Originally Posted by Gorman

You sure as hell did in Iraq. Do you just 'not count' that?
Havn't you been hunting him for 10 years or so?

That doesn't even make sense.
You are saying it is only OK to slaughter 'enemies' of the US? Now THAT really is twisted!

It certainly can be. US made illegal hostile military actions within Pakistan. I don't think "It was for our your own good" can be expected to wipe this away. Weren't you alleging that Pakistan was hiding Bin Laden in a previous thread? If Pakistan and the US both agree that Bin Laden is mutual then why didn't the US just ask permission? It wouldn't be unheard of for a country to follow international law.

Remind me how assassinating a man is considered "justice".

If you are trolling; 5/10 obvious but it got me to bite.

Originally Posted by Boredpayne

You were talking about this so-called attack on Pakistan. Obviously it wasn't an attack aimed towards Pakistan and harmed no Pakistani people, which FNugget pointed out. You are changing the subject.
No, you just don't understand that this attack was part of the US's wider man-hunt for Bin Laden which was their reason for invading Iraq and killing thousands of civilians. (watch the apache helicopter video from wikileaks, then decide who is the real terrorist)

If Pakistan was aiding an enemy of an allied country that supports them with billions of dollars, implying that the U.S. is the big bad lawbreaker in this case is quite unfair.
So, two wrongs make a right? Logical fail.

Why wouldn't it be? Yes you can drag this into a death penalty debate, but it should be universally agreed that he deserved to die.
You are denying him not only his human rights, but also his constitutional rights. Plus, there is no legal proceedings involved in an assassination, it is by definition un-just. Besides that, your assumption that every person in the world supports the death penalty is just stupid. Even within the US it is constantly under contention.