any other country really they will be detained for being criminals!

Not in Canada.

The trial of the man who tried to arrest George W. Bush
www.voltairenet.org...

On March 17, 2009, Mohawk activist Splitting the Sky (STS) attempted a citizens’ arrest on George W. Bush in Calgary (Canada), his first foreign visit as a private citizen without diplomatic immunity. Brutally arrested for his action, STS earned his "day in court" in March 2010 to highlight the hypocrisy of the Canadian Government for allowing Bush into Canada, in breach of its own laws.

In his March 2010 trial STS invoked the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes legislation, which was enacted by the Canadian parliament in 2000, to submit to the court that he was implementing the law by seeking to apprehend Bush, and was unjustly arrested by police who were in effect “aiding and abetting a credibly accused war criminal.” Former US Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney came to Calgary to attempt to testify in the March trial but was prevented from doing so as the judge shut down the trial earlier than anticipated.

It would only be justified to liberal left whackos who still think Bush and Cheney are some kind of masterminds. Anyone with common sense can see assassinations are not acceptable.

Originally posted by acrux
reply to post by meathed

 

So if it was my country and i was the leader, i would pass a law just as America and Israel have a i would murder anyone i did like.

"I WOULD MURDER ANYONE I DID LIKE?"

With friends like you who needs enemies.

I suppose your answer makes sense in a way because America has stab in the back many former allies/friend.
Saddam. Gaddafi, Osama etc.

edit on 12-5-2011 by acrux because: (no reason given)

My answer makes perfect sense , just ask me. One day they are friends the next day they are killing each other. So i would do the same.
Your question you asked was hypotectical, and the answer i gave was the truth. If America can kill whom ever they want in the name of freedom, then any other country has that same right to kill and defend itself too.
It is that simple.
If i was a leader i would make sure my people were safe, and if that meant assasinating like america and israel do, then i would do just that.

reply to post by meathed
I understood what you meant & know you told the truth of your feeling.

It was just the way you phrased it by putting the word "DID" in the sentence makes it sound like you would kill your friends. [i would murder anyone i DID like.)

(i would murder anyone i DID'NT like). Makes it sound like you would murder anyone who crossed you.

Its just a simple typing error of one critical word can totally change a sentence's entire definition.

Please don't take it don't take it to heart, it just sounded funny, that's all.

Originally posted by acrux
After all the drama & celebration Osama in Laden's death what if the roles were reversed because many see Bush/Cheyney as terrorist & America as a terrorist group/nation.

America claims it's killing/assassination/murder of Osama Bin Laden was justified/legal because of 9/11.
America claims it was for the killing/murder of 3000 people in the WTC buildings
Now Osama never admitted to committing/planning/funding 9/11.
America never issued an arrest warrant for Osama in America or through interpol.
Some say because he approved of 9/11 so he is guilty,even though he wasn't directly involved in the act of killing himself.
America committed a black-ops mission in a foreign, sovereign nation without that nation's knowledge/permission.

I was wondering?

If the alledged terrorist/freedom fighters could/would commit a black-ops mission into America &
killed/assassinated/murdered George W Bush or Dick Cheyney or any of the key figures in the former Bush Administration, would it be legal/justified, because of Iraq/Afghanistan.
Bush administration killed/murdered 100,000 plus people in Iraq/Afghanistan
Bush administration committed/planned/funded/invaded Iraq/Afghanistan.
Some say because George W Bush or Dick Cheyney approved of Iraq/Afghanistan, that they are guilty even though they weren't directly involved in the act of killing themselves.

edit on 12-5-2011 by acrux because: (no reason given)

Murdering people in cold blood is evil.

I don't advocate killing people that are not trying to kill you.

This thread is like comparing oranges and apples.

reply to post by lokdog
It is looking at how would America feel if "the shoe was on the other foot", so to say, in regards to this particular incident.

Originally posted by acrux
After all the drama & celebration Osama in Laden's death what if the roles were reversed because many see Bush/Cheyney as terrorist & America as a terrorist group/nation.

America claims it's killing/assassination/murder of Osama Bin Laden was justified/legal because of 9/11.

9/11 was the turning point that brought fascism to power. We failed to DEMAND the facts and now we have have lived thru a decade of lies, destroyed liberties economic destruction. Those facts make it imperative that we launch a real investigation, collar the real perps and get some real payback.

Instead of focusing on the branches, we need to go back and cut down this 9/11 tree.