# Was Killing Osama Bin Laden Lawful? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 2, 2011, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-killing-osama-bin-laden-lawful/580474 "2011-05-02T14:13:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![NotreDame05](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/90ced4/32.png) [@NotreDame05](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotreDame05)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2011, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-killing-osama-bin-laden-lawful/580474/181 "2011-05-09T01:33:32Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > So, when do you expect that Pakistan is going to complain to the UN Security Council about this infringement on its sovereignty? I do not expect them to, since they are addicted to our dollars. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2011, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-killing-osama-bin-laden-lawful/580474/182 "2011-05-09T02:04:32Z")
> [@NotreDame05](#): > > The international law was not conceived at a time when organizations attacked nations in an unconventional manner. Nonsense. Congress declared war against pirates in 1802, and one of the key precepts of customary international law that relates precisely to this situation (which involves self-defense, raids into third countries, and violence by subnational actors) dates to 1837. Google the Caroline incident for more details. > [@](#): > > At this time, acts like 9-11, are construed as criminal actions, and should be prosecuted as criminal actions, and the perpetrators pursued, detained, and treated as suspected criminals and fugitives. Until the U.S. invaded Afghanistan, Osama and his co-conspirators were criminals. Sorry, but Congress, the Executive Branch, NATO, and the UN have categorized Al Qaeda’s attack as a threat to international peace and security, not a criminal matter. That does not exclude the possibility of prosecution of criminal laws, but it also doesn’t preclude the legitimacy of military action. You can certainly say that you’d prefer the matter to be treated not as a matter of military intervention. But literally every level of international policy making (Federal, multilateral treaty organizations, and the United Nations) have endorsed military action against Bin Laden. Shoot, even Ban Ki-moon stated that “justice has been done” re: the killing of Bin Laden. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2011, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-killing-osama-bin-laden-lawful/580474/183 "2011-05-09T04:44:41Z")
> [@Arnold\_Winkelried](#): > > I was thinking that some laws should be international (e.g. the Universal Declaration of Human Rights), that having an entity capable of enforcing those laws would be a good thing, and that it’s good that countries would be willing to arrest someone who violated such an international law when that person left their home country to travel abroad (using Pinochet again as an example.) > > In practice, when a country signs an international treaty, such as the “International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”, then they should be expected to implement laws to enforce that treaty. > > Finally, of the international treaties I am familiar with (Human Rights treaties), I haven’t seen one yet that shouldn’t be ratified by every country. And since we’re talking about the US, this country has a poor record about adopting those treaties. One famous example being that only two countries in the world (the USA and Somalia) have not ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. And who enforces those rights against the USA? Those laws get enforced by the strong against the weak. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2011, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-killing-osama-bin-laden-lawful/580474/184 "2011-05-09T13:02:02Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Shoot, even Ban Ki-moon stated that “justice has been done” re: the killing of Bin Laden. Since I was on my iPhone earlier and couldn’t quote Ban’s statement, let me now pull out a few choice quotes: > [@](#): > > Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. > > The death of Osama bin Laden, announced by President [Barack] Obama last night, is a watershed moment in our common global fight against terrorism. . . . > > Personally, I am very much relieved by the news that justice has been done to such a mastermind of international terrorism. I would like to commend the work and the determined and principled commitment of many people in the world who have been struggling to eradicate international terrorism. > > The United Nations General Assembly has adopted a global counter-terrorism strategy, and on the basis of that, we will continue to work together with Member States of the United Nations to completely eradicate global terrorism. Thank you very much. I need your support. Thank you. [Link.](http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocus/sgspeeches/statments_full.asp?statID=1163) ---
**Author:** ![NotreDame05](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/90ced4/32.png) [@NotreDame05](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotreDame05)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2011, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-killing-osama-bin-laden-lawful/580474/185 "2011-05-09T14:08:09Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Sorry, but Congress, the Executive Branch, NATO, and the UN have categorized Al Qaeda’s attack as a threat to international peace and security, not a criminal matter. That does not exclude the possibility of prosecution of criminal laws, but it also doesn’t preclude the legitimacy of military action. > > You can certainly say that you’d prefer the matter to be treated not as a matter of military intervention. But literally every level of international policy making (Federal, multilateral treaty organizations, and the United Nations) have endorsed military action against Bin Laden. > > Shoot, even Ban Ki-moon stated that “justice has been done” re: the killing of Bin Laden. > [@](#): > > Nonsense. Congress declared war against pirates in 1802, and one of the key precepts of customary international law that relates precisely to this situation (which involves self-defense, raids into third countries, and violence by subnational actors) dates to 1837. Google the Caroline incident for more details. Non-sense!!! I specifically stated, "The international law was not conceived at a time when organizations attacked nations in an _ **unconventional manner** _. Furthermore, my remark was confined by the context of the post, which was done in regards to conceptualizing “battlefield.” You have said nothing, and indeed the Caroline incident says nothing to refute my remark. > [@](#): > > Sorry, but Congress, the Executive Branch, NATO, and the UN have categorized Al Qaeda’s attack as a threat to international peace and security, not a criminal matter. That does not exclude the possibility of prosecution of criminal laws, but it also doesn’t preclude the legitimacy of military action. The UN’s characterization of the 9-11 attack as a “threat to international peace and security” is not synonymous with authorizing a war, much less authorizing a targeted killing. As far as international law is concerned, the 9-11 attacks were a violation of international law, and the perpetrators criminals, not military actors of any sort, and consequently, they were to be pursued and prosecuted as fugitives. What transformed this analysis, as I told you before, was the authorization to use military force against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda located in Afghanistan. What is less clear, however, is whether the 9-11 attacks permits the U.S. to perform military operations, and targeted killings, on the sovereign soil of other nations, and justify it as “armed conflict,” thereby permitting those operations. After my brief and cursory examination of international law in this area, I am dubious international law permits such actions and instead requires those individuals to be treated as criminals and pursued as such, as opposed to killing them as enemy soldiers in a battlefield. Equally unclear is whether Osama was a combatant after having retreated to Pakistan and this is important in assessing whether the presumed targeted killing was justified. > [@](#): > > But literally every level of international policy making (Federal, multilateral treaty organizations, and the United Nations) have endorsed military action against Bin Laden. This is not a factually accurate statement. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2011, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-killing-osama-bin-laden-lawful/580474/186 "2011-05-09T14:19:53Z")
> [@Justbeingfactual](#): > > I agree with Giles’ unbiased views in general. > > To add, ABC news will report what the US Gov tells them. We will never find out for sure the details, navy seal will never say, however a witness, a 12-year old girl has said a.) her father was unarmed, b) captured alive c) shot. That equals summary execution and I believe is illegal, even under the laws of ‘war’ - and was outside ‘hours of combat’ under Geneva Convention. Well, that, if true, would be a disturbing revelation and I would want some sort of explanation. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2011, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-killing-osama-bin-laden-lawful/580474/187 "2011-05-09T17:01:08Z")
The Pakistan government is raising hell. They are plenty pissed at our ignoring their sovereignty. But the fact that we did not trust them is a slap in the face. But the truth is, we did not trust them. Most think Pakistan knew about OBL living there and think he had help from many Pakistanis and likely the government. They still want our money so they will temper their indignation. We will still give it to them. What’s the next raid, taking over the nuclear bomb installations? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [May 9, 2011, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-killing-osama-bin-laden-lawful/580474/188 "2011-05-09T20:31:21Z")
> [@NotreDame05](#): > > This is not a factually accurate statement. Prove it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-killing-osama-bin-laden-lawful/580474.md?page=9)