Quote Originally Posted by wiggin View Post
There's different stories circulating around the media - one 'government source' implies it was a kill op, while another says it was intended as a 'capture or if necessary kill'. That being said, there's a number of sources indicating that they seriously considered using a bunch of 2,000 lb JDAMs launched from a B-2 but chose to go with a helicopter assault to confirm they had him and to limit collateral damage. This implies the main mission was intended to kill, but they may have at least theoretically asked DEVGRU to capture him alive if possible with the understanding that they didn't care too much about the alive part.

I think the interesting part of the EC statement's language was about 'crimes not going unpunished'. That is probably what the reporters latched onto as an implicit acceptance of death as a reasonable punishment for his crimes.

I also found it interesting that the English language questions - notably the one on Pakistan - were far closer to what an American audience would have asked and be concerned about. I assume they were British reporters, which implies this might not be an American/European divide but more of a Anglo/continental divide. *shrugs* Then again, the first questions asked at the White House briefing right after Obama's speech had to do with: whether it was a CIA or DOD op, the circumstances of OBL's death, details on future threats of retaliation, the type of helicopter used and the nature of the mechanical malfunction, questions on Pakistan, the nature of the compound, and the disposition of OBL's body. This is in stark contrast to what a different group with a different focus might have asked.
It is an important question, since assassinations are at least frowned upon here. And doesn't the US also have an executive order prohibiting all assassinations? The whole drone strike-assassinations has always been a bit of a shady area. By the way, I wouldn't be surprised if the decision to send a team instead of bombs had more to do with identifying the body than collateral damage.

This is also probably why a lot of European leaders have stated they are happy that he's gone, the world is safer, etc., etc., but that they'd have preferred him to be captured alive. I can imagine the US public (and therefore media) are not really interested in such things, they are just happy he is dead and want as many details as possible about his death, and as little critical questions as possible.

Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
A different look at events. Link found at The Economist:
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/gl...5/02/bin_laden
I can find myself in his view.