Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde
Both. I just don't understand the logic of a country that thinks it's absolutely okay to assassinate somebody but thinks it is unethical to provide accurate documentation of the corpse. It honestly amazes me you aren't the least bit skeptical on this; you're very choosy sometimes.
|
Well again; what exactly is the issue? The evidence seems pretty solid, and there is no viable competing theory.
Again, it is totally in line with our history to kill somebody and then handle it as gently as possible afterwords. There is nothing to be gained by making a spectacle of his body, there is a logistical nightmare in trying to bury him on foreign soil. A mission this high up the food chain, with direct command by the president, is going to be 100% by the book, and I don't think you are grasping the public offense of the muslim world that would have arisen by not following islamic burial tradition.
The entire world, all along the spectrum of beliefs, admits he is dead, I really am not seeing what you think is so unbelievable about it at all. There was effectively a blank check and every available tool of the most powerful nation on Earth after this man for a decade; and once it was done, the world would be watching.
When it comes to religion, the US tends to accommodate; like I said, muslim prisoners at gitmo get halal food, korans, etc, etc.
And for the record, it was absolutely okay to assassinate him, and it would be disrespectful to not follow islamic burial code or to plaster pictures of him with smeared brain matter where his head used to be. This is the complex nature of international relations.