Yeah, yeah. Another opinion about the death of Osama bin Laden. What makes this one any different, you say? I'm not blindly speaking out of my ass and posting blatantly stupid shit like all your dumb Facebook friends have been doing. (keyword: blatantly) Here's what I think, full of strong opinions and equally strong hypocrisies:
Gotcha bitch!
I don't care who you are or who you think you are, but you have to feel relieved, happy, glad, etc. to see the fall of a terrible, heinous person. Some people are saying that they don't think he should be dead, but rather should have been captured and taken in to jail for life. There's two things wrong with that to me:
-He's not going to go down without a fight. He was killed in a firefight. It's not like we're going to have troops surround him and he's going to go, "lol, u got me guise, i give up." He wasn't going to be caught alive, plain and simple.
-This is a man who founded an organization raised to kill people and fuck shit up. (I think that's the politically correct term used) bin Laden has personally ordered attacks of innocent people while corrupting youth to kill, much like gang members are raised to do in the US. Except, of course, al-Qaeda is taught to kill and harm in the name of Allah. (Allah=God, for those who don't keep up with the times) To me, this man needed to die. One's opinion on this matter, though, will differ from each individual. This may be similar to the "eye for an eye" concept commonly seen with capital punishment. I believe any person who purposely kills should be killed. (there's plenty of hypocrisy in that, which I'll address later on)
Should people be celebrating the death of a human being? Again, this will differ from each person. In this case, I believe it's justified for all the terrible things this individual represents and has accomplished. Some may say that it's not right, because each human life is sacred and treasured. Whether or not you believe it's alright to celebrate bin Laden's death, I do believe the people celebrating have a justified reason. Yes, he's a human being like you and I, but you and I also don't brainwash people into killing innocent people.
George Washington University students takin' over on Pennsylvania Avenue outside the White House. Maybe it was just me, but I was totally expecting CNN to show a drunk chick to flash the crowd on live TV.
Now, the hypocrisy.
I said that I'm all for the "eye for an eye" concept when it comes to capital punishment, and how a person who kills should be killed in return. Since the Irag/Afghanistan wars have started, it's reported that approximately 900,000 people have been killed.* This figure includes US causalities, civilian deaths, and just about any other death that could have been recorded. Compare this to the roughly 3,000 Americans killed on 9/11. A nice chunk of those deaths are due to US involvement, but it's said that the Taliban is actually responsible for the majority of those deaths.
Now, I doubt the Taliban personally killed 897,000 people, and that the US killed 3,000 "just to get even." The US is responsible for a large portion of those deaths. I previously said that we should kill those who kill. Does that mean we should kill Presidents Bush and Obama? They were/are, after all, commander-in-chief. They are in charge of the US military. Where do we draw the line with this "eye for an eye" theory when it comes to bringing the responsible parties to justice?
I'm not trying to belittle the death of Osama bin Laden, nor those lost on 9/11, nor those lost fighting these wars. His demise was necessary on many accounts, you cannot deny this. But isn't it just as hypocritical of us to kill more than we lost on 9/11, just to get back at those responsible?
Also, quick note to those hailing Bush as this great person in the death of this person.... Bush started a manhunt and couldn't finish it in 7 years. Obama did it in 3. Obama had to do more with this event than Bush did
HOWEVER, Obama merely ordered the attack. I don't necessarily thank Obama and I sure as hell don't thank Bush. I thank the troops in the region who are doing the fighting.
So, my next point; what does this change?
Not much, homeslice.
bin Laden has built up al-Qaeda to function on it's on, without it's leader and founder. It's no doubt a crucial blow to the organization, but al-Qaeda doesn't need Osama. They're fully able to organize attacks still. al-Qaeda is running strong in multiple countries in the Middle East. To me, his death is more symbolic than anything. We've hunted down the most wanted man in the world..... 10 years later. What's been done in those 10 years?
Well,
we've invaded two countries,
seen oil prices shoot up to a point where OPEC has a vice grip on our balls (and by balls, I mean they really only control our wallets and economy, no biggie),
seen the beginning of the potential the demise of the United States (see: trillion dollar debt caused by these conflicts alone, and that's not including other costs that have been racked up indirectly because of our interactions in the Middle East),
put Islam on a pedestal in the US (see: islamophobia. It's not like bin Laden was trying to push Islam across the globe or anything),
and essentially created a terribly negative image of the US caused by these conflicts. His death isn't going to make everything better. OPEC is still going to bend us over the bed and fuck us in the butt, the global image isn't going to change overnight, and we still owe over a trillion dollars (plus many other costs that will come from these conflicts) which isn't going to go away in the long run.
Today, we have every right to celebrate the fall of an awful person. Some may say "we've won." But really, I think Osama has won in the long run.
*source: http://www.unknownnews.net/casualties.html Either way, you should educate yourself and check out the link, which is full of credible sources that back up their figures.
