I agree, if that was the newspaper’s policy, there could have been much better ways to deal with it. What is particularly fascinating, though, is that this newspaper is in New York–so Clinton served as their senator for a while. And now she is serving as secretary of state, representing the whole US. It brings up a lot of questions about the public versus the private sphere–when the public political sphere is represented by the private religious sphere, whose rules apply?

(Obviously, I have an answer for whose rules I think should apply, but there could be other convincing answers as well).

religion, politics and sex! this is some risky territory, but fortunately as a middle class, white, christian, male I am well qualified to comment…

I don’t find joy or celebration in his death, but I just wonder if a trial could have been possible. I also can’t say I will mourn his loss.

Here’s hoping everyone feels conflicted, and thinks hard before celebrating this human’s death

-I am not entirely sure what you mean by a multilateral agreement. Do you mean some kind of sanction by the international community for this action? If that is what you mean, the US probably has it. The UN Security Council after the September 11 attacks adopted a resolution saying that the Council “expresses its readiness to take all necessary steps to respond to the
terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, and to combat all forms of terrorism, in accordance with its responsibilities under the Charter of the United Nations.” The phrase “all necessary steps” is a code word authorizing the use of force, which would no doubt encompass what the US did (although this language would probably have to be considered in context with a few others). Regarding any possible violation of the sovereignty of Pakistan, there are a number of situations in which it has been tacitly recognized that states may respond to attacks from the territory of another state where the state is unable or unwilling to halt the attacks. It is not uncontroversial, but neither is it roundly condemned.

-It would have been completely impossible and unfeasible to somehow bring this action specifically to the UN Security Council for consideration before carrying out the attack, and it looks like the same is true of working with the Pakistani government. If it was ever going to be successful, it probably had to look like this.

-Regarding a trial, under international law bin Laden is probably considered an enemy combatant, not just a criminal, and for that reason all of the rules about trials and extrajudicial killing are different. It is a somewhat gray area that has not been fully agreed upon by the international community.

-On a non-legal moral level, I certainly understand a feeling of ambivalence. It doesn’t exactly feel like a victory for the rule of law. A trial would seem to be appropriate, but I am not so sure when you stop to think about it. There is no real dispute that he was at least largely responsible for what happened, so it would just be a farce in finding him “guilty.” I think it would be just a painful prolonging of the process to go through a big public show trial. Bin Laden would have given impassioned speeches proclaiming himself a martyr to the whole world… a good thing? The US couldn’t even pull off a trial of KSM feasibly. Would it have even been possible to do anything different here?

-Here is an interesting article on the related issue of whether this was an illegal assassination under US domestic law: http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/05/02/was_killing_bin_laden_legal

Last night, I was watching the crowds in front of the White House with their flags and crudely-made signs. I started thinking about Libyan rebels on top of Gaddafi, or Saddam’s forces showing off with wreckage of American vehicles… There was no difference.

So, long story short here is my point: When it comes to ‘revenge’, we all want blood. Even Washington, DC – a very liberal, democrat city with extremely educated people in a develop country – is more satisfied when they see blood…What if ‘they’ want blood for Osama, too? When will we stop?