May 4th, 2011
04:33 PM ET

Should the United States have tried to take Osama bin Laden alive?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

If they had taken Osama bin Laden alive, there wouldn't be a debate about releasing these pictures. Hindsight is always 20/20. But reasonable people may disagree on whether or not it would have been a good idea to bring this guy back alive.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/05/04/art.obl2.jpg caption=""]
Depending on which account of the mission you believe, it sounds like it might have been possible. At first, we were told he had a gun, he resisted, he used his wife as a shield and the impression was the Navy SEALs had no choice but to kill him.

But then the story changed. He didn't use his wife as a shield. He wasn't armed. But he did resist. One account even said he looked like he was reaching for a gun.

You could also engage in a hypothetical discussion about whether shooting and killing an unarmed man is a good idea even if it was Osama bin Laden. In his case, I happen to think it was a great idea.

Returning him as a prisoner would have presented monumental security issues and putting him on trial would have cost this country a great dea l– financially, emotionally and psychologically. Tossing his body into the sea was also a good idea. No grave site that becomes a shrine for his demented followers.

Here’s my question to you: Should the United States have tried to take Osama bin Laden alive?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

George in Pennsylvania:
In a perfect world, yes. As things are now, this outcome is probably for the best. At least we're certain he won't be plotting another attack from some jail cell.

Dan in Capitola, California:
Alive? Are you kidding? And do what with him? He'd be a hideously expensive rallying point for the murderous losers who follow him. We have a trove of data from the raid and we don't need to debrief him personally. Did he try to take any of the thousands killed in his name alive?

Greg in Arkansas:
The SEALs didn't know if he had a "suicide vest" on or if he was planning to blow everyone up. Therefore, a head shot would have been my first choice too. I served in Vietnam and Afghanistan and the Monday morning quarterbacks make me sick. Unless you are in a position where you actually have to decide to "pull" the trigger, keep your mouth shut and enjoy the fact that a "three ring circus" of a trial has been avoided.

Anthony in Swedesboro, New Jersey:
Can you imagine the cost of a show trial affording Osama all his rights and the fury of his followers and the fringe escalating every day? This would have been a circus we couldn't afford. I remember the great sardonic smile on his face that day and only wish I could have seen the fear on his mug as he was confronted by the angels of death, the Navy SEALs. He was wanted dead, but by no means alive. It works for me.

The answer is no. A chance for too much rhetoric about him. He does not deserve it. Also, the pictures should not be shown, the soldiers involved not identified and the details of the mission should not be disclosed. The people involved were given a job to do. They accomplished it. Time to move on.

Harold in Anchorage, Alaska:
I dunno. Should the FBI have asked Bonnie and Clyde to surrender? Should they have waited until John Dillinger got his gun ready? Please! This isn't Hollywood, it's the real world. If a soldier already at risk would have risked himself further for such theatrics, he hasn't been trained right.

Filed under: Al Qaeda • Obama Administration • Osama bin Laden
soundoff (442 Responses)
  1. Larry Feierstein

    and spend more US tax dollars on keeping him alive? Please. Can we just let this go, he's dead. We did not destroy a terrorist network just one of the leaders.

    May 4, 2011 at 2:52 pm |
  2. Pisher from Harrisburg


    Unless we were prepared to make the spectacle that Israel made when trying Eichman and that we made when trying Sadaam Hussein, capture and a trial was not necessary. He was an enemy combatant who declared war on the United States, had executed military operations against civilians and was a legitimate military target for target. The capturing of the computers may have actually been the bigger prize than the killing of OBL which makes a trial and capturing him and trying him virtually superflous.

    May 4, 2011 at 2:56 pm |
  3. sauerkraut

    What would be the point of taking him live? Death was in his past, his present and his future. I suspect he is too busy with the 72 sturgeons to care.

    May 4, 2011 at 2:56 pm |
  4. Aria

    No not alive. There would be more chaos, hostages takeovers, suicide bombings, protests for Osama's release. Better off dead.

    May 4, 2011 at 2:57 pm |
  5. Larry from Georgetown, Tx

    NO! We have enough issues without allowing these crazy people use him as a recruting tool for their cause. I'm sure the legal people would have loved it so they could make millions off of the working class tax payer.

    May 4, 2011 at 2:58 pm |
  6. John from Alabama

    Jack: Dead or alive Osama bin Laden was an evil individual. I believe violent terrorist usually die in violent acts. The Seal Team that took Osama bin Laden out deserve honor, priase, and medals for their acts of patroitism. It is not easy to become a member of a Seal Team, and their only reward is the respect of a grateful nation. These brave individuals never recieve any fanfare or parades in their honor. Our nation is a much safer place, because they exist.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:00 pm |
  7. Terrence Cain

    No, Jack, I think killing Bin Laden was the best option. If we'd have taken him alive I believe things would be worse. There would have been attempts to break him out and quite possibly innocent civilians or US Troops being held captive to get the US to release Bin Laden. The Seals did the right thing by putting Bin Laden out of everyone's misery.

    Terrence Cain
    Big Spring, TX.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:02 pm |
  8. Michael Danahy

    Woulda! Coulda!, Shoulda! He's gone. It's over. Mission Accomplished!
    Thank you Mr. President and the brave Navy Seals who carried out the mission. Move on Jack. You're fixated and it's getting annoying.

    Michael from Los Angeles

    May 4, 2011 at 3:05 pm |
  9. Dennis north carolina

    He is dead and our people returned safely, so lets not second guess our actions.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:05 pm |
  10. Lori - PA


    I have the feeling that wasn't going to happen.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:07 pm |
  11. Ed Hoffman

    From Cedar City Utah:
    No if we had taken him alive it would have created a media circus that would have swamped even the one we have working still.

    A court case would be a joke with demonstrations in and out of the court and we would also have had to make sure we read him his rights at the Pakistan compound otherwise his "rights" would have been violated.

    Better dead all around.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:08 pm |
  12. Shirley H.

    Bin Laden should have been taken any way we could get him. It was left to professionals who handled it. Thank you Mr. President for making the decision not to release the horrendous photos and catering to the taste of ghouls as well as inflaming the situation. Sometime, sometime, somewhere his political enemies will have to admit that Obama is a class act.

    Hamilton, Ohio

    May 4, 2011 at 3:09 pm |
  13. Tom in Desoto, TX

    There was no reason to take him alive. Only a fool, and there are some, would think him innocent. Of course, lawyers in this country will cry because of the billable hours lost. They would want video showing him being Mirandized. For what he did, he did get swift justice that day. Now, he sleeps with the fishes. And, we don't have to hear people from that region talk about justice.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:10 pm |
  14. Sylvia from San Diego

    Absolutely not! Justice was served and the tax payers saved a lot of money...

    May 4, 2011 at 3:11 pm |
  15. c.K.c. Florida

    Im sure there are things about 911 that the government hopes died with Osama, So with that said, I dont think there was a chance of him coming out of this alive.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:13 pm |
  16. Marvin E Marshall

    Should’ve would've could've – forget that. Let's use it to pay down the National Debit – Have 5 min private showing of the photos, with total security being camera free – and charge starting at 10k per person and allow 100 viewers at a time then down to as little as 1k per person as demand lessens. 10 showing per hour, 240 per day = 240 million per day – 10 days is 2.4 BILLION !!! Now lower the price as demand allows. A TRILLION dollars is realistically possible. 98% of these gross proceeds go directly to paying down the National Debit. 2% goes to the victims of 9-11.
    Marvin E Marshall – Texas

    May 4, 2011 at 3:14 pm |
  17. Paul From Austin, Texas

    No Jack No. Then we would of had the crazy one's say he should be brought to the U.S. and try him at ground zero and a public hanging. Then there would of been the ones that feel sorry for anyone saying it was a bad childhood that caused him to go wrong. Bush and Obama had it right Dead or Alive. Why do you think that saying from the old west days had the word Dead first. It also saved us a boat load of money with trails jails and the fight on just how do we put him to death. It is best for us all they took him out. I am a Retired Army Ranger and if I saw him blink I would of took him out.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:14 pm |
  18. Gary H. Boyd

    Since just finding that piece of garbage took 10 years, taking him alive would have probably allowed him to die of old age. He's now gone and food for the fish. That's what's supposed to happen to garbage,.

    Gary in Scottsdale, Arizona

    May 4, 2011 at 3:14 pm |
  19. Pete in Georgia

    No, absolutely not.
    All it would do is create a 3 year charade and platform for more radical lunatic doctrine............................center stage.


    May 4, 2011 at 3:18 pm |
  20. Dan Louisville, KY

    NO. Our Justice Department seems to be tied in knots over how to handle the routine terrorists we already have. If we had bin Laden, we would face kidnappings of potential hostages for trade. Lawyers would have to be appointed to defend him for years – and for what. How could he not get the death penalty. We already issued a WANTED- DEAD OR ALIVE bounty of $ 25 Million. I cannot believe the hand wringing on this!

    When we blow up people with Predator Drones,no one raises much of a fuss, but when Special Ops units have to fight through the gunfire, avoid the women and children, and then, when they kill Public Enemy No. 1, we erupt in second guessing?

    The Seals were prepared to take him in if he had surrendered. He did not surrender because he did not wish to. He let his son, his brothers, and even his wife charge the weapons. He could have come out first, surrendered and spared his family.

    Now we should tell Pakistan we are sorry for not trusting them, and tell them that we TRUST that they will now find Eiman Al Zawari.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:19 pm |
  21. Charles L. Morse Sr

    No ! Think what the cost would have been to protect a guilty man .
    Think what he could have done to promote himself as a mortar .
    Lets just hope the way he went to the bottom of the sea he , and
    his legacy was water boarded with his body .

    May 4, 2011 at 3:22 pm |
  22. Bonnie from NJ

    NO NO and NO. Not that I celebrate his death, but what a circus that would have been, what would we have done with him? Did he commit a war crime, is it a civilian crime? Did he spend his millions, would we have had to provide him with an attorney? And although what happened I am sure will cause ill will from the Middle East, I am also sure it would have been 100% worse if we had to bring him to trial. It is so much better for the US citizens and taxpayers the way it happened, I applaud President Obama for making that tough decision.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:23 pm |
  23. Michael Bindner, Alexandria, VA

    No. As a prisoner, he would have been a constant insightment for terrorism.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:23 pm |
  24. Donald Godby

    Burkesville, KY
    NO!!! Definitely not. When someone enforcing the law faces a criminal with a weapon, the law enforcer should shoot to kill. bin Laden held a loaded weapon, Alqaeda. When you catch such a criminal, why clutter the system?

    May 4, 2011 at 3:23 pm |
  25. Tom Mytoocents Fort Lauderdale, Florida

    My first impulse would be for Bin Laden to be brought back to New York for a trial. Then my thoughts turn to Eric Holder and I quickly change my mind. I'm glad Bin Laden is dead and very pleased with all decision regarding his death and burial at sea. He's gone to Allahland

    May 4, 2011 at 3:23 pm |
  26. Sabine V.

    Personally, I am opposed to the death penalty, but in this instance I believe this was the best approach. As a reporter mentioned, Osama bin Laden's death may have the same impact on Al Qaeda as Hitler's suicide on Nazism. I'd like to believe that by cutting off the head of this huge monster (i.e. an organized terrorist group) the monster will lose its power and will eventually die. Bin Laden as a captive would still have fostered hatred – many feet under water it's harder to do.
    Sabine V., FL

    May 4, 2011 at 3:23 pm |
  27. Mac from Vacaville

    That's insane. Putting aside all the problems we would've faced taking him alive, we all know where this would end: the death penalty. This method spares the American people vasts amounts of time and allows us to move on with our lives. We should take comfort in the fact he died by our hand instead of living out his life without paying for his crimes.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:25 pm |
  28. dianne uno

    They did ask him to come with them, he indicated NO. They shot him. Bravo. Did you want them to cuff him and give him his rights? OOPS! He was in Pakistan, right. Maybe when he said No we should have booked him "Danno" or made a hasty retreat? Not armed, you say? What WAS all that gunfire directed at the SEALS. THE WHOLE PLACE WAS ARMED. What do you think????????

    May 4, 2011 at 3:29 pm |
  29. John McLean

    No. Why capture him alive and take the burden of trying him in Civil or Military Court?. It just would waste too much of Tax-payer's money. We know the conclusion that he has to die. So why prolong the pain?.

    The big disppointment is that OBL should have not only be given the final departure as per muslim rites but should have been killed in first place not by shooting but in a traditional Taliban way – of public stoning him (OBL) to death. Death came too quickly to OBL and without much suffering. This is not acceptable to many muslims and non-muslims around the world.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:32 pm |
  30. Shelly

    Absolutely not! Not one cent of tax money should have been spent on him including the white garment they buried him in. Having his face on tv would have inflamed both the US and given the opposition more reason to continue. Take the $25 most wanted money and give it to the families of service men and women who were injured or killed.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:33 pm |
  31. Jim LeBow

    The answer is no. A chance for to much rhetoric about him. He does not deserve it. Also, the pictures should not be shown, the soldiers involved not identified and the details of the mission should not be disclosed. The people involved were given a job to do, they accomplished it, time to move on. The press should wind down
    giving him much on air time. Jack, thanks for you intelligent insights.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:33 pm |
  32. jeff

    No! We got our man,He is out of the picture. Let's move on!
    It is time for us to leave from over there with a message for the
    terrorist, We are leaving in peace , YOU STRIKE AGINST US AGAIN WE WILL BE BACK!

    May 4, 2011 at 3:35 pm |
  33. Shelly

    Absolutely not! Not one cent of tax money should have been spent on him including the white garment they buried him in. Having his face on tv would have inflamed both the US and given the opposition more reason to continue. Take the $25 most wanted money and give it to the families of service men and women who were injured or killed.

    Baton Rouge, LA

    May 4, 2011 at 3:36 pm |

    but just long enough for him to dwell on the fact that his end time has come and he will soon be meeting his virgins in hell.
    It's too bad he didn't know what hit him. It was much too quick. He should have suffered for a little while especially knowing how long the victims families are going to suffer.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:36 pm |
  35. Bill in Portales, NM

    No, I don't think the seal teams should have tried to take him alive.

    The final decision is a tactical decision that would be made in the field.

    The handling of a difficult prisoner is very dangerous and has its own problems. You never know the prisoner's capibilities. A soldier can be killed in the space of his own reflex time. When I was in the army we were told to never allow the prisoner to get within 5 meters (over 5 yards) of us. However, the handling of a dead body is not without its problems, but they pale in comparison.

    A trial of bin Laden would have been very trying on us citizens. We would have been divided about many of such a trial's aspects.

    Having said this, I dearly wish that bin Laden would have had more time to contemplate his own capture and demise.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:37 pm |
  36. Michael Carroll

    Why would they want to, It was clean and simple the way it was done

    May 4, 2011 at 3:37 pm |
  37. Dan

    Alive? Are you kidding? And do WHAT with him? He'd be a hideously expensive rallying point for the murderous losers who follow him. We have a trove of data from the raid and we don't need to debrief him personally.
    Did he try to take any of the thousands killed in his name alive? How many of his victims were even armed?

    I can't believe all the second-guessing and hand-wringing going on by people who have no clue.

    Capitola CA

    May 4, 2011 at 3:38 pm |
  38. Bob Kobs

    No. We have enough problems with KSM. You want him to spark a religious war? Do you want him as political football? Do you want American dollars going to care for this man and paying for his legal costs?

    Jack, what is with you lately?

    May 4, 2011 at 3:39 pm |
  39. L Lepley

    No, the cost for containment would be astronomical.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:40 pm |
  40. pat

    Why, so the powers to be could hide him away in some secret prison someplace in the world and torture him for answers until they find out what they want–then he dies. Best to just shoot him.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:42 pm |
  41. Greg in Arkansas

    The Seals didn't know if he had a "suicide vest" on or if he was planning to blow everyone up, therefore, a head shot would have been my first choice too.
    I served in Viet Nam and Afghanistan and the Monday-morning-quarterbacks that are second guessing the methods of the mission make me sick....unless you are in a position where you actually have to decide to "pull" the trigger.......keep your pie-hole shut and enjoy the fact that a "three ring circus" of a trial has been avoided.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:43 pm |

    No holding him would have taken our eyes off the ball we must stay on alert. Good job thank God

    May 4, 2011 at 3:45 pm |
  43. George in PA

    In a perfect world, yes. As things are now, this outcome is probably for the best. At least we're certain he won't be plotting another attack from some jail cell.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:46 pm |
  44. sophie joyce

    I think that bin laden should have been killed.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:47 pm |
  45. Buddy


    Absolutely not! We’ve been killing Tabiban leaders in both Afghanistan and Pakistan with Hellfire missiles fired from Predator drones for years. Those certainly weren’t attempts to take them prisoner! The only thing different between killing of those Taliban leaders and killing bin Laden is that the latter was done up-close and personal. I say good riddance and lets move on.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:47 pm |
  46. Chris J Marshall


    YES , sure would have been nice IF he was captured alive , ( i.e. proof to same ) ...although i admit chances where probably slim .......if he was , we wouldn't all be having this global debate on the issue !!!

    – SO , president OBAMA wants to keep any and all proof under wraps and tight security.............hmmm............sure makes me wonder WHAT really happened and what really is going on !!! ( like millions of others )...

    – as far as i am personally concerned , proof better show up REAL soon........for lack thereof may cause serious political damage ! evey minute ticking by adds thousands to the doubters list....

    – i think he's now living in the whitehouse basemesnt apartment along with ELVIS ! 🙂

    chris marshall

    May 4, 2011 at 3:49 pm |
  47. Tom Clay

    Jack No way... It would just have cost more money, and lot of wasted time.... He is in a much better place now.....

    May 4, 2011 at 3:50 pm |
  48. Linda

    If possible. But if circumstances did not allow – those on the scene were the best judge of what to do and when, and so I am trusting their judgement. The end result is the architect of 9-11 and the deaths of many around the World, including Muslims, is dead.

    As Elmo on Sesame Street said, move along people there is nothing to see here. Next?!

    May 4, 2011 at 3:54 pm |

    Sure, and just add it to the debt ledger....or not, depending on which administration's accounting practices you follow.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:55 pm |
  50. Joyce H

    No Jack, the U.S. should not have taken Osama Bin Laden alive. What for? So we can house and feed him. Take up countless years in prosecuting him. Turn him into a martyr for his cause. Many countries have suffered tremendous loss of lives behind terrorist idealogy. No, it was time to put an end to Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda's reign of terror. His death will certainly not stop these people, but will serve as a message that the world will not tolerate their actions anymore.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:56 pm |
  51. Mary

    Hey Jack, I don't recall him giving the folks on 9/11 a choice. Some people are better off dead...he is one.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:57 pm |
  52. charles hazen

    Yes. Imagine seeing Bin Laden taken in and surrounded by U.S. Navy Seals and authorities. I wish he had been armed, and the news that he was not is a bit troubling. I'd like to know the exact provocations made by Bin Laden that led to his demise.

    They keep saying "This is not who we are", but the shifted details regarding this episode on the 3rd floor of Osama's Hideaway, at present, have mucked up the promise and the definition of that statement to a large degree.

    I don't care about the photo's. Weighing the rants of conspiracy buffs against the better odds that photos would probably incite a person or group to do more violence, the answer, in this case, seems clear.

    May 4, 2011 at 3:58 pm |
  53. Jamie in St. Louis

    Why? The end result would've still been the same and I think it was a good message to send to other terrorists. Still, might've been good to waterboard him a little and see what kind of information we could get from him.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:03 pm |
  54. Michael Roepke

    Do we know that they didn't?

    May 4, 2011 at 4:03 pm |
  55. Rachelle

    ABSOLUTELY NOT! I think the President made the right call. I remember 9/11 vividly. All of the sounds, sights and sheer horror of that day. To parade this mass murderer around on TV would have been a dishonor to the victims families. What is that old saying, an eye for an eye? That's what President Obama allowed those families. I gag at the thought of having to ever lay eyes on him.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:04 pm |
  56. Conor in Chicago

    They did try to take him alive. They told him to surrender, he did not comply, and with one of his wives rushing at US Navy Seals, knowing full well that 20 minutes into a gun battle both Bin Laden and his wife could have strapped on suicide vests, the decision was made to terminate the target, gather intel, and start the process of verifying the targets identity.

    This isn’t a movie and the US Navy Seals are not ninjas, or superheroes, or pawns on a chess board. They are men with families waiting for them. Asking them to risk their lives more than is absolutely necessary just so we might be able to get Bin Laden alive is precisely something someone who’s never seen combat would ask of our soldiers.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:04 pm |
  57. Harold from Anchorage-,AK

    I dunno;should the FBI have asked Bonnie and Clyde to surrender? Should they have wasited until John Dillinger got his gun ready? Please! This isn' Hollywood, It's the real world. If a soldier already at risk would have risked himself further for such theatrics, he hasn't been trained right/

    May 4, 2011 at 4:07 pm |

    How do you know they didn't. I wasn't there. Were you, or any one that seems to think that the whole thing was just another " MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" moment. Way to go people. METALWORKER in La Salle, IL

    May 4, 2011 at 4:10 pm |
  59. Tony from Southport

    Usama bin Laden captured, brought to the USA or Gitmo, revered as the Leader of al-Qaida, fed and clothed, housed, pampered and photographed for his followers.... cost: $1,000,000,000.00.

    One US mission, one Navy Seal's Bullet...... cost: $10,000.00

    The answer to your question is – NO.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:13 pm |
  60. Annie, Atlanta

    He's right where he should be. Now maybe, finally, we can move forward and heal all the damage he inflicted on us. Maybe?

    May 4, 2011 at 4:14 pm |
  61. bob in florida

    I think the Operation was handled perfectly.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:15 pm |
  62. RITA

    No: That would have been asking for more trouble from All Queda and other terrorists around the world. The USA HAS ENOUGH TROUBLE AS IT IS.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:17 pm |
  63. Anthony J. Frascino from Swedesboro, NJ

    Come on, Jack. Can you imagine the cost of a show trial affording Osama all his rights and the fury of his followers and the fringe escalating every day? This would have been a circus we couldn't afford.
    There was already irrefutable evidence, including films of him lauding the martyrs who carried out his great scheme. I remember the great sardonic smile on his face that day and only wish I could have seen the fear on his mug as he was confronted by the angels of death, the Navy Seals. He was wanted dead but by no means alive. It works for me.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:19 pm |
  64. Rick McDaniel


    In this case, a return to the wild, wild west, with a bounty on his head, dead or alive, means you don't make an effort to bring him in alive...........unless you are just determined to do things the hard way.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:22 pm |
  65. Richard from Kansas

    Sure, but those who think it was possible have never gone on a mission like this. You enter a closed door and things move at lightning speed. If you're not quick to react at anything coming at you or movement of any kind you'll probably be dead. The target, Bin Laden, could have been moving towards a weapon or just reaching in his clothing for a tissue. Either of these gets him killed.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:24 pm |
  66. Randy

    Maybe the US didn't, but your question already assumes the US did not try to take him alive. Also his intelligence value depended upon how isolated he was and if was directing any operation. Brave Republicans like Monica Crowley wants to interrogate his wife. All that chest thumping makes them look sooo tough. And John Yoo, author of legal briefs for waterboarding and other "Enhanced Interrogation techniques", now opines that Bin Laden should have been captured instead. Yeah, we should listen to that crew, who couldn't get Bin Laden and instead started a Trillion dollar war in Iraq.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:24 pm |
  67. David Scott Doherty

    Six of one and half a dozen of the other. No matter which way it had turned out there will be those who will say we should have done it differently. Me I'm glad the way it was handled, there won't be the huge expense of a trial or the turmoil on where to have said trial. And we don't have to worry about hostages being taken in order to free him. It's a done deal, nice and neat.
    David from Peterborough, NH.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:27 pm |
  68. David in Mississippi

    Excuse me! We did, you see that is the difference from dropping a big ole bomb and sending in special forces. Had his hands been clear he would not have been shot.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:28 pm |
  69. Joe CE

    THey allegedly tried but it is far better that it was ended. What a circus if he was taken back here or Guantanmo. AS for the photos, if Bin posed and autpgraphed them, some would still think they were faked and they would have become the basis for at least two conspiracy theories. The Phoyos als would have provided a potential prophganda tool foe Al Quida.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:32 pm |
  70. Randy

    No, he would have said some things that don't fit the pretty little storyline the gov't and for profit media has invested so much in. But no worries...the illiterate masses suck it up every time.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:33 pm |
  71. Joe CE

    THey allegedly tried but it is far better that it was ended. What a circus if he was taken back here or Guantanmo. AS for the photos, if Bin posed and autpgraphed them, some would still think they were faked and they would have become the basis for at least two conspiracy theories. The Phoyos als would have provided a potential prophganda tool foe Al Quida.


    May 4, 2011 at 4:33 pm |
  72. Joe R - Houston

    No. He got a fair military tribunal.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:35 pm |
  73. Steve Martin

    Only if he was taking himself hostage, with his own gun to his head, like that scene from "Balzing Saddles"


    May 4, 2011 at 4:39 pm |
  74. Mark in BC

    No, killing him there was the right thing to do. Now for the photo's. Here is Liberal logic; federal funding for abortions on American unborn, yet they won't show the remains of OBL? And you wonder why Liberalism is a mental disorder?

    May 4, 2011 at 4:41 pm |
  75. Paulette in Dallas,PA

    I'm with you Jack. Save the people of this country some money for a change. Over 3000 innocent people didn't even get a warning. He got what he looked for and deserved.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:42 pm |
  76. Karl in Flint

    We couldn’t take him alive. We didn’t catch him shopping at Wal-Mart or hiding in a hole like Sadam Husain and the bunker like fortress he was living in had to be taken fast and clean for our own troops safety. The wife running at the Seal pretty much narrowed our options in my eyes. There would be no safe place to put him that his followers wouldn’t kill as many as possible to try to get to him or, more likely, he make himself a martyr by suicide which would be another set of problems. His followers will no doubt retaliate, but he is gone for good and nothing but a memory. Memories eventually fade.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:42 pm |
  77. David, from Plant City Florida

    No, It would have been a mess trying to keep him held, and the longer we held him the more attacks that would have been done to free him. Including the capturing of U.S. citizens to try and force a trade for him.

    Killing him was the only good option.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:43 pm |

    tampa, fl Let's get the facts straight, 1st we knew where he was for over a year, 2. we built a replica of his mansion (at taxpayer expense) and ran scenarios for a year. 3. osama's dna test results were instantaneous to confirm his id, but it takes normally 5 to 10 days and 72 hours if "pushed", very questionable. 4. we invaded a foreign country without permission or declaration of war. 5. we assaulted and overwhelmed osama's home without a permission or search warrant, did not try to take him alive, but rather killed on sight. 6. dumped the body at sea and won't release photos. This is our "open, transparent" government at work. Should we be surprised if someone with a bazooka shots at the White House or Congress in retaliation? Osama was a scumbag, but he was not a soldier, just a street thug, and should have been arrested and stood trial, as our Constitution says.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:44 pm |
  79. Jack - Lancaster, Ohio

    Mr. Cafferty:

    None of us were there so we do not know if he was taken alive or not !
    Again, we must beleive the people who got us where we are. I would not be surprised if they saved his brain, after, throwing away the unrecognizable parts. In this way, hollywood can brainstorm the movie that the majority of Americans will buy, rent, ipod, iphone and otherwise support in the name of....education. I think we are in real trouble, Jack.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:45 pm |
  80. Jane (Minnesota)

    Absolutely not. The country already has a number of detainees at Git-Mo. It would have set the stage for more trouble and why have one more person detained that it takes 10 years (or probably longer at the current rate of handling the Gitmo detainees) to determine guilt and punishment. How many unarmed innocent people were killed by Bin Laden's actions? Enough said in my opinion.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:45 pm |
  81. Lou P.

    No. Terrorists would be looney hysterical trying to get to him. (Would have required monumental levels of security) He would have been a symbol of propaganda, a tool for recruitment of more of their soldiers of hate. Would have been unparalleded media frenzy , and indescribable added heartaches for the families of 9-11 victims.

    Osama bin Laden was America's # 1 enemy.

    I trust the Navy Seals that OBL resisted, thus sealing his own fate ( no pun intended).

    Lou P.
    Roanoke, VA

    May 4, 2011 at 4:45 pm |
  82. Steve, Clifton, VA

    There plans to take him alive but there was not time to negotiate with him on issues which could ensure his life beyond the raid. . The unfortunate evolution and execution of the raid resulted in Osama Bin Laden's death. History will no doubt prove that this was a Blessing to the world. The burial at sea was good for the global community, Muslims and non-Muslim. Had the Navy Seals captured Osama Bin Laden alive, then the 10 year nightmare that the world has endured, would have been perpetuated for perhaps an additional 10 to 15 years and more blood shed in Ben Laden's honor and under the cover of religion

    May 4, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
  83. Benny

    I guess it would have removed all of the doubts surfacing. I think it was a better idea to to be having this debate with him already dead. Nobody has to worry about his followers causing carnage. plus a trial would have just given him a bigger stage to promote his ideas and recruit. And if he stood trial and was executed you just had a open recruiting session for more suicide killers and nobody will be safe

    May 4, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
  84. Paul P.

    Jack, you nailed all the reasons well in your summation. I can only add that the quiet and swift nature of the events, along with the refusal to release pictures is the best means by which to offer little or nothing to terrorist organizations to recruit with and feed off of. Skeptics will always doubt, but I think the way it was all handled from everyone involved was top notch.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
  85. Bob in Kansas City

    Nope....he got what he deserved. You live by the sword you die by the sword.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:49 pm |
  86. Jim


    Absolutely not! That would have turned into a nightmare. No prison or trial setting could have been safe from terrorist attacks. At the bottom of the sea, gone and soon forgotten, is where he belongs. That was a great decision by the administration.

    Reno, Nevada

    May 4, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
  87. Jerry Johns Creek, GA

    There should have been absolutely no hesitation once a positive identification was made that he should have been and thankfully was executed by an American hero. As an extreme terrorist he does not come under any kind of law that would or should afford him a day in court. Yes, he could plead insanity but that would be nuts. We don't need his pictures either. We don't have to satisfy the news media, paparazzi and every talk show host talking about how ugly he is and what a shame it is that his face was blown away. We should just rejoice in the fact that Bin Laden is now at home with his father, the devil.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
  88. Cheryl in Bluffton, SC

    No way, Jack! I'm an unarmed liberal, and even I would have had no qualms about shooting this monster in the face. Justice has been done, and I feel fine about it.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
  89. lou

    For me, it was not so much an act of revenge as it was the fact that this guy was still a terrorist. He was still using a courrier and I'm guessing it wasnt just for getting his groceries. He still had friends in in al queda. Just because we hadn't heard from him in a while, doesn't mean he was any less a threat. It was in our national interest to shoot to kill this guy.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
  90. Jim in Alabama

    No Jack, because there will always be those doubters who doubt that he was actually killed and the release of the pictures would only serve to further inflame the extremist Muslim world. So long as we know he is dead, that's all that matters. Now, we need to go after Ayman Al Zwarari and take his butt out. BTW, we've already ticked off the followers of Bin Laden about as badly as is possible, so why rub it in? Just get the rest of them.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:56 pm |
  91. Kirk (Apple Valley, MN)

    Just look at all the tax money we saved by killing him up front. The GOP should be beside themselves with glee.

    May 4, 2011 at 4:58 pm |
  92. JoeNJ

    What? And go through a charade like the Nurnberg trials?
    In adition, was there a problem showing a picture of Ernesto 'Che" Guevara's body lying on a stretcher in Bolivia?

    May 4, 2011 at 4:59 pm |
  93. Marsha from Kansas

    Supposedly the orders were to take him alive if they could be sure he was harmless–no weapon, no body explosive etc. With people firing at them I imagine it was difficult to assess his lack of explosives. They did what had to be done to keep their own casualties to zero. Good for them!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:00 pm |
  94. Gigi Oregon

    It is over , It is done, and it's time to move on. It is old news. He sealed his fate the day he planed his mission. We are now moving on, old news is boring...Let's take care of Congress now, do their business or prepare to end their terms...

    May 4, 2011 at 5:01 pm |
  95. barbara in nc

    Our Navy Seals are some of the smartest men in the world. What the heck gives you the right to question their judgement?

    If the Seals say he is dead, HE IS DEAD. Let it go !!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:01 pm |
  96. Sandstone.

    "You have no proof wharsoever they killed anyone! To me it's all a hoax, and you love to suck it up! Obama is everything I said he is! And it will all come out. Nothing is hidden forever!!"

    May 4, 2011 at 5:04 pm |
  97. capnmike

    It doesn't matter if he was armed or not. The thousands of innocent people he had murdered weren't armed either. Nor were they murderers, or guilty of anything except not believing in his twisted sick lie of a religion. We should not be expected to apologize for ridding the world of this piece of trash. Why should we catch him alive and treat him to a cushy prison cell and meals and legal representation and a huge trial at taxpayers expense? He already cost us enough. We did the right thing. Now let us find the rest of these rats and give them the same treatment.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:08 pm |
  98. Ralph Spyer

    America has spent 1,400,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.That I.4 trillion dollars,on Iraq and Afghanistan,so far. With a good team of lawers like O.J. had he could have walked.The C.I.A and the Government wanted him dead. Why did Bush stop looking for him? After 9-11 why did the Government let all Bin Ladens leave the country.No one knew he was in Pakistan ?

    May 4, 2011 at 5:08 pm |
  99. Lisa from Florida

    Enough innocent life has been spent at the expense of a coward who's life goal was to instill fear in others and take glory at killing thousands. To some degree, justice entails respect – but justice should not be confused with compassion – something Bin Laden did not deserve. Weighing innocent American life, to provide compassion? I don't think so Jack. Whether it's politically correct or not – everything's relevative Jack and this was justice.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:08 pm |
  100. Anthony Rattin

    Absolutely not! Especially in connection with such a callous and vile individual. Months or even years could have expired before his case would be herd in a military or civil court. It would have angered me terribly if one penney of my tax dollars would have been spent to house and feed this creep while in custody.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:09 pm |
  101. Gary - Woodhaven, Michigan

    It is a shame that mankind has become the judge of who lives and who is killed, I was taught only God had that power. We cannot choose what virtues or commandments we will obey on any given day or at any given time to suit our egos.

    When we kill those in cold blood for the sake of revenge or ideology, no matter who it is, we only fight evil with evil, and no one can ever win.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
  102. Lucy

    Why bother? Nobody in the U.S. wanted this guy alive, keeping him that way would have been like pouring salt on an open wound.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:13 pm |
  103. curtis

    I say it would of been a good idea to keep him alive just to see what the next step for him and his talaband would do next. Because you never know who he left in charge after he died and if there going to retaleate in his death. that's my feed back i guess.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:13 pm |
  104. Melissa

    Yeah...He is 67 years if he is that dangerous.Imagine how much knowlegde and information he would have held.It would have been very interesting to see how tought he really was...

    May 4, 2011 at 5:15 pm |
  105. Ken in NC

    The chance to take him alive was given from the time the charges were made against him up to and until he was killed and he failed to turn himself in to US authorities. Osama made a good decision not to come in willingly and Obama made a better decision not to leave him free to walk this earth.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:15 pm |
  106. sammee

    Armed or unarmed after all this "man" has done? PLEASE!!!!! And for those who say that God should be his ONLY judge? Well we sent him via the "Express Lane".

    May 4, 2011 at 5:16 pm |
  107. honest John in Vermont

    I think the SEAL's got it just right.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:16 pm |
  108. Mark

    No, thank god they killed him...there would have been too many issues and variables that would have just delayed the ineverable death sentence! The US needed the quite closer and deserves it!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:16 pm |
  109. Adrian B

    Why? To give him a fair trial???

    May 4, 2011 at 5:17 pm |
  110. Susan from Idaho

    The thee thousand plus that were killed and on 9/11 didn't get a choice. They were also unarmed. Those who live by the sword die by the sword.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
  111. Dave

    There is no money in the budget for laughter or for an Osama Trial

    May 4, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
  112. FM Hilton

    Absolutely not. He would have incited other terrorists to try to free him if he had been captured. It would have been a security nightmare.
    Besides, it was recorded in a Newsweek interview in 2001 that he did not intend to be captured alive if they ever found him.
    Guess he got his wish, huh?

    May 4, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
  113. Chris Montgomery

    The chances of harm to Americans at large and the troops in the raid in particular made the taking of this monster alive made it impossible.

    What is done is done, lets go on and begin to heal the nation from the scars of 9/11.

    Americans need to just simply rejoice that this long nightmare is over.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
  114. Andrew Stevens

    I'm surprised the GOP haven't jumped all over the killing and spun it to say Obama should have brought OBL alive in order to torture him to get information of any future plans he may have.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
  115. Mason Heath

    i think killing him was too easy. for muslim extremists, death is too easy, its giving them what they want, its like suspending a child from school, the school sees it as a punishment, however the child loves it. i think we could have made an attempt to keep him alive

    May 4, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
  116. Michael

    OBL, by his own admission was guilty of 9/11, There was nothing to be gain by attempting to take him alive. Lets move on.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
  117. Gman

    No way Jack...These people have to realize, you mess with us, you die...

    May 4, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
  118. Kevin

    Can you imagine the debacle we'd be dealing with if we had taken him alive? Let the military do its job and fight the War on Terror.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
  119. Mike

    Nope! They did just what we should have done Jack! I think we both know that taking him alive was not the plan.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
  120. Russ in PA

    Of course he should have been taken alive. Seems to me that he deserved a trial, just like any one else. Or aren't we a nation of laws any longer? Guess we have known the answer to that question for a long time...

    Ron Paul in 2012...

    May 4, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
  121. Marie MD

    NO! Whether he really had a chance to surrender or not it was certainly more of a chance than those who died on 9-11 had.
    Go Navy Seals!!!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:18 pm |
  122. Pam Woodley

    No. They should have killed him twice.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
  123. Christopher in MO

    Who cares?

    I'm tired of everyone questioning what these elite men did during the raid on Osama bin Laden's compound. These are the best men we have, and if they felt the need to kill Osama, then so be it. His death should not be celebrated, as I would not celebrate the death of any person... but justice has been done.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
  124. Juan

    YES, we should have taken him alive. worse of all is the fact that no one will answer the question as to what the Navy seals intentions actually where. its very simple, was it to KILL or was it to CAPTURE? KILLING an unarmed man is not bringing justice, i dont care who he is. THANK YOU

    May 4, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
  125. Tim

    Weather Osama was armed or not is irrelevant. That "fog of war" included probably having to approach a fortified compound undetected, parachuting down in the dead of night into a locked, gated, enclosed fortress of people immediately shooting at you with high caliber automatic weapons. Then having to go through four floors and layers of shooting to finally get to Bin Ladin who, in his best interest would probably NOT want to get taken alive. Then throw in a crashed helicopter. Mission Accomplished. Im just sad because I believe 9/11 was an inside job.. and they just killed the star witness

    May 4, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
  126. Angel Cadena USMC

    The order said "Dead or Alive"... Dead was always the first choice.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
  127. Matt

    No way we should have taken him alive, a trial would have just meant more US tax dollars spent and more mental stress on the victims families of 9/11. We gave him a proper Islamic death and dumped him in the ocean which is more than he deserved by my perspective. The shows the U.S. is back!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
  128. Martha Campbell

    Absolutely not Jack. Taking Bin Laden alive would have only prolonged the inevitable and the extremists would have created world havoc as long as he was in the custody of the U.S. I'm sure that the plan all along was to kill him on the spot and dump him in the ocean. It was definitely the right decision. Kudos to President Obama.

    Jamestown, PA

    May 4, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
  129. becky - Las Vegas

    Jack, I think it was perfectly fine to kill him, resistance or not. I disagree, however, is that the burial at sea was a good idea. If we would have buried him somewhere, we could just bomb it and wipe out his "demented followers" in one fell swoop.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
  130. julia

    the President was correct in killing him...it would be horrible to have him brought back to the U.S.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
  131. Tiffany

    The bottomline is Osama bin Laden is dead. Whether he was taken alive or dead, you're always going to have conspiracy theorists. To answer the question, no. He should not have been taken alive.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
  132. Michael Hardinger

    No! You kill a mad dog and bury it. We dont want to spend one penny on show-trials for a madman. Good riddance. And thank you Obama, for taking the civil route and saving us for pictures of a crushed head. Let people who want to se that play with their own photoshop. Disgusting! And the morons would shout Photoshop even if they saw the actual photo.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
  133. John

    Bin Laden taken alive? He was a professional terrorist and death is just an occupational hazard.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
  134. Marilyn Burgess

    Usually I would say that our behavior reflects on us and killing an unarmed man is very bad behavior. But in this case, Bin Laden‘s death was quicker and more painless than the 3000 people he incinerated. And for his part, I am sure he would have chosen it over languishing for years under “the infidel” and being executed in the end. We have given him an appropriate burial –withheld offensive photos- we have done all that decency required in his case.

    If he has a problem with that, he can discuss it with whomever he meets in the afterlife.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  135. Frune

    Absolutely, NOT. As far as I'm concerned, it's a bonus that he was killed in the raid.


    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  136. John Unger

    Kelseyville, Ca.

    Should we have attempted to take Bin Laden alive. NO. It is also my opinion, let it go. He is dead, wonderful. Lets not keep talking about hime without a weapon, his wife trying to defend him and young daughter seeing his death. Enough all ready. On the other hand, maybe should see the 3,000 plus die on 9/11. thanks

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  137. Joe

    NO Jack, keeping Bin Laden alive is a waste of everyone's time and money. A complete waste of time and money, besides if the media is continuing to exhaust these issues, can you imagine if Bin Laden were alive and the media chaos we would experience? The American people need closure and anyone who wants to doubt the truth belongs with the rest of the nest in Donald Trump's hair.
    Joe, Binghamton, NY

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  138. Nick D. Neighbour

    One thing is for SURE!
    Obama's decision NOT to release the photos of the dead Bin Laden, shows that Obama is STILL a LOSER at heart, to whom, moments of TRIUMPH are repugnant!!!
    Nick. N.
    Pasadena. CA.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  139. GoodRiddens

    The seals did the right thing by not taking him alive! He didn't deserve all the publicity which would have followed. He deserved to die the way he did.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  140. Rick Kneeshaw- San Diego

    Yes, if possible he should have been taken alive but still should have been buried at sea. A bullet to the head is too fast.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  141. Russ Eppen

    Dead? Maybe he is still alive and being kept in a secret place for "interviews". After all, he would be a lot more valuable to use alive than dead...and if he's under raps, there is no way he can be proven either dead OR alive. I think he is in some room undergoing intense, inhanced interrogation. It would be stupid to think he is dead.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  142. J. Mills Portland, OR

    We should have taken him alive so he can see all of our faces, and we can look him in the eye and let him soak in our rage and anger. Since we did not, my only hope is that Osama had NO DOUBT that these were AMERICAN troops in his home and bringing with them the rage of the American People. Those SEALS are true American Heroes (as are all of our troops), and I hope they get rewarded and applauded as such in a public forum some day.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  143. Lee

    NO, he should not be taken alive!! and why are they talking about him being unarmed!?!?!?! the people in the WTC was unarmed soooooo whats the big deal here. ONLY option will be take him DEAD!!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  144. Shawn

    Anyone see 24 season 1? I think we did capture him and just said he died because its all top secret. Something similar happened in 24.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  145. Barbara T. Las Vegas

    No , we should not have tried to take him alive. It would have cost a fortune to put him on trial for starters. Then we would have had to go throught the disgusting display of protecting his rights as a prisoner. Better he is dead. Now we need to move on.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  146. Roger

    No, Jack. He should not have been taken alive. He would have been executed back here, or put in prison for life. The only complaint I have about his demise is that it was too quick.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  147. Vince Cami

    Yes! However, if we were not going to use enhanced interrogation to gleen infomation, the answer is no.
    Vince Cami
    Duluth, ga

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  148. Rick in California

    No. It would have caused more trouble than he is worth. Those idiots would have started a new campaign to break him out of wherever it was and he would probably just escape again with their help. As far as killing an unarmed man, he killed 3000 unarmed men and women. As far as showing the body, how can we possibly make them more angry than they are. Washington thinking just slipped another cog.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  149. Bob Gancarz

    Yes and then George W could tell him face to face mission accomplished.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  150. Forrest in London, Ontario

    Not on your life (pun intended)! He didn't afford 9/11 victims the choice to leave the buildings. Quid pro quo...and bullets are cheaper than the security and trial needed to exact the same result.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  151. Michael

    It really doesn't make any difference what should have happened.
    A person such as OBL had to be killed. He confessed and even bragged about what he did.
    We can lower the deficit with the hundreds of millions we would have spend to try him
    He was guilty and has got what he deserved.
    May he be good food for sharks.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  152. Rick

    Jack, We are at war with Bin laden and his kind, just like we were at war with Hilter and his kind, would there a been a big uprising if we assinated Hitler NO!!! So the same goes with Bin Laden

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  153. Orlando Garcia

    For any of us to make a judgement on how and what Navy Seals should have done is ridiculous. Bin Laden got off easy by being shot.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  154. Andrew

    No, I do not think the United States should have taken Osama Bin Laden alive becuase the safety of the American people, including or men and women serving over seas, would be put at risk. There's a good chance they would have become POW until we releases OBL, which I would not have seen happening. Plus, the security and a trial would be a very high profile case and we would be arguing over jurisdiction.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  155. Jay Hubelbank

    Absolutely not. There was a capture OR kill order.

    He was hunted and put down like the animal that he was.

    I only hope that all his followers meet the same fate, the sooner the better.


    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  156. Sean

    Of course, if for no other reason to gain info about his network. They should have tied him up, taken him away, not said a word, got all the info possible, then shot him in the head and dumped him in the ocean.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:20 pm |
  157. Terry

    Under the circumstances of this raid, it would have been totally insane to burden our "Navy Seals" with the requirement to bring Osama in alive. He killed three thousand plus Americans on 9-11. This was an act of war and we retaliated accordingly. Job well done!!!!!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  158. Brian Skafas

    Benefit of the Doubt? He bragged about it, so why stand trial! The trial would have brought more problems than the showing of his death pictures!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  159. Edie from PA

    No, take the money we saved and give it to the families affected by 911.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  160. Surendra Chaturvedi

    No; That would have been a bad idea and stupid. Remember what happened in India. Plane was hijacked to Kandahar and they demanded the release of a terrorist in exchange of hostages. Indian govt. yielded to public pressure. So I am glad that it is over or else it would be an emotional trauma for so many who have lost their loved ones in 9/11.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  161. April, Iowa

    No I don't think the Navy Seals should have taken him alive. In all honesty we have wanted him dead for ten years now. Now he is dead and we should rejoice about the victory.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  162. thornton1830

    So what if he was unarmed. He never cared about the thousands of people he killed, whether they were able to defend themselves. I say '" no mercy"!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  163. askme

    Yes why not bring him here and protect him on taxpayers behalf. He killed thousands of innocent and unarmed people and they did not even get proper last rights. I think this terrorist( let's stop calling him by name and showing his pictures already) got more than what he deserved. I would not have it in any other way.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  164. Chuck

    With the known Al-Qaeda propensity for suicide bomb vests and martyrdom operations, I think that any action beyond complete and instant compliance would justify the use of deadly force.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  165. Renee M. Parker

    To ask this question, in many ways questions the decisions of the SEAL team assigned to this task. Had we taken bin Laden alive, we would have had to find a place to keep him...I wouldn't even want to wish him upon Cuba and Gitmo.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  166. ron Shedd

    I wasn't at the scene of the mission, so I would never second guess our military. I am really getting angry that Pakistan is now feeding the media with information/suspicions to attempt to make us look bad. I guess the
    "best defense is a good offense", as their government is the one who is the most suspect in this whole deal. I am sure they were harboring/protecting him.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  167. Stefka

    No, we should not have taken him alive so that hostages could be taken and sites blown up, numerous people people killed trying to release him. Did he give any of the 911 victims a chance to escape without harm? I think the media should not discuss the circumstances of whether he was armed or not. Just say he was killed. You give too much information that could jeopardize future such operations and our troops. STOP!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  168. Joe Greech


    How many people were armed in the World Trade Centers?
    Let's face it, he got off easy!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  169. Demetrius

    No. This should have been a kill on sight mission (which is what I think it was all along).

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  170. Murat

    The seals did the right thing.
    The whole place could have been rigged to explode.
    I would have shot him too if he moved a finger.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  171. Luvee

    Jack – the United States Navy Seals DID try to capture Osama bin laden alive – but were unable to. Their lives mean more to me and to everyone else proud to be an american! I would be more disappointed had they captured him alive and one of our own killed in the process.
    I trust our President when he tells us bin laden is dead and I trust our Navy Seals that they got the job done – I trust them with my life. God Bless America and God Bless the US Military!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  172. Nan in PA

    We should have spent just as much time and effort trying to take Osama bin Laden alive as he spent trying to save the innocents in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  173. Brian U'Ren

    No not to the USA,, Canada, or anywhere else. Frankly they should have put him in a building and collapsed the building on him. Way to much of a respectful burial at sea.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  174. Gary Bowden

    Of course we did the right thing by taking this monster out.I just can't see us bringing him over here and have a trial and wasting tax payer's money after what he did to us on 9/11.This sends a message to other terrorists out there.If those who think we shouldn't have killed him,then they should've went over there and try to bring him back and see if their opinion is the same..We owe our gratitude and respect to Obama and to the Navy Seals who carried this through.God Bless them!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  175. Bob

    Jack, I couldn't agree with you more. Taking him alive was not a realistic option. The Navy Seals did exactly what most American wished they could have done to such an evil person.

    While I don't always agree with your commentary, you're on the mark with this one.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  176. Claudia, Houston, Tx

    If not, were we suppose to wait for the Pakistan government to give us permission to remove him from their country, even though they admit they had no knowledge of his whereabouts. Killing him was the only alternative for final justice without any further and unnecessary entanglements.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  177. Dezarae

    OMG! He is dead. I dont know anyone that could survive a shot to the head and a shot to the chest. He is not Jesus, He is a psychopath that was plotting to harm more americans. Lets raise our flag high and shout "DOWN WITH TERRORISM, UP WITH FREEDOM". Lets let his psychopathic name be put to rest. Who cares anymore, He is dead and who knows how many americans lives were saved.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  178. Laura

    No. Osama Bin Laden's presence was a threat in itself. Taking him out in his sleep would have been justified.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  179. Juan

    The us has the most elaborate and legitamit Justice systems in the world. All who say we should not have tried him because of monetary costs, are you crazy!?!? money is no object in the us, DUH. Bring him to trial and PROVE what this "man" has done. have we lost our minds? or maybe just our confidence, and we are happy not to know the truth..

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  180. Harrison

    Take him alive to where? Guantanamo Bay where terrorist would attack next to free him and countless other extremely dangerous individuals? I think Americans are better off with him in the bottom of an ocean.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  181. tom from raleigh

    Jack, Any of the "armchair seals", who think Bin Laden should have been taken alive, should volunteer to take the point, in our next covert operation. I doubt, they will be as generous to this murderer, as they wish our heroes would be!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  182. Fran from Huntington

    Absolutely not! How could you even pose the question. The ramifications are way too many to discuss. This is the perfect scenario, Bin Laden sleeps with the fish.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  183. Chris from Orlando

    Yes we should have taken him alive. We should have interrogated him and tried him. Why not? The only reason why not is to boost Obamas poll numbers.

    I fully believe that Obama is sick enough, cynical enough to send in commandos to murder an unarmed man in front of his children. That's what they admit they have done.

    And it's fully consistent with Obama murdering Qadafi's children and grandchildren in the name of protecting civilians. I guess the grandchildren weren't civilians.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  184. Hope & Ed, San Antonio, TX

    No! OBL should NOT had been taken alive. And, in as much as the fact that he was unarmed .... how about all the 3,000 victims that he killed ..... they also were unarmed! We are glad that the last thing OBL saw was an American and he knew we had kept our promise .... we had come for him! Good thing he was buried at sea! Good riddance!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  185. Roy H. Wagner ASC

    Absolutely not! We see how badly lawyers and the legal system can screw up the most morally logically question. We've got thousands of "detainees" that will never have any solution as long as lawyers can bill by the hour. If we had the same opportunity with Adolph Hitler under the current morally bankrupt legal system would he still be sitting in a cell somewhere without any resolution for the victims he created?

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  186. Mick Fowler

    They should give the Navy Seal who shot him the Congregational Medal of Honor.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  187. Sydney

    Absolutely not! This man had no problem with masterminding all of these violent unconscionable attacks. The media needs to stop trying to make a story where there isn't one. The Navy Seals did their job and should be commended. He deserves no further discussion. He's dead and good riddance. Now on to the next target.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  188. Brooks

    he put america through enough... if he was using mother theresa as a human shield i would have shot through her to get to him.... he was a true monster the only thing i wish he suffered more in his final moments. two bullet wounds he got off easy in my book.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  189. Chris From Alexanria VA

    I personally think they should have done exactly what they did mostly because alkida would have probably tried to free him and you may have people here trying to assassinate him not mo mention it would cost alot.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  190. Vanansio Samson/ Lavergne, Tennessee

    The shield did the right thing. Dead is the answer to the question as this will allow tax payers to save extra money to spend at the pump.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  191. Brad in CA

    We spent enough blood and treasure trying to find him and on the added security measures required after 9/11. He did not deserve a trial. God bless and godspeed to team six. I am sure glad they are on our side!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  192. Bill George

    We should not have taken him alive and we should have tried, at the same time, to find and kill his next 2 top aids. We just cut off the head and it will be replaced very quickly

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  193. Craig Williams

    we will never know if Ben laden had a gun or use his wife as a shield or even if he resisted. They tried to bring him back alive instead Ben Laden ended up dead. there is really not much to say about that

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  194. Beas

    Absolutely not. I'm happy with the way the operation was carried out: show no mercy, bullet to the head, swift burial at sea, public statement about justice being served and release no photos. Retribution or should I say revenge, is best served cold.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  195. joe in canada

    should the us have taken bin laden alive?

    only if the us were willing to trade g w bush in exchange (to be tried for his war crimes) on middle east soil.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  196. Angela Charlotte, NC

    No! Let him feed the fish. It will be the only productive thing he will have done. I hope Pakistan will blow up the property where he lived, and then perhaps he will disappear into oblivion.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  197. Millie

    No, No, No!,
    We would have put our troops overseas in "harms way" They would attempt to take them as prisoners, and demand we release Osama the murderer.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  198. 'Dee'

    Yes especially when he was unarmed. The President said justice was served, what kind of justice was this? Mob justice, outlaw justice, vigilante justice? To kill an unarmed man is not American justice.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  199. Jan

    No Jack, we should not have tried to take Osama bin Laden alive. Where would we put him? Area 51 with the rest of the alien monsters?


    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  200. Mark, Billings MT

    No way, can you imagine how many hostages would have been take to try to make a deal?

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  201. Steve Auld Kingman Arizona

    NO ! And we don't need any more details, what was done was great and a long time coming, but we don't need pictures or any more information. We have done a good thing, now let it go.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  202. Debbie, Ontario Canada

    Yes Jack, I believe they should have taken Bin Laden alive at all costs, but kept it a secret. The amount of information in that man's head would have been priceless and without anyone knowing he was still alive, the CIA could have used any tactics necessary to get that information. No one have had to know, I secretly hope this is actually the case. One can dream.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  203. Terry Ferris

    Those who died on 9/11 were not armed, nor were they in an armed compound. They were showen no mercy. Why should their mass-murderer be showen mercy?

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  204. diana yachcik

    hows this, how many of our family and friends where armed when he bombed the world trade center??? he killed thousands of unarmed women, children,and men. why bring him here we are already broke, i dont want to house, protect or feed him do you????

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  205. Ben

    Absolutely NOT. Don't care if he was armed or not, hiding behind anyone or everyone or any other parameters you want to apply. As long as it was in fact OBL, then assassination was eminently appropriate. Any other action would be giving him credit that he did not deserve.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  206. Tony Rochester, NY

    Absolutely not. If he were left alive he would have been a huge liability and useless. He wouldn't have said anything that would help this country and if he did have future plans... they're already planned. Killing him is a warning to those who try and carry on his role and plans. We are the greatest country in the world so its time to focus on the future of our great country and take this as a huge feat and accomplishment for all americans

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  207. Daniel Herman Groveland California

    Nothing good would have come from taking him alive. I feel that President Obama has done the right things from the start to nto puting out the photos. Job well done Mr president Daniel Herman Groveland California!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  208. jeff odegaard

    who says he's dead? oh. hmm. we'll just take his word. they're playing the pakistanis like they played him. they don't want them to know if he's dead or alive. it's all part of the game. you're telling me they didn't have contingency plans?

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  209. Patricia H. Laurenzo

    Absolutely not. Mr. Bin Laden was an enemy combatant who killed without reservation. To bring him in 'alive' would only provide a platform to do more harm. He is dead, and he will never harm another soul again.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  210. Josh

    There are humanitarian and legal debates which can speak to this issue, but I don't think tactically we wanted to provide Bin Ladin's extremist followers with an opportunity to try and get him back. It could have provoked kidnappings to be offered up as trades for his release, etc. If we are really in a "war" on terror, taking out the enemy's leader is well within reason as a tactical victory.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  211. Kim

    A dollars worth of bullets to kill the SOB certainly was the best investment given that he would have been killed eventually. The period of time between now and then would have cost us an unacceptable amount of money that we can better use toward something more important. Possibly finding and killing his replacement in less than 10 years this time.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  212. John C,

    No! A Kill Order is a Kill Order. There is no room for deviation by a professional soldier. The only thing acceptable is the precise execution of the order, with extreme prejudice.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  213. brett

    There is no way that Bin Laden would give up any information. The data collected from data storage devices and computers is more than he would ever tell us. If anything he would use that opportunity to mislead us. From my time spent in SOCOM I can tell you that most special forces members are itching to pull the trigger. The type of person who decides they want to be the ultimate soldier tends have no reservations about killing someone. Osama Bin Laden was a trophy too tempting for most average Americans; consider what it was like for DEVGRU, the most elite of the elite.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  214. Tom Graner

    The team did exactly the right thing. How could anyone trust he was not going to blow them up or create a safety drag as they tried to leave. I also fully support the decision to bury him at sea AND the decision (as of now) to not air the pictures. We should be classier than that.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  215. Jerry Aleff

    When he was confronted they did not know if he had a "help" button on his person he could have pushed that would have called in armed people, they did not know if he had a sucide jacket on, they did not know if the place was rigged so he could blow it up if he desired. All they knew was they wanted h im dead and they wanted to leave alive....They got that done...Jerry Aleff, Waverly Iowa

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  216. David Clark

    Jack, This mass murderer should have died on Sept 12, 2001. Ten extra years was totally undesereved. That Navy Seal acted appropriately. End of subject!
    Dave, Ellicott City, MD

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  217. Beth Toy

    Why would anyone think we should take him alive? The man was a mass murderer for God's sake. I am hearing now that someone is concerned that his daughter saw him shot. Did all the 911 victim's families watch them burn? Did all the rest of us have to watch the horror? Are people just stupid or what? As far as religion goes, there is a passage about an eye for an eye. Yes, that can be debated as to how far that goes, but David slew Goliath and nobody had a problem with it.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  218. markus

    If this is a WAR on terror the U.S. should take NO prisoners. 3000 + families will never be the same, we have enough bullets for killable enemies.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  219. David W. Gibson


    No, he should not have been taken alive. It would have turned into a circus. Hot shot lawyers would have been climbing over each other to defend him just for the name recognition and book rights. Numerous plots would have been hatched to free or at least glorify him while his trial proceeded. I personally received no satisfaction from Saddam's trial and subsequent hanging. He might have rather had merciful double tap such as Bin Laden received. Bin Laden was the enemy. The object in war is to kill the enemy. All is fair in love and war.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  220. NickJersey

    Taking him alive would serve no point. Putting him on trial would cost over $100 million in taxpayer money only to get a guilty verdict and send him to jail for life. How it was handled was the perfect way way and there should not be any complaints. Remember this is Bin Laden were talking about, the man responsible for thousands of deaths of innocent men, women and children.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  221. Jeremy Blackburn

    I think Bin Laden should have been capture alive, because even though they had taken all the computers, flash drives, hard drives, papers, and such. We could have gotten much more information from him about the terrorist group. I bet 80% off the data on those memory items won't even be about alcida. He is a person too he is surfing the web and stuff to. He will no doubt have information about them, but don't you think Bin Laden was the main source to the information we need?
    But for all we know, the government could be lying for killing him, and the have him hidden some where for questioning so that other countries wouldn't freak out too much.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  222. Rob for Canada

    Idealistically it would be great to take OBL alive, but realistically there is a lot less red-tape required to have him dead. Had he been captured alive, the International debate over a trial (and by who), the outrage over the idea of a death penalty if sought, and execution if deemed approriate, would become an international issue and last but not least.. the ability for him to continue to be in the media (his death will eventually quiet down) for the next few years while a court case, execution etc would be debated would only keep him and his evil mandate in the minds of all.

    His death brings an end to his continued power, and allows the world to move onto the next stage in the war on terror.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  223. dustin davis morganton, nc

    Absolutley not, the trial and media coverage would just keep dragging his face and name across the nation for the victoms families to see everyday. By killing him, the seals were judge , jury, & executioner & now his rain of terror is done! The burial at sea was even better than the decison to kill him, fish food is suiting. im sure its never crossed his mind or any of his followers whether to kill an american or not.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  224. Drew

    Yeah, we did try to take him alive, but didn't. Too bad. Enough said...

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  225. Peggy German

    I think the answer to that question can only be answered by the Navy Seals that were in the situation at that time. I'm feel completely confidant that they were trained as to what to do in every sinerero. I trust they did what they had to do.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  226. al

    This country is financially strapped. Keeping him alive would have created costs no one could imagine. Having a trial would be rediculous, he is Guilty.

    We have people in this country starving, homeless and struggling to stay alive and he woule have been living the good life if saved. GOOD RIDENCE!!!!!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  227. Vince P.

    No, we should not have tried to take him alive. If he were in custody it would just be a matter of time before his crazy followers managed to take one or two hundred Americans hostage and started killing them gruesomely in an attempt to get him released. There was no question of his guilt. So the doctrine of innocent until proven guilty is in this case outweighed by the responsibility to protect innocent people from potential harm.

    Good riddance

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  228. Marta

    They should not have taken him alive...
    We do not have to spend any money keeping him
    alive .... and putting him on trial...

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  229. Cal

    Dead is good!

    But, waterboarding would have been better, because the spoiled brat would have sold out his followers right away and we could have crushed many more Al Qaida operatives within days.

    The current administration wants to be too politically correct to take the waterboarding steps that would have saved more American soldiers' lives.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  230. Deb

    What we did in killing this man was the right thing to do. He hated this country and he deserved the same fate as those in the twin towers, pentagon and on the United flight that went down in PA. He has cost this country BILLIONS of dollars in this war of terror, why would we want to pay to keep him alive and as a prisoner? If we had captured him alive and kept as a prisoner, the only worthwhile punishment while awaiting DEATH would be hourly WATERBOARDING and let George Bush do it


    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  231. Emile Romain

    No.. Because some crazy "Al Qaeda" cronies would be taking hostage
    Americans overseas, or some high ranked officials from other countries
    and demanding his release in exchange.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  232. Frank Williams

    I am a Democrat and I believe 1000% that President Obama ordered the Navy Seals to capture and to kill this devil....this completely EVIL MAN ( I cant even come to type his name) I salute my President and the military for a JOB WELL DONE!!!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  233. Bob in Texas

    Jack, I'm divided on this issue. Both arguments have valid points. I would loved to have seen him grovel and beg for his life. I would love to have seen him tortured to the point of renouncing his brand of Islam. I would love to have seen him publicly executed ala Saddam. In other words, I've had to come to grips with the fact that taking him alive would only have brought out the worst in me. For me, it's better this way. Now I can just be glad he's dead. Thank you to all involved for taking this monster down.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  234. Andrew from Michigan


    Osama Bin Laden was one for the theatrics. The reason he brought Al-Queda together was because he was a great speaker. If he was given his day in court, he would have tried made the court case into a circus of absurdity. Though he would inevitably have been convicted, he would have become even more of a martyr. Being taken alive was what he wanted and killing him was the most logical thing to do.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  235. Tom Lee

    The question is; what orders were given to the seal team regarding Bin Laden? If they were told to kill and not capture no matter what, then they did their job. If it was left up to their professional judgement, I respect the decision of the seals to protect themselves. I do hope it was not just a kell mission and that if Bin Laden tried to surrender, we would have taken him. I guess we'll just have to wait for the inevitable book from the seals when they retire.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  236. Eugene

    I think not!!..taking him alive would only cause more trauma. What would they have done with him anyways? This man killed thousands and the mere fact that we even respected his religion enough to give him a burial in 24 hours should be good enough. He didn't pat the thousands he killed before killing them nor did he give them a warning nor think of their rights. I think he's be spared a miserable death. From whats going on after his death, he seems to be getting a lot of respect rather than what he actually deserves and I'm sad to say the media is actually flaming this fire.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  237. Nayef

    Knowing the Wahhabi ideology, they forbid glorifying any sort of shrine. They destroyed the graves and house of Prophet Muammad in Madinah, so Bin Laden would not be glorified in such a way with a shrine. However, taking him alive would not have achieved much. On the contrary, it might have terrorists acting up even more than if he were killed.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  238. John Walaszek

    What would you do if you endured a 40 minute firefight throughout this compound and then come face to face with Osama Bin Laden? You have just been shot at for almost an hour straight. Would you politely ask him to put his hands up? Would you assume one of the most dangerous men in the world doesn't have a gun or bomb? They say he resisted so if that means he didn't put his hands up immediately then that warrants the shooting. In hindsight I understand how it was technically unethical to shoot and kill him, but I wouldn't have taken any chances either.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  239. Carla

    What is accomplished by discussing this issue? What is done is done and nothing will change that. We have to believe that the Navy Seals made the best decision at the time. Bin Laden will not be nominated by anyone for sainthood–and we know that he believed in suicide missions. It was probably 50/50 whether he would have blown up the entire compound and killed everyone if he could get to and push the button. It is sad and I do not rejoice in anybody's death–but now is not the time to second guess and play the could have-would have-should have game. Sometimes it is just better to be safe than sorry.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  240. Gail

    Had we taken Bin Laden alive and held him for trial, Al Qaeda would most certainly have retaliated with an American hostage situation unlike any we have ever seen in order to rescue their beloved leader. Killing him gives closure even to the radical muslims.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  241. Carol

    The fact that he is osama bin laden changes all the rules. In the interest of public safety the navy seals were justified in killing him. It was also a wise decision to bury him at sea.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  242. Sam, Palm Valley, FL

    Maybe we should pose that question to the 3000 UNARMED who died in the Towers or any of the UNARMED thousands in Africa, etc, OBL killed/had killed.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  243. Butch Yon Aiken, SC

    Jack, I believe our Navy Seals followed their orders to the letter. These men are nothing less than national heroes. Mission accomplished. End of discussion!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  244. Steve Allison

    No way we bring him back alive. Any increased terror threat we face from killing him would have only been multiplied exponentially had we brought him here and allowed his case to meander at a snail's pace through the judicial system.

    Tampa, FL

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  245. Cat

    No way!!!! He would have just been another unneeded security risk in our country. He got what he deserved as far as I'm concerned. This sends a message of, "You try to hurt our country and you'll get yours!" We found him, we killed him, and now he cannot hurt anyone ever again. Good ridens Osama. God Bless the U.S.A.!!!!!!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  246. Jacob, DFW TX

    Yes, he should have been taken alive. Not only because he was unarmed, but for a number of other reasons. He was killed simply to bring "closure". That was the purpose, that and to say our efforts overseas are not in vain and that they are working. God forbid we let him live and he says things the government doesn't want us to hear. For example, at best Bush and Cheney knew 9/11 was coming. Dead, he won't have a trial and won't have a chance to speak ever again. Another government patsy dead?

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  247. mark in arkansas

    No. He and us are better off with him dead. Where would he be kept? Guantanamo? Also, a trial would have been splashed all over the TV, only making him a martyr. In the end, the result would be the same, but there would be a lot more backlash.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  248. Carolyn Pierce

    NO! This had to be a kill mission. Possible retribution for the U. S. killing bin Laden is nothing compared to what would have happened if bin Laden were alive and in our custody.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  249. Pamela Meadows, WV

    No Way, killing him on sight was the smartest thing to do all around.
    Imagine the dragging out of things had we captured him alive. bleh
    Years from now we'd still be feeding and housing his butt, not on my tax dollar. Thanks for ending it and ending it fast.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  250. Philip

    yes i think we should have kept him alive.if we would have kept him alive ,everybody in the us could have seen him die.we could have took him to the 9/11 site and hang him in the middle and let everyone see.now you have people like mewho dont believe hes dead. they dont wanna show death pictures,or any clue that they killed him. for all we know they could have killed a double. hey thats my opinion.
    Now we are gonna doubt the white house and eveyrthing they do.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  251. Cal (Maui)

    Bringing him back alive to stand trial would have brought on more grief for this country, the idea that this person would have be subject to American Justice system rules or even a Military tribunal would have dragged on for years costing the tax payer scores of millions, the idea that he was killed unarmed instead of being taken alive does not phase me in the slightest, none of those passengers on those planes were armed, none of those people in the twin towers were armed, He got what he deserved and dumping his body in the ocean was the best thing now he swims with the fishes.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  252. Maxwell

    The President should have poster pictures of Bin Laden
    Jesse James Photos were Taken and his body was on Display
    for all to see Was bin laden not the No/1 most wanted Dead or alive if he was brought back alive he might have gotten off on a technaclity

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  253. al Hall, Stoneham, ma

    Bin Laden was wanted dead or alive. He got off easy!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  254. Phil - New Jersey

    Why would any person in this world want Osama Bin Laden alive. This man was a mass murderer and deserved to die. Another detainee who won't speak! He's gone, let's move forward with our economic problems and stop giving this mass murderer all of this attention. Haven't we wasted enough money on this. It seems to me that people get all wrapped up with the drama of it all. Let's cut this story short and move on to things that are much more important, jobs!!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  255. John Goodman

    We had to kill Bin Laden. People that know the U.S. understand that it's very rare that we pre meditate to kill anyone other than murderous leaders. KSM is still alive, as well as killers housed at GITMO-so in fact we don't have a "QUICK Trigger". As far as if bin laden is dead or not, the fact that I live the the USA answers that!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  256. Oscar

    Simple, No. Its less on the taxpayers, I'd take a less expensive route like a .50 bullet.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  257. Christian

    Absolutely not. His ultimate fate would be execution, so cut to the chase and pull the trigger. Why prolong this any longer, or get lost in the overwhelming evidence he is guilty. Osama Bin Laden's 5 minutes of fame, stretched over 10 years is now over!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  258. Steve Cooper

    Killing Bin Laden was proper and I wish the administration would quit sounding as if it's trying to justify the actions of the team. We found him, we killed him. End of story.

    Under NO circumstances should be pictures of his body be released. If I were the POTUS I would take this line:

    "He was our mortal enemy, but he was also a human being and we will not disrespect his body by publicizing pictures of it to the world.

    Let Bin Laden prove he's not dead."

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  259. Edwin

    Were the 3,000 people + people on Flight 93 + Pentagon given a trial?

    We finally received dividend on our 10 year investment.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  260. DJ

    The team members went in to do exactly that, if the situation permitted it. Grabbing OBL is very different than stopping a common criminal on the street. Very few criminals wear explosive vests with the intent to blow themselves, and you, up if they feel they have no other options – that is al-Qa'ida. All this Monday morning quarterbacking is useless and moot since WE were not there. We would not even be having this conversation if government representatives had waited until the team members were properly debriefed and the FACTS were then shared.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  261. Marsha Harris

    I thought we were in a War Against Terrorism. He was the chief terrorist. It's W.A.R. Have the terrorists had a problem beheading anyone? It would have been impossible to take him alive. Anyway, the SEALS are American heros, we should trust their judgement about anything they did. Forgeddaboutit !!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  262. marsha lafountain

    no he should not have been taken alive. why so the terrorists could grab more hostages or hijack a plane and try and make a trade off. that would have been the ultimateinsult to all that have died at the hands of terrorists

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  263. BJ

    They did try, he resisted so they shot him.
    2 Bullets saved us Millions.
    Good place to start with budget cuts I think.
    Obama keep it up and I may vote for you this time.
    Now you can pull the troops home and protect the border.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  264. ellen ganopoulos, NJ

    No. It's life served no purpose other than to inspire destruction, hatred, and fear. It gave up its right to life they day it became a bringer of death.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  265. nic

    Absolutely NOT. I believe that there is much more to this story than what meets the eye. Neither the United States nor the SEAL's should have to defend their actions. Dead or Alive was the original deal if I remember well. From here on this should be the standard operating procedure for the United States. Without America there would be chaos on this world. Take my word on it. I came from a communist country. Thank You Mr. President and Thank You America and last but not least, Thanks to the US NAVY SEALS ! Job Well done !

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  266. Robert Castillo

    Absolutely not...Osama Bin Ladin got what he deserved and the U.S. and President Obama did everything right. And one more thing, it seems to me that there are those who do not believe that Bin Ladin is dead. If this is the case, just have the unbelievers to call him up and see if he answers.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  267. John

    Taking him alive and incarcerating him would probably have increased the danger to U.S. citizens and U.S. military worldwide. Al-Qaeda members probably would have kidnapped large numbers of U.S. citizens/U.S. military and demanded Osama Bin-Laden's release.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  268. Rich Meister - Re: Obama Shrine

    The U.S. is naive to think that burying Bin Laden at sea will prevent a shrine being constructed to him. Napoleon who butchered tens of thousands of people is entombed at the Invalides in Paris; Chairman Mao, who purged 186,000 people, has a National Mauseleum in TiananMen Square; and evn the U.S. has a staute to the murderer Billy the Kid in Hico, TX...to think that a shrine to Bin Laden won't be built somewhere is again simply naive.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  269. Dwayne

    No way. It would have just cost a lot of extra money and more problems, just like it did when they captured Hussein. The way they took him out is the way it should be done – get rid of the media and don't tell anyone and let the troops do the job they are trained to do. This is exactly what they should have done with Kadafi, his sons, and his supporters.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  270. Stephen Bush, Ontario Canada

    Jack, Navy Seals were on an airborne mission. No need to risk an incident on return flight. Mission accomplished. Stephen Bush, Cornwall, Ontario Canada

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  271. Joe from Ohio

    He wouldn't have surrendered anyways. This was a man who bragged about being the figurehead behind thousands of deaths (and not just on foreign soil) who had no intent whatsoever in surrendering. Also, capturing him and giving him a trial would have been a great risk for the US.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  272. Paul

    No one on 9-11 had a choice about their fate. I am glad Osama didn't have much of a say with his. I am much happier now that he is "swimming the fishes".

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  273. John - New York

    Yes, the US should have captured him alive, now that we know that he wasn't armed, nor did he had used his wife as a human shield.
    What does the US want to hide about 911? Wouldn't be fair if he was brought to justice, wouldn't be satisfying if he had confessed then gotten executed?
    I don't buy the argument that "we don't want to make him a martyr, nor do we want his grave location to be a shrine..." This is too much drama that the government likes to play
    The whole thing is fishy and makes me think that there is something to hide. US Administrations are never shy from doing things imperfectly and without any smoke.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  274. timothy sharp

    Definately not,he needed to be killed on site if the us qa to take bin laden alive there would have most definately and immediately been a very gruesome attack of retaliation...not to free him because I'm sure they know we would never allow him to escape alive but to kill him as to protect their cause and to give bin laden his right to be callled a martyr in the name of his followers and beliefs

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  275. Dr Patrick Guerin

    I am grateful for all of us who would have had to suffer endlessly if Bin Laden had been taken alive, that he was not. The relatives of the victims of 911 as well as anyone who knows how convoluted and complex our systems can be in this country, realize that we have been spared a great deal of pain and anxiety by this outcome.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  276. Ethan Maryland

    This is the United States of America, remember? Anyone who thinks that the cost of detaining him supersedes his right to a trial needs to reread the 6th amendment. After he's convicted, carry out whatever punishment a court of law deems fit, but if we start to ignore our own constitution because of emotional or financial costs, what do we have left?

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  277. Darrell -Kitchener, Ontario

    As a Canadian I find it hard to agree with killing a unarmed man even if it was Osama Bin Laden or not. Aren't you not just as bad as him now? He was a evil person but two wrongs do not make a right. The World is a better place without him but if a police officer shot a unarmed man that was American he would be held accountable for his actions

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  278. barb Fogle

    I would normally say above all else yes! However in this case, It would have created too many problems. Where to hold him safely, where to try him, the cost to the taxpayers, the anxiety. WE know he is guilty, he admitted it. Skip the red tape! Burrial at sea was a wise decision otherwise they would martyr him.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  279. American Woman

    Personally, I hope he is dining with other demons which unfortunately we also have been unfortunate to encounter. He was disposed of in the necessary manner that was needed to make sure his type of evil was dead.
    On the other hand, the manner of his death could be an issue. International laws would prevail here in this instance I would think. Which outweighs the other?
    My answer is the lives of everyone his continued presence would effect is by far more important than any law.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  280. Dianne Ratcliff

    Osama got just what he deserved. I don't think he should have had a burial according to muslem law. He should have been just dumped in the sea. I wonder what the thousands that have died because of him would have thought. Some families didn't even get a chance to bury their loved ones because their bodies could not be recovered. I commend our Goverment and especially the service men . God bless them and May God bless the USA.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  281. Catherine Runnals

    Enough is enough, we are talking about the devil here. If he was taken alive then what. Where would you hold him? Have we forgotten all those innocent people who were not arm in the twin towers? Did they have any choice, did there children not see them die, horrific I might add. Osama
    Bin Ladin is dead. Let's talk about the brave seals, instead of this lowlife and how he died or if he were arm. I know if I were there I would take no chances. I know as Americans we should have compassion, but this person was another Hitler he was not human in any way. Does anyone wonder what would happen to the seals if he caught them. Please this animal deserved what he got. God bless the Seals.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  282. Don Desjardins - Colorado

    Jack –

    Absolutely not, this leader of a radical cult bent on our destruction needed a swift and final resting place, and I hope he never gets to rest. People are too soon to forget the he was the Hitler of our age and President Obama gave the Navy Seals his directive and they executed, end of story.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  283. Patti in Missouri

    Dead then or dead later, makes no difference. He's going to be spotted everywhere. Just like Elvis.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  284. Bryan Lovsness

    In light of how crafty OBL has been regarding the use of bombs and total demolition THERE WOULD BE NO WAY TO KNOW IF HE COULD TRIGGER SOME SORT OF DEVICE and blow his compound and our troops off the face of the earth. I feel it was self-defense and in this case was ABSOLUTELY done for the good of our nation.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  285. James Baxter

    In my opinion it may have been a good idea to have brought bin Laden back to stand trial. It's obvious the direction in which the trial would have gone, but the physical appearance of bin Laden in a courtroom would have given monumental closure to family members of victims of the 9/11 attacks.
    Let's not forget the amount of time and energy that was put forth to bring Nazi war criminals to stand trial. It would have been easy to simply kill these men, but many of the higher-ups were made to stand trial and that is what was fair to the victims.
    Osama bin Laden did deserve to die, in any case, however, if he in fact did not resist or fire on the Navy S.E.A.LS., I think it would have been beneficial to bring him back for the American people to see.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  286. Rick from Houston

    No he should not have been taken alive. The initial directive should have been kill him as it should be with Moammar Khadafy. Absolutely no mercy!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  287. Terry, Minnesota

    Osama bin Laden, like Hitler, willfully chose to be a personific­ation of evil in this world and so abrogate his humanity to became a monster. He has brutally died for the brutality he perpetrate­d. This is a fate he chose for himself. I always believed that if we found him that he would not let himself be taken alive. Justice was done and yes it is not wrong to be glad for it, the world is a better place even if only a small way.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  288. Denise

    The ultimate decision rested with the Navy Seals. I feel they made the right decision. Why capture him and drag the issue out into a trial? The bigger question is.....will the Navy Seals get the $2.5 million reward?? The deserve every penny!!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  289. Troy Daniels

    Absolutely not! Think of how much money it would have cost in security to imprison him and put him on trial. Not to mention the argument over where he would be kept and tried. For what? To eventually find him guilty and put to death? President Obama and the military did the right thing.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:25 pm |
  290. Don Arizona

    Choice one – Bring his head back to ground zero on a stick
    Choice two – Bring him back yo ground zero alive for a traditional stoning
    Choice three – let the Seals kill him and make his body disappear

    May 4, 2011 at 5:26 pm |
  291. Id

    I do not believe we should have taken him alive. We have been searching for him for years and to think now that he should be paraded through our legal system, whether in a military tribunal or a public trial is inconceivable. He is dead, as he should be. Let his Maker pass judgement on him in the afterlife. We do not need to have him alive as a constant reminder of the devastation he was primarily responsible for. However, his death marks a significant point from which we as Americans can move forward from together.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:26 pm |
  292. Rick in Vegas

    Jack, The short answer is NO and the long answer is NO WAY!
    The man died as his victims did, violently and quickly...Live by the sword, Die by the sword. It would have been torture for the 911 families to see this man working his way through a court of law or a military tribunal. At least this way the families have some closure.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:26 pm |
  293. Anne

    This is yet another poor choice by the US Government!
    Did we all FORGET the dead Americans, as well as the dead world wide from this terrorist and his followers??? I sat down weak in the knees, crying on September 11,2001. If there is a concern over more attacks on us anywwhere? What else is new! They are going to attack no matter what we do or don't do! President Obama owes our military and the American citizens to show proof! ( The pictures) The only reason he wouldn't is if he does not want to be president again.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:26 pm |
  294. David from Greenville, SC

    It was certainly better that UBL was not taken alive. My problem is that with seemingly everything with the Obama adminstration is all the lies and cover-up. Starting with the president's speech on Sunday night something just doesn't set right. We got Usama bin Laden and that is fact put the rest of the story isn't adding up. Obama made a tough call to send troops into a soveriegn nation and thus shows a climpse of leadership but then.....immediately laspes back to lies and inuendo. Please Mr. President where is the change you promised? Will we get straight, honest talk out of the White House ever again?

    May 4, 2011 at 5:26 pm |
  295. Wayne - Orlando

    The outcome regarding Osama bin Laden was an exceptional case of doing the right thing. Given his career actions that resulted in horrific deaths on a grand scale, the verdict on his guilt was concluded long ago. For the world's sake, carrying out this action was inevitable.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:26 pm |
  296. Ellen in Missouri

    We claim to be a nation of laws, if at all possible we should have gone through the drawn out spectacle of a trial, just to uphold what we say we are. Not at the expense of any more of our troops, but if possible.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:26 pm |
  297. Ann, Arkansas

    To what end? He has already cost the US trillions of dollars and untold misery. Bringing him back for a trial would have been absurd. And why does it matter whether or not he had a weapon in his hand when he was shot? Obviously he was not going to waltz out of there with his escorts! There is no valid reason to second guess the actions of the men who conducted the operation.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  298. Tom Skinner

    Absolutely not. What an ongoing nightmare that would create. And as far as his "Death Photo" and Palins calls for is release goes, Do we really want to expose ourselves, our children, and our grandchildren to the gruesome photo of Bin Laden with his face blown off? So much for Palin's family values... Lets try to regain some dignity and preserve a little innocence please.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  299. Nancy, Tennessee

    Wanted dead or alive was the imperative. The Navy seals did their job and Osama will not have to rot in a jail cell awaiting a trial somewhere. There will not be any missions in the dark to try and free him. There will not be protests from anybody about what would be a fair trial for him. There will be no bells tolling for thee, Osama bin Laden.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  300. Hope & Ed, San Antonio, TX

    No! OBL should NOT had been taken alive .... and in as much as he being unarmed ..... well, the 3000 victims he killed were ALL unarmed also! Good that he was buried at sea AND good riddance!

    As far as Parkistan .... I don't see where we have any choice but look the other way .... turn the other cheek ..... Paklistan has nuclear missles! They probably would use them while we Americans probably would think twice about using them.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  301. Morgan

    The man was a monster. Getting rid of him for good is better than keeping him around.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  302. George from Sarasota

    I say there was no other way to deal with bin Laden. Killing him could have saved lives if he had access to a bomb. We know that suicide in response to the enemy brings them great things in their after life. I would not want to see our troops killed because they hesitated. As for the photos, I would say they should be published. As a journalist myself, the photos tell me and my readers that, yes, indeed he's dead.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  303. Keenan Shaw

    Absolutely not Jack, Bin Laden plotted and carried the worst terrosist attacks in US history. He was an enemy of war for almost 10 years, therefore the President has the right to order his assination. The Whitehouse has repeatedly said taking him alive was the second option, and I am more than ok with that. Terrorist around the world need to understand that when America declares war on you there's nothing that will stop us from bringing justice to you.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  304. John Morgan

    Maybe here's why we didn't "bring 'em back alive". He knew too much about his allies in Pakistani ISI and elsewhere. He had become largely irrelevant as a threat to the United States but could have embarrased many people in murky world of the "international intelligence community" - an oxymoron if there ever was one.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  305. Evan

    No. the debate on how to handle a captured BinLaden with tax payer money would have only split our country even more. Obama did the right thing. Bin Laden is in the ocean with Megatron now

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  306. Leroy Johnson

    Having read and listened about the thousands of suicide bombers over the last two decades, as a SEAL I would only allow the subject to blink his eyelids. Any movement beyond that would induce my right index finger to pull back toward me with lightening speed...and hold it there. We have continually heard of men, women and children laden with bomb vests killing innocents. Osama could have donned a bomb vest as his normal habit for dressing. Let's end this media frenzie and just say justice has been served.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  307. Leanna in CA

    I think the soldiers should have brought Bin Laden back alive, sure it would have cost more to put him on trial, but its one of the principles that the United States is founded on, he should have had a trial here, and he should have been executed here if that was the out come of the trial. In the United States we are innocent until proven guilty. He should have been brought back and received justice here, not in the middle of the night in front of his family, he may be guilty but that doesn't mean his family is.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  308. McKinzie from DC

    Jack, In all cases, the preservation of human life is ideal and our nation's courts are set up to ensure this. However, there is a line between what is ideal and what is right. Osama claimed the responsibility of 9/11, amongst other tragedies, and therefore attached his own life to the outcome. His death is his outcome, and US citizens' feelings of vindication should not be met with remorse.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  309. Leticia C.

    yeah they should have tried...but then again for what so we could then have our taxpayers take care of him until we do execute him? They just helped the country save money....we have spent enough on him already. Not glad the man is dead...but glad he cant himself hurt anyone else.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  310. bryan m

    Absolutely not.
    It would end up serving as a shrine or a desecration of the site, depending on who worships him or despises him.

    I do think the White House should release ONE (and only one) post-mortem photo to assure America (and others) that we indeed get him.
    I'm not a fan of conspiracy theories.

    Bryan M. Ellensburg Wa.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  311. larry

    no , absolutely not! whats done is done.bin laden never asked the innocent people at the world trade center if they could have a chance to evacuate before two planes were driven into them. there are no bleeding hearts here. don't turn this into some" politically correct ideology".

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |

    After 10 years of searching the mission should have been eliminate the target on site and retreive remains if you can.Oh wait thats what happened.Never mind.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  313. William Douthit

    Jack: Its a simple 1 – 2 – 3. (1) The U.S. determined Bin-Laden, the enemy combatant, was a clear and present danger to our national security. (2) A WANTED – DEAD or ALIVE notice was posted providing adequate notice to surrender and remain alive. (3) The perpetrator opted to remain at – large, thereby refusing the offer to surrender and live.

    Bill D.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  314. Christopher L. Tulsa, OK


    Absolutely they should have killed him and buried him in the manner they did. It DOES prevent a shrine, although they'll like just flock to the compound, but had we brought him back to face the courts and be imprisoned, we would likely be facing an ever increasing threat from his brethren here and abroad trying to free him. Who knows how VIOLENT and INVENTIVE they would become in order to achieve their goal.

    Christopher L.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  315. Mitch Dworkin - Dallas, Texas

    No (or at least not publicly) because of the partisanship and the cost that would be involved. After what Bin Laden did, I would not have any problem with our doing "whatever it takes" to get as much information from him that we could get however we chose to do it from behind the scenes (even if it meant secretly holding him for a time to do it and not telling the country). We were going to kill him any way so why not try to get as much information as we can from him while we had the chance to do it in order to try and save lives? I am against torture but this would be a definite exception to me because of how high profile of a person that he was and with how much he may have known. I would say the exact same thing if we caught Hitler and World War II was still going on because it could help to save lives.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  316. Stan Littlefield

    No, they should not have tried to take Bin Laden alive. They should have chopped his head off. I heard that he was not armed. That's o.k. none of the 9/11 victims were armed either.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  317. donald

    it comes back to what people want to believe. Many feel that Obama is not realy telling all because he does not want to offend the muslim world.
    does not release the photos so as not to offend the muslims and can't understand that us residents say why respect the muslim countrys that finance or harbor terrorists and support and train young muslims in extreme sects. Many believe that if we did capture and put him on trial and execute him publically it would help to heal the familys of thousands that lost loved ones. And would put out the word that terror will not be

    May 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  318. Nobody

    Osama is alive and in our custody ( somewhere). No way that we would dispose of him ( too much intell to collect). God bless and way to go Navy Seals.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:28 pm |
  319. Rollison E.

    The dead brings a final conclusion,the living brings fatal coincidence. Better dead, to bring an end to hope,than alive to stir fate in Al Qaeda.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:28 pm |
  320. S.P. Thornton

    NO, and I would like to think that the SEAL that pulled the trigger had final words for him on behalf of all American citizens. The circus that would have become his trial would have made more out of him than he ever deserved.
    Had he ben captured within hours or days of the 9/11, we would not be discussing this.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:28 pm |
  321. Steve

    Jack It doesn,t matter. You got to wait for the movie to come out for the alternative ending. Then you could have it either way.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:28 pm |
  322. R.Boland

    Let's not lose sight of the fact that the assault team was prepared to do this, but chose not to. Because it was a military operation, we should not apply law enforcement standards, which for some folks out there would mean they'd be licking their chops about a lawsuit. The military operators made an on the spot decision to apply lethal force, and I for one support their decision!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:28 pm |
  323. Thomas K. Cole

    There is such a tendency to make everything political and critical. It was done correctly. It has saved time and money. If Pakistan wants to doubt the death, they have the blood and wife and kids of Bin Laden. Whether people have ever agreed with Obama on anything else, they should give him credit on this one.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:28 pm |
  324. pam

    obl was never waterboarded. just shot in the head and killed.( a good thing). FOR ME I'll take the waterboardin any old time.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:28 pm |
  325. David - Madison, WI

    No, if there was anyone on the planet who deserved killing, it was bin Laden. He was an enemy combatant who by all accounts did not attempt to surrender. Furthermore, he had killed thousands and would have preferred to kill millions. He got better than he deserved and it is time for the US to move on to the next scum bag who deserves the same.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:28 pm |
  326. steve from schuylkill haven pa.

    yes. Bin Laden should have been taken alive. then he should have been promptly taken to new york. Then put on top of the tallest building left, had aviation fuel dumped all over him, lit on fire then pushed over the edge. It could have even been put on pay per view with all the proceeds going to his victims families and to our brave troops families that have been killed in Afganistan.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:28 pm |
  327. Al A.

    If there was a viable option to take Bin Laden alive, then it should have been done. I honestly don't believe that Bin Laden gave our military the option though. What really bothers me about this situation is that these armchair military experts and blinded citizens are holding Bin Laden to a higher standard. Did they forget that this man made it his life work to kill and to continually seek the lives of innocent Americans? He led a life of death and destruction and in the end he reaped exactly what he sowed. He declared war on the United States and died in the same war that he put in motion. Think about all of our citizens and soldiers that have died in this same war. For everyone so concerned with the rights of this dead mass murderer, go devote that same compassion and energy to preserving the lives and rights of our American citizens that have their rights abused on a daily basis.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  328. D. W. Finley

    Bin Laden, as a U. S. prisoner, would create serious problems for the government of Pakistan. The U. S. had to take that into account. There have been many communications between the two governments which will never be made public. We should not assume that we have enough information to form an opinion. All we can do is hope that people who are close to a situation like this will make a proper decision.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  329. Jim in Lehighton,PA.

    No, the people murdered on 9/11 were not given that option.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  330. Collette, Oregon

    NO! I'm very pleased with the outcome of this mission. bin Laden never once considered the thousands of American people that died on 9-11 or God knows how many Muslim people he killed as well. He was evil personified and met a fitting end. God Blessed America.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  331. Summer Walker

    No way should have we taken OBL alive! I shudder to think of the repercussions we Americans (especially our troops in the middle east) would have had from al Queda had we taken him alive.......killing him was our only option.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  332. Jim

    You're the Navy Seal in the situation. You have less than one second to react. You began the noisy assault on the 1st floor; you're now on floor 3. From training you know the entire building may be rigged with explosives for just such an attack; you know bin Laden realizes it's an attack -– he may have explosives on him or have the remote control devive to detonate the entire scene -- you do the only sane thing – put at least one in his head so his chances of detonating are slim.
    "click – click" amidst the hysterical wife.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  333. Kevin, South Carolina

    I say yes for only one reason. The President and the White House spokesman kept giving the response about the lack of release of the post-mortum photos because they say that's not who we are or we're better than waving the photos in adulation. The same reasoning was given for bin Laden's burial at sea. We shouldn't only give ourselves as Americans that sort of acclaim based only on the non-release of the post-mortum photos or the burial at sea. If we truly are "better than that," then killing an unarmed man is not the way to show it. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that he's not still alive and hiding out somewhere. I'm just saying that you can't have it both ways. You can't say that you're too good to release the post-mortum photos and at the same time say that it's okay to kill an unarmed person, no matter how evil he may be.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  334. Mike

    While I would have been personally intrigued to understand how any human being could justify such heinous acts, I believe that it is for the best that the United States did not take him into custody alive. If they had, citizens would have been outraged the moment he stepped on US soil for the inevitable trial. The proceedings and his warped rational would have only acted as a constant reminder that such a mind-set is still prevalent in the middle-east. How could he even receive a fair trial considering every person within the US hates him with every fiber of their soul?. Also, I'm sure that the documents that act as concrete evidence of his guilt are still classified for security reasons. While it goes against what we stand for to not allow him to surrender, I don't think those morals apply in times of war.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  335. sree

    We already spent trillions of dollars and gave billions of $ to terrorist via pakistan govt and thats enough. We don't need to spend another billion dollar on trial.... its good we killed him, after all he is a terrorist...

    May 4, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  336. Ira Burrell

    I rather spend 50 dollars on some bullets instead of millions on a legal matters

    May 4, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  337. janice williams

    It is like confronting any rampaging wild animal. If a grizzly bear had just killed 10 people but was temporarily off guard,would you relocate it on the off-chance that it would not kill again? As long as he was alive, he continued to have the power to encourage his crazy followers to carry out his dreadful deeds. The bottom of the ocean is an excellent place for him.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  338. Ali

    Absolutely not Mr . Cafferty. If we did, it would have brought up the same old debate about whether to try him in a military tribunal or a civilian
    court. As we know, this debate would have gone forever. In addition, like you point out Mr. Cafferty, it could have cost us on many fronts. In my opinion, what the U.S. government did was cost effective and right!!!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  339. roger

    why to waste money on this terrorist and wait another 5-6 years to give justice to the families whose loved ones died in 911.we should be proud of navy seals who did this operation succesfully

    May 4, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  340. Dom Frontauria

    Should we feel remorse for killing Bin Laden while he was unarmed, instead of taking him prisoner? I believe this question should be addressed to the unarmed victims of 911 and the unarmed Daniel Pearl.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  341. Nan in PA

    Sure - we should have spent as much time trying to take him alive as he took trying to save the innocents on 9-11.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  342. Goddy

    Bringing Bin Laden alive even when he is not armed will involve a lot of physical fight whivh may delay the operation or harm our special forces. why do people who do not know what it involves to do this kind of thing talk nonsense. who on earth will not understand that releasing the pictures will incite violence. people shouild wake up to their senses.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:30 pm |
  343. Gertie Preyer

    No! No!No! Did OBL give 3000 Americans and opportunity to leave the Twin Towers?? Then Why should we be concerned with giving OBL a chance to spur more negative rhetoric and cause even more harm to our people. Past President Bush did not have the wherewithal to give the order in 2003 when he had OBL cornered, but Thank God President Obama was committed, incisive and determined to get the deed done.
    God Bless America.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:30 pm |
  344. Diana

    NO!!!!!!!! Never forget Sept. 11th as we watched those poor people jumping to their death; their option burn to death or jump...he got off easy.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:30 pm |
  345. mike

    absolutly not! Killing him then dumping his body in the ocean
    was the justice he deserved. If certain people are skeptical' let them be. Time for us to move on!

    mike in orford, nh

    May 4, 2011 at 5:30 pm |

    With regard to the pictures of Bin Ladin. It's like religion – "for those who believe no proof is necessary, for those who don't believe, no proof is possible".

    May 4, 2011 at 5:30 pm |
  347. DJ

    This is a communications debacle, not a operational one. Government representatives wanted to put out information without waiting for the results of a full & proper debriefing of team members. Operationally, the team would have captured him alive if they could have. This are not common criminals; this is al-Qa'ida. Suicidal use of explosives is always a factor. Even full & immediate submission may be a feint and the subject still presents a possible threat. We were not there, so this is just Monday morning quarterbacking.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:30 pm |
  348. Ray from CA

    Killing Osam Bin Laden was the right move. If he was captured alive and detained by the US govt, all of Bin Laden's followers will be even more motivated to carry out their evil terrorist acts and demand the release of their leader. Suicide bombers is one thing, but the increase of hostage takings could jump.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:30 pm |
  349. Carrie in Al

    Jack , of course not , this President at least thought this through, which is a quality I am liking more and more. He does not jump in by the seat of his pants and hope it works out just because he is on the" right" side or wears the white hat. That said this is the best way for all concerned,
    No trial , no heart ache for all of us to go through for months and months of hearing about OBL and his rights!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:30 pm |
  350. Paul

    Taking Bin Laden alive would have been a plus for the nay sayers and an extreme burden on the US. Nobody 'owes' anybody any explanation other than what has been given. If you saw 'a picture of him' would you believe it was him? Most people have to work tomorrow and buy gas to get there so there is enough to worry about other than all the 'fiction and friction' that has risen in two days. For the nay sayers 'the world is round(ish)'.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:30 pm |
  351. Ira Burrell

    I rather spend 50 dollars on some bullets instead of millions on a trile.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:30 pm |
  352. Justin

    Ya I wish they did it would be nice to see him on TV and in trial and have him deal with all the consequences he has done :).

    May 4, 2011 at 5:30 pm |
  353. Jeff in Canada

    Yes Jack,

    OBL should have definitely been taken alive. The Seals should have had to coddle him and help him onto a Blackhawk and given him all the respect a Muslim icon deserves; regardless of danger to themselves.

    Then, he should have been stuffed full of candy and hung in Times Square in a body harness; and anyone ready to donate $100,000 to needy kids could have a whack him!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
  354. gary in PA

    Better off that he was killed. He was a terrorist, responsible for thousands of innocent lives being lost around the world. Good decision not to release any death photos too. This is in no way going to stop any further threats and killings in the future.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
  355. Jim

    I am sure they tried to take Osama bin Laden alive. Since Osama bin Laden used suicide bombers there was no guarantee that he was not wearing explosives himself. As it turned out he was prepared to run rather than to make any sacrifice himself. I will not question our troop's interpretation of Osama bin Laden's final actions.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
  356. George from Sarasota

    I say the only option the Seals had ws to kill him. When you need to make that decision, knowing they like to blow themselves up, killing him makes sense. I'd rather he be dead and unarmed than dead after taking some of our troops with him. That would be worth more to al-Qaeda's cause. As for the photos, the reporter in me says YES, publishing them is news the people want to see. Personally, I don't have an opinion. We have more problems here at home than worrying about spending time debating about his photos.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
  357. Edith McGlynn

    The Navy Seals did the job they were sent to do. Thank you Navy Seals you are loyal patrons serving your country. The bounty should go to the Navy Seals Org. No mercy was ever thought of for our thousands of people Osama is responsible for killing. For the first time since Obama has been elected he did his job to protect this country thank you Mr. President for doing the right thing.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
  358. Linda

    Did Bin Laden give the thousands of innocent people he murdered a chance to defend themselves against his evil? He did not. He was a psychopathic zealot who did not deserve a trial. We know he was behind 9/11 and a quick death, in my opinion, was too good for him. The families who lost loved ones and the rest of the world have waited years to be rid of his presence. God bless our soldiers!!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
  359. Mike

    While I would have been personally intrigued to understand how any human being could justify such heinous acts, I believe that it is for the best that the United States did not take him into custody alive. If they had, citizens would have been outraged the moment he stepped on US soil for the inevitable trial. The proceedings and his warped rational would have only acted as a constant reminder that such a mind-set is still prevalent in the middle-east. How could he even receive a fair trial considering every person within the US hates him with every fiber of their soul?. Also, I'm sure that the documents that act as concrete evidence of his guilt are still classified for security reasons. While it goes against what we stand for to not allow him to surrender, I don't think those morals apply in times of war.

    New Jersey

    May 4, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
  360. Erwin from El Paso

    Seal Team Six, the quiet "professionals". Probably the most professional group of men at their job in the world. They do things quick, fast, and in a hurry. Being an Infantryman and a Paratrooper from back when I was in the 82nd. I can tell you from my experience, any quick movement that the enemy might pose at that blink of an eye can be interpreted very quickly as a hostile attempt to harm you. I'm sure that if Seal Team Six had a reason to shoot him, it was a professional judgement call as they are Professionals.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
  361. Diane

    NO WAY............3000 people died was the order he gave......he was buried with dignity,,,,thats more then what we can say about how the 3000 people were buried....3000 people died and they were unarmed, did he give a damn? Why are we questioning Our President and the member of the Navy Seals who did the U.S. a GREAT service to our people.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
  362. Gary Bowden

    @Juan..The Navy Seals asked him to surrender and he didn't want to,so they did what they had to do.Why should we have pity for this beast or even have a trial? Why remind the victims what this "man" did by having a trial? I get sick and tired of these bleeding hearts who think we're suppose to show compassion for these terrorists who have killed God knows how many people and let them get 3 meals a day.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
  363. angie


    NO! NO! NO! He got exactly what he deserved and I don't think as a country we should waste our tax dollars for what would have been a lengthy and drawn out legal process. Had he been taken alive, I think it would have furthered the fanaticism that his followers seem to have.

    angie from Cleveland Heights, OH

    May 4, 2011 at 5:31 pm |
  364. Jim Forcum

    Dear Mr. Cafferty,

    No, an effort should not have been made to take Osama bin Laden alive. Security for him and his trial would have cost this country millions of dollars and would have caused both the country and the 9/11 families great mental anguish. His was a self-confessed murderer. He received justice. Furthermore, a burial at sea was the correct course of action for the same reason there is no grave for Adolf Hitler. A bin Laden grave would have been a rallying point for radical terrorists for the next century. Now such a thing does not exist.

    Jim Forcum
    Beavercreek, OH

    May 4, 2011 at 5:32 pm |
  365. BoB

    OBL should have been taken alive in order that JUSTICE be served. The manner in which he was killed amounts to murder / assassination which flies in the face of Justice that the USA is always touting as the way all Governments should conduct thenmselves. The USA doesn't seem to understand what the Geneva Conventions stand for or what the definition of Murder is!!!!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:32 pm |
  366. Cheryl Turner

    No, they did the right thing to kill him. He showed no mercies. An eye for and eye and a tooth for a tooth. Why should we bring him to trial only to execute him. We have waited for closure much too long.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:32 pm |
  367. Karen

    No, we should not have tried to bring him back alive. I think we did Bin Laden a favor....kind of like assisting in his suicide. He should have killed himself just like he preaches others to do. I'm glad he's wiped off the face of the earth...just like what he did to so many innocents on 9/11.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:32 pm |
  368. Jim Brown

    No way to take him alive. I can't praise the SEALS enough for what they did, and did so well.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:32 pm |
  369. M Baker

    If the US had caught him alive, has anyone considered that, besides the expense of a trial, that would open the door for terrorists to kidnap US citizens abroad, thinking they could negotiate a swap. By killing him on sight, and not taking hostages, there is no room for negotiating. Its done. Lets move on to who ever is number two in line, keep going, till there is nothing left but untrained thugs.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:32 pm |
  370. Bill

    I feel killing him save us the tax payers a lot of money.
    As for dumping his body out at sea even a better idea because out of sight out of mind.
    as for the pictures not being release it's a shame all the respect our country is giving this mass murder. RELEASE THE PHOTOS

    May 4, 2011 at 5:32 pm |
  371. ilandgal58

    Jack, why are we still debating this, I personally do not care how he died.
    The U.S. forces did what they were trained to do "One Shot, One Bullet"
    It would have become a logistic nightmare having him in our possession alive. He got what was deserving for the type of person he was. Lets put it to rest now. Lets focus on what needs our attention.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:32 pm |
  372. joe

    Yes, he should have been taken alive and then buried at sea

    May 4, 2011 at 5:32 pm |
  373. fred richmond,va

    taking him alive would have ment a trial with facts.... even bush and cheney went together before the 9-11 commision of course they were not under oath and no paper trail and as most people know he was never charged with 9-11 and never admitted to it even in the goverment seized documents and tapes..... now we have become judge,jury and excutioner we broke the law by torture we are supposed to be a country of laws so the next war our boys will be roughed up for sure ..... if he was behind the killing of the over 2,000 im sure he would have got death anyway but were not god yes a trial would have been better

    May 4, 2011 at 5:32 pm |
  374. Cook

    Why risk anymore Americans life's bringing him back! I'm sure the Devil was surprise when he arrived and is wishing that he could get rid of him, too!!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:33 pm |
  375. Sandro

    Public Enemy # 1 is down. This dude, who does not deserve to mention his name, killed thousands of innocent people. A murderer living in a million $ house like he own the world. It was the best decision to take him down with no questions asked.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:33 pm |
  376. Francis Ezeala

    Taken him alive would have been a big mistake...... that would make some trial lawyers richer and cost more burden on "we the tax payer"....Osama Beast Laden is dead and buried...End of Story.

    Francis Ezeala..Atlanta, Ga

    May 4, 2011 at 5:33 pm |
  377. Terry

    No, they should have not tried to take him alive, armed or not because then, what would they do with him? Now if the politicians and the press would just shut up about the whole thing, maybe you won't drive the Muslim extemists even more nuts by releasing more and more information and basically bragging about it which is just going to cause an even higher chance of attack(s) to occur. It's time to drop it. Shut up and move on to something else news worthy.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:33 pm |
  378. Robert D. Thomson

    The victims of 9/11 did not have a choice to live or die, and I am glad that the evil monster has now paid for his crimes against humanity. But it seems like we will be at war with the terrorists for a long time. Hopefully, we also gained a lot of intelligence from this raid to help defeat the evil plans of Al Qaida.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:33 pm |
  379. william welch

    Have we forgotten the live feed of our citizens jumping to their deaths from the towers while bin Laden and the rest of the radical muslims cheered on. I say hunt down the rest of the organization and "SEAL" their fate. Also lets post his death picture so Donald Trump can't make an ass of himself again in front of the nation.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:34 pm |
  380. johnmd

    yes, they should have taken him alive. they took quite a few others from the mansion alive so why not him. all our president did was commit yet another illegal act which he himself should be held accountable for. why bother allying with others to fight the terror and yet commit an unauthorized unilateral action in a country we had no authority to be in. just as he has tossed our own civil liberties out the window with healthcare and extending the patriot act of which half his campaign was supposedly dedicated to ending. worst president we have ever had.its too gruesome yet in any city every single night you see a dead body on the news or in the media in some way shape or form.i just wonder what they are gonna change the story to tomorrow or the next day. would have meant a lot more to the people to have a trial by the very means of which we are to govern ourselves under, and then yes, the death penalty of course but what happen to due process in this country? now we have no idea what information he had other than computers, but what person keeps everything on a computer. the world says we are idiots and we have certainly proved it with what we did and how we did it. a war for nothing, lives lost for no reason, and yet nothings changed.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:34 pm |
  381. Ann Turnbull

    The death of UBL has become the replacement for the Birth Certificate fiasco The SEALS are trained to read every movement and every situation. Let's trust their judgment and move on. We have all wished for someone to take UBL out. It happened.

    Let's concentrate on getting our troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq so that no more Americans have to face notifcation of the death of a loved one in these worthless wars. Worry about the health and welfare of Americans, not the child of UBL who wittnessed his death.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:34 pm |
  382. Mike Corning


    No we did the correct thing(s) ... we didn't need that circus here in the US or in Cuba.

    My biggest concern is that we are telling way to much to the world (enemies & friends alike). Someone will take OBL;s place and we will have to go after him and others. So in Washington and on every tv station we are telling too much about our action(s)... the courier information, our intelegence, the Navy Seals (training, plans, instructions, ...,), the information gathered at compound (papers, computers, hard drives, thumb drives, ...), thet OBL had phone numbers and $ in his clothes, ... . We have young men & women fighting there and I think this discussion of the items above put them at more risk in current/future operations. Lets stop talking about this and protect our service men.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:34 pm |
  383. Lloyd Jones

    No, not unless we wanted to put a camera in his cell and every time we have a terror attack go in and beat him with a bat and put it on the internet for all his Al Qaeda buddies to see! No, in this case for once they did the right thing with OBL with the surgical strike, killing him, burying him at sea, and not releasing the pics. Mission accomplished.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:34 pm |
  384. joe crete il.

    No! Our country doesn't need a pointless trial to convict a mass murderer!
    He's dead, leave it alone and do not give him or his fraction any more press! Great job navy seals and everyone involved!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:34 pm |
  385. Thomas Jamison

    What? Keep Obama alive and find out who in Pakistan cooperated with him for six years?

    What? Keep Obama alive and show him to the world to prove we got him in a way no one could refute?

    What? Keep Obama alive and find out who in Saudi Arabia in the Royal Family was helping him?

    What? Keep Obama alive and pretend we are a nation of laws instead of a nation run by the equivalent of a Mafia Don who orders hits on whoever he wants to kill?

    What are you nuts?

    May 4, 2011 at 5:35 pm |
  386. Don Cirb

    I believe that is exactly what already happened; that Bin Ladden was captured. He is worth too much to the U.S. for us to kill him. H e has a wealth of information that would be helpful to us and hopefully we can get it out of him so we can end this war with the Taliban much sooner rather than later and thus bring home our soldiers ASAP. It is much better that the world knows that Bin Ladden is dead. I don't fault our Government for tell us something that would be better for our national security interest. If the Islamist radicals knew he was alive, more threats and possibly other dangerous actions would be forthcoming.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:35 pm |
  387. Mike

    I think they should have strapped him to a Predator Drone and launched him into Saudi Arabia where he came from.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:35 pm |
  388. Dominique, Cincinnati


    We definitely should not have taken Bin Laden alive. Their would be an outrage against the Obama administration for holding this murderer with tax payer money. The decision to end the search NOW, was in the interest of national security, and having him may have created an\ disaster situation with the middle east from an international relations standpoint.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:36 pm |
  389. Kim Smith

    For once the taxpayers got their monies worth. We saved ourselves millions, if not billions, in lawyers fees and security costs.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:36 pm |
  390. Jason, Koloa HI

    Osama was just a patsy for the illuminati. His "Jihad" on 9/11 was ALLOWED to happen by the Bush and Bin Laden families who have been cozy for decades. He was used all the way and if he was taken alive then the real truth might have been able to come out although I'm sure it would have been spun so many times you'd never know up from down. His usefuleness as world terrorist #1 was over and so he became expendable to the real powers that puppet governments, banks, and the NWO. But not before trillions were spent on wars, defense, homeland security and many of the rights of free citizens were stripped to "protect us from him". He was an enemy to those he attacked and a hero to those who felt they were victims of western imperialism, but in the end he was nothing more than an expendable patsy whose time had finally run out.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:37 pm |
  391. Paul F. Connolly

    If the U.S. had taken Osama Bin Laden alive, it would have been a
    nightmare politically and logistically. Even some of our allies would have called for a " fair trial" which would have drained the U.S. thru
    even more pain while we waited years for justice.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:37 pm |
  392. al salvador

    No! All Obama decisions about Osama, including non release of death photos, are wise so far. Money spent prosecuting and maintaining Osama in prison until he dies would be enormous federal financial burden in current hard pressed economy. Money would be better spent for poor victims of disaster areas. Not including, the savings on the utility cost of his electrocution or medical expenses of lethal injection!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:37 pm |
  393. king

    my parents respected the persons elected even without their voting for them-they grinned and bore it. mom and dad are gone now, but i'm positive, without a doubt, they would not celebrate killing Bin Laden in a pep rally. they were Christians all the way-as i age, i see fewer and fewer real Christians.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:37 pm |
  394. Richard Martin

    Jack – The result we are left with is actually perfect......you see, it allows Donald Trump to start a "Death-ers' movement, so he can continue to go around the country demanding to see 'proof of something', and raising ridiculous questions in general.....(which Americans seem to love!).
    So Trump gets to stay in the race, and we all get to go on listening to him whining about how great he is.....

    Could life get any better?

    Rick Martin

    May 4, 2011 at 5:37 pm |

    Yes. They could have easily captured him; put a bag over his head;
    knocked him out; and then carried him away on the helicopter. He then could have been taken to Guantanomo Bay for questioning; then tried and executed. I think there was a "kill" order.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:37 pm |
  396. Suzanne

    No! He lost his right to live a long time ago.
    There is no good purpose for him being captured alive, but a "treasure trove" of reasons why he should have been killed on sight. If our supberb Navy Seals saw OBL blinking and considered THAT an "act of aggression", and the validation for killing him, that would just fine with me. Thousands of others lost their lives at OBL's hands for far less.
    I'm glad that the last thing OBL saw was a USA Navy Seal.
    Suzanne, a very proud American!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  397. Williamfamily Age 12 auburn maine

    Obama vs Osama who's head is in the sand homeland security ?? my dad kidnapped me 3 times hes free & Osama never confessed to doing anything why shouldnt he walk the mile why cant we hear his statements maybe this is all a cover up just to get oil prices up and obama re-elected change bills laws and peer inside homes Osama died without taking any life i now beleive now that ive seen his dead face

    May 4, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  398. lynne in north carolina

    It would have been nice to know what he actually knew about certain individuals and our government. But given the fact that he is nothing more than a psycho that has killed thousands upon thousands of people, he's better off where he is.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  399. Joe Demmeck Houston Texas

    Justice was served. Why all the fuss about this THUG whether he was treated right? They should have put him on public display at ground zero and cut off his head like they did to Daniel Pearl. Would have been a waste of time and money on a trial. Wake up America and be proud that we did the right thing and he received just what he deserved. GO SEALS!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  400. Millie

    No, No, No,
    We would have put our troops overseas in "harms way" His followers would be taking our soldiers as hostages, and demand we release Bin Laden. Not a fair trade!!!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  401. Mary in Ohio

    Why are we discussing Bin Laden (like he is even worthy of discussion) I don't need to see pictures of his dead body. And I don't want to hear what Sarah Palin has to say, or watch the Pakistan people demonstrating against us. We, as Americans always do the hard work and put our servicemen in harms way. And then we get criticized for doing it. . I say good riddance to Bin Laden. Let's lay it to rest. The Navy Seals risked their lives, did an outstanding job and did what we all wanted to do. Bravo!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:39 pm |
  402. Sherry

    Calabasas, Ca.

    For what purpose? To spend tax dollars on trying this person in a court of law, trying him for what? There was no question as to his leadership in ordering the terrorism attack upon our country. It's not as if we would hang him in front of the White House until he rotted, which I feel even that would have been too good for him. But we, as Americans are too civilized to display his body in such fashion.
    ***Finally, why would we EVER put even one of our soldiers, our amazing Navy Seals, at any risk? Haven't we shed enough blood over this evil man? They were ordered to do a job, they executed it perfectly, and NOW we question if they should have? It was done exactly as it should have been, quickly and without bloodshed to our troops taking the action.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:39 pm |
  403. Rick Parrish

    The Navy Seals took a big risk. They had no way of knowing whether the house was booby trapped and an i.e.d. could have been set off by someone in the house. The fact that he had no gun has nothing to do with the risk they faced. They made a split second heroic decision and did the right thing. As for the picture, we don't need to show a picture to prove anything to anybody, mainly because we shouldn't care what anyone else thinks. This was done as an atonement to his despicable acts. I woud have stood outside and tear-gassed the house until he came out or shot himself while inside.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:39 pm |
  404. Kevin in CA

    Better to kill him from the start than have a drawn out trial and execution. Besides, it saved a lot of money this way.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:39 pm |
  405. Dane

    No I don't think we should have taken him alive because if you try to make your point by murder expect to be murdered!

    Portland, OR

    May 4, 2011 at 5:39 pm |
  406. Gurn Blanston

    Maaaybe, just maybe we DID take him alive. Who would know. I hope we did, and that he is being waterboarded 24×7 for the rest of his days to the point just short of death, and only stopping long enough to spill some knowledge.
    And with all the talented graphics people out there, why don't we already have scores of credible fake photos of his bullet-ridden corpse?
    And why don't we cut off every penny of (our tax dollars) support to Pakistan until they find and hand over alZawahri? (just the same, I like Shumer's idea of no support for the Lybian rebels until they hand over the Lybian who bombed PanAm 103)... Just watch how quick they realize they know where he is!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:39 pm |
  407. Calvin

    The President made the correct decission not to release the pics.
    The war on terror is not over just because O.B.L. is dead......we still have much work to do.... we are diligent in our fight on terror and need to support the President's decission.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:39 pm |
  408. juliei4

    Hell no! If the SEALS had captured him there would be attempts to take high level American hostages to try and exchange for him. His suffering would make him a martyr. Dead and Gone – Good for us.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:39 pm |
  409. Horst

    Yes.I am also stating the following facts.If the Oklahoma bomber comes out of the court and i shoot him,i will get procecuted for first degree murder.If i braek in to some criminals house and shoot him,I am a murderer.Dont get me wrong .i am glad obl is dead.Lost my stepsister in wtc.But isnt that what we just did in Pakistan.Again our govmt,is lying.this is just a publicity stunt from obama.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
  410. Jennifer Tapp

    no- no arguments about who was present (children) or anything else matters. Children were present on 9/11 – children were killed, children were impacted forever here too. He was a cold blooded killer and deserved no mercy. Many Americans in the US and military abroad have died with no mercy.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
  411. dave wrinkle maumelle arkanssas

    Sorry Jack, but this UBL "kill" has a smell of being "Cooked"
    we should see pictures of a body. It is not that I am a "kuke" or
    an avid Alex Jones Fan. It just seemed staged. for political gain
    rather than combating terrorism.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
  412. Nguyen

    I don't think the Seals that performed the mission had any intention of bringing him back alive. No fault to them, they are consummate professionals but the risks to them were way to great and to risk that much for the likes of bin laden. I would do the same.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
  413. Don Danley

    No! We do not need to allow Ubl to cost Americans more in any way. He was a cowardly murderer without respect for faith, gender or age. America should not care if his followers do not believe he is dead, when he never appears again they will.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:41 pm |
  414. Jim

    On a purely moral level, we should have tried. I think it would have spoken volumes about our moral resolve. But humans are not purely moral beings. We are emotional beings as well, and I think that in every other way it is best for it to just be done.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:42 pm |
  415. Tim in Texas

    Is the sky green? Is the earth square? Is a hat cheese? Is your name Dwane? Some questions don't need to be asked. You know how when you were in school, and the teacher said: "There's no such thing as a stupid question'? She was lying to you.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:42 pm |
  416. Stephen Charchuk

    From many of the replies on here I can see why we have a justice system and not a revenge system..... As I've said. bin Ladin was evil. What's your excuse?

    May 4, 2011 at 5:43 pm |
  417. patricia tyler

    If the opportunity had arisen to take Hitler alive would we have done it, or did we take Musilini or any of the other monsters they have been in this capacity of evil been taken alive ? First of all their ego and their so called cause that they beleived in would have never have been an option just as Hitler took his rather than be captured and placed on trial .These men like Osama Bin Laden were sociaopaths,sick individuals that did their horrific deeds for self not for Allah or anything else but self and hate for humanaity . They used religion ,race superiority anything they could use to manipulate people into their way of thinking and do horrific devastation to man kind.He should have not been given any mercy or respect , he gave none in his life and he should not have recieved any in his death. And if he had been taken alive what do you think would have happened , the Al Quda would have made every attempt to rescue him and at what cost? The seal team made the right decison there was no other option. When you see a snake you kill the snake there are no good ones,you take no chances.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:43 pm |
  418. Catherine Shaw

    Not taking bin Laden alive was exactly the right thing to do. If we do not have the will to try Gitmo prisoners what makes us think we would do any better w/ bin Laden? And then what? Sentence him to death for executing nearly 3,000 people? Give him life in prison at taxpayer's expense? It's done; move on.
    And on another note: Who cares if his followers –or lawyers or whoever over there–believe he's dead or not? Release no photos. Release them and al qaeda would still claim they were not real or photo-edited while simultaneously using them to rally the troops to incite more terrorism.
    Catherine Shaw, former Mayor, Ashland, Oregon

    May 4, 2011 at 5:44 pm |
  419. Bryan in MIssouri

    O.K., I'll play devil's advocate.

    Who says we didn't take him alive? No pictures, no videos, no body. What better way to tuck him away without anyone looking for him if he is supposedly dead. That way we can take all the time we need to get the info we need not found on any of the other media recovered from the scene.

    Now back to reality...

    If they did kill him already (which I believe they did) he got off to easy.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:44 pm |
  420. carole babb southcarolina

    No we should not have brought him back to the usa nor should we have turned him over to pakistan.i also agree with our President.....not to drag this out with a fiasco over pictures.....may WE now rest in peace. Thank our government employees,the SEALS,our elected government employees, President Obama,VP Joe Biden our Secretary of State Clinton and God,,,,,not necessarily in that order.
    They are our Triniity.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:44 pm |
  421. Lupe

    Yes...yes...yes. Taking him alive would have removed all doubts in regards to whether or not Osama was armed/ unarmed.....cooperating/resisting. Now we may never know. Is this the type of "justice" our nation is willing to stand by in future years?

    May 4, 2011 at 5:45 pm |
  422. David Cline


    He is dead, enough of the debate about what we should have done. When is the news media going to stop focusing on issues that have no impact, on ideas such as where Obama was born that has no basis in reality, and let's begin a real debate about a real pressing issue....

    Such as:

    How should we deal with increasing deficits so that quality of life can be assured?

    When do we begin pulling our forces back from front lines around the world and encourage other countries to bear their fair share in establishing a peace that can be for all people?

    Or we could just continue to debate issues that seek to inflame passions for no good at all.

    Come on Jack!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
  423. Linda in Arizona

    Apparently people have no concept of the exchange rate with Pakistan, which is currently about 85 Pakistani rupees to ONE dollar. If you did have a clue about that, you wouldn't keep referring to the rather shabby estate as a "million dollar compound". At the very most, it probably cost a tenth of that. Not only does a dollar go incredibly far in that part of the world, labor is absurdly cheap. For a million dollars, you could build a hotel with a golf course. However, as propaganda, the "million dollar compound" meme works quite well.

    Should we have tried to "take him alive"? No, and I'm sure they never intended to. It would have been riskier for the Seals, and what would we have done with him anyway, had a nice trial in NYC? Please. It's clearly better he's dead.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
  424. Mike, Philadelphia Pa

    Even the liberals would have to agree on this one.Having him brought in alive would be very costly and serve no purpose.I feel confident as an American that the country did the right thing!
    hat's off to the SEALS.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:47 pm |
  425. Ron from Boston

    Why waist the money and the time on Bin Laden he has caused the United States and the allies enough money already. We do not need to see his picture as proof that he is dead. If he is not dead, let him make another announcement. I am sure is burial did not cost as much as the lives we lost. At least the fish of the ocean will have a feast.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:50 pm |
  426. Sharon from Illinois

    Yes, they should've tried to take him alive, and then dropped him ALIVE in a volcano-100 some stories high-an eye for an eye.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:51 pm |
  427. James Lawubah

    Let everyone know that Balen was wanted Dead or Alive. Tthere is no question that someone will be asking why Benladen was shot when he was unarm. whether he was arm or not, we wanted one out of two (Dead or Alive) and we got one. Lets be greatful for to the brave men who carry out the mission.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  428. Jay Pepino

    Of course not! The safety of our Navy Seals was what was in play, as well it should have been. Our brave men did the world a favor in Abbottabad. And, as irony would have it, the accuracy of their kill gives new meaning to the phrase: "An eye for an eye."


    May 4, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  429. Sherry Bulizo

    the terriosts didnt think twice about cutting the head off Danial Pearl and broadcasting it. The storys of the capture always changes. Is he dead now I'm doubting it, anything could have been tossed overboard, is the body or is he in America?

    May 4, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  430. Doug Bellefontaine,Ohio

    The President and all others invovled in this did a perfict job the best way it could be done especially the navy seals.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  431. Courtney

    I just wanna know why do we even have pictures at all. You mean to tell me that after killing him we took the time to take pictures? And for what purpose? If we don't want to show them cause Obama says "thats not who we are" then why were they even taken?

    May 4, 2011 at 5:55 pm |
  432. Kunal Bhandari

    No way. We need to set precedence with his death for those who follow him. If you try to take on the United States and kill innocent civilians, you will face justice.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:57 pm |
  433. Jim

    if they did Conservatives would complain that he wasn't killed. This was a no win game with the likes of Rush and his band of lunatics.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:57 pm |
  434. Steve Reynolds

    This question is only being asked because bin Laden was killed during the administration of a Democrat President. If he'd been taken alive, you'd be asking why the wimp President didn't have him killed.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:57 pm |
  435. gfwms1

    We owe the scumbag or his followers nothing!

    May 4, 2011 at 5:57 pm |
  436. Jim

    Jack, the folks raising this question apparently have no regard for the lives of the brave men whose mission was to walk into this monster's nest.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:57 pm |
  437. Don Robinson

    Hell no !!!!! This animal never gave one thought about killing 2,700 innocent Americans on 9/11. We've all seen the circus' created when our legal system goes into action with putting someone on trial in the US. We should all be thankful for the escape of the financial nightmare.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:58 pm |
  438. Janice

    At this point he is gone. We do not need to know how it was done, what he looks like dead, or how we got the information. It doesn't matter if it was done on Bush's time or Obama's time. Let's move forward with a more united country. News people stop trying to bring people on your shows that only pull our country apart. God bless America and the military families who are separated by the wars....

    May 4, 2011 at 5:58 pm |
  439. Terese

    Almost 10 years on a mission, mission accomplished, I am very proud to be an american...now lets move on. Asking for a picture of the body of Bin Laden is like asking to see the bodies of people form 9/11 shown in public....Lets just be americans and be glad that he's gone.

    May 4, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
  440. Ed Chew

    Why would anyone want to capture him and bring him back to the legalistic insanity of our system. What were the Seals supposed to do? Ask him to please get a gun and shoot first?

    May 4, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
  441. Frank

    Jack .there seems to be two schools of thought here .If you think the actions the Navy seals took was a police action ;then they should have taken him alive .However this was an act of war ..and that's another thing

    May 4, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
  442. Daniel Morin

    To take Osama bin Laden alive would had been a bad idea. For the president to say that the Navy Seals had a licence to kill Ben Laden, would also had been a bad idea. Now. Why are the media trying to do a trial over that? What is the goal for it. This a job well done. That the end of it. Next.

    Dan, Quebec City, Canada

    May 4, 2011 at 6:00 pm |