This is pretty much how I see it. Right now he’s a hero to the bad guys, if he becomes a martyr to the bad guys, I’d shudder to think how much uglier they’ll get.
Yes, we need to find him. I’d prefer we just kill him in combat, but I have no particular objection to dragging him back in chains, putting him on trial, and then sending him to the gurney for execution. The nightmare scenario would be to capture him alive, try him, and get a not guilty verdict. Really doubt that would happen, but if it did, it would be embarassing.
No. It’s a wild goose chase. Aside from satisfying our vengeance, what good would it do? There are plenty who would take his place.
It’s important for justice, but not important for national security.
Valete,
Vox Imperatoris
Yes. People who maliciously commit crimes should be prosecuted for them.
If he’s dead, his nutso base will be energized.
If he lives, his nutso base will still be energized.
So, with all else being equal, I maintain that he ought to be held responsible for his crimes.
I think it’s very important because you want to show that no one can hide from justice. If he hides long enough and we give up, it basically sends the message that with enough money, a single man can mastermind an attack on a country and suffer no consequences for it. It’s kind of like how Alcatraz had that ‘impenetrable fortress’ mystique as a prison until those three guys escaped (and probably drowned), but the point is it went downhill from there.
I for one do not want every nutjob with funding and a bone to pick with the U.S. thinking he can be successful in an attack because “well Osama did it and got away with it, so I can too”
I for one do not want every nutjob with funding and a bone to pick with Iraq and Afghanistan thinking he can be successful in an attack.
Yes, I think the CIA should find him, set him up with a hooker, and they try him under Islamic law.
Beat me in one.
To all you sooo tolerant and understanding folks who don’t think it would do any ultimate good to find Osama. I’ll bet Adolph Eichmann would have appreciated that sentiment. Wouldn’t have ended up hanged in Isreal.
Another agreement here. Allies of America, at the individual or state level, aren’t going to like us less because he isn’t captured. Fundamentalists with teh crazy will indeed be inflamed if we do.
Like, they aren’t pissed off at us now? 
I would like to acquire the moral high ground by giving him a trial. It wouldn’t change the mind of the bad guys, but it would show reasonable folk that we are better, and make me feel good.
Yes, punishing him for his crimes is a matter of justice.
I was just thinking the same thing the other day.
He’ll never ever ever in a million years get a fair trial in the US, so what’s the point? We’ll be giving the victims a bit of closure and at the same time giving the people drumming up Ameri-phobia that much more ammo.
Here’s a radical idea. We offer to withdraw all American troops from the Middle East if Osama bin Laden surrenders himself to American authorities for a trial and possible execution. Let’s see if his willingness to have others die for his cause applies to himself.
Why wouldn’t he get a fair trial? We gave one to the first guys that bombed the World Trade Center. Gave one to Tim McVeigh. Gave three of them to OJ, including the civil suit.
He’s admitted the crime…even bragged about it on video. The jury would likely be allowed to hear his confession, along with other evidence. He’d be represented by counsel, allowed to confront the witnesses against him, allowed to voir dire potential jurors, allowed compulsory process to obtain witnesses in his favor, allowed to present evidence in his defense, and all of the other rights given to any defendant.
He’ll be convicted, but that’s because he’s guilty. Not because the trial was unfair.
You answered your own question:
You already believe he’s guilty. As a lawyer (IIRC), you know that automatically disqualifies you from serving on the jury, or at least from being an impartial juror. Everyone else thinks he’s guilty, too. Where are you going to find 12 Americans who don’t already believe he’s guilty?
While allowing his counsel to voir dire potential jurors might help them select the least biased among them, it’s hardly reasonably to conclude that they’ll find any who are unbiased. Remember how long it took to select jurors for the OJ trial?
Angela Davis and OJ Simpson had fair trials. I think I could be opened minded on a jury.
As a lawyer, I’d defend him at trial, and do the best job I possibly could…for a suitable fee, or for whatever the Court approved if I was appointed counsel. And if he was convicted, and I believed there was reversible error, I’d represent him on appeal, and again give him by best efforts all the way to the Supreme Court, unless he fired me first.
Assuming the appeals failed, I’d be there when they strapped him to the gurney, and stuck the needle in his arm. And I wouldn’t shed any tears for him.