Lots of stories in the press about the reactions in Europe and among some leftoids re the killing of mass-murderer Osama bin Laden. This is just about as silly a concern as can be imagined. Apparently some people worry that Osama was unarmed when he was killed and that he did not have the "surrender option."
This is war in the 21st century, folks. It is different. You are dealing with people who fly civilian aircraft into buildings; who deliberately blow up trains and buses; who behead noncombatants and proudly broadcast the murders all around the world; people who wear explosive vests and get children to do likewise.
That said, let us bring up two points about the killing of Osama.
First, had we used a B-2 or a Predator, he would not have had a "surrender option." Everybody in that house would have been vaporized, and maybe even some neighbors.
Second, let us also remember another famous killing of an enemy leader ordered by another Democratic President. I refer to the intel-driven killing of Japanese Admiral Yamamoto, the mastermind behind the Pearl Harbor attack. In April 1943, responding to direct orders from President Franklin Roosevelt, and relying on information of the Japanese officer's whereabouts obtained from the deciphered Japanese naval code, US P-38 fighters shot Yamamoto and his staff out of the sky. They were in two transport aircraft, could not fight back, and had no surrender option. Was that a war crime? Hardly. Removing the Admiral, the most talented Japanese naval officer, probably saved a lot of lives and helped shorten the war. Yes, he was replaced, but he was not replaced by anybody with his skills and charisma.
Final thought on this topic. I could not help but reflect that Osama bin Laden learned first hand what the SEAL of the Prophet means . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment