Yes, I'm opposed.
It's a simple liberal position, really.
Anyone interested in freedom ought to have an attitude towards the state of extreme distrust.
Those who say 'get bin Laden' are handing over their authority to a power that is not their own.
It will rebound upon them.
In pursuit of the overriding moral imperative 'get bin Laden', ordinary people's rights will be trampled.
Pursuing bin Laden means extra-territorial action.
Presuming that the US govt. is not proposing to seek extradition - nor indeed satisfy the Afghan government's wholly justified request for proof - 'get bin Laden' means 'in breach of the sovereignty of whichever country he is living in'.
It would be naive to think that the US military-state machinery would be constrained to arresting bin Laden, but would be free to interfere in all aspects of the country invaded - all in the name of getting bin Laden.
Is the US state to be trusted in dealing with bin Laden justly? No. The political atmosphere is poisoned, suggesting that a 'not guilty' verdict would be impossible - hence there is no justice.
Finally, what is the likelihood of proper evidence? Since one presumes that whoever was involved in the decisions to attack the Pentagon and WTC - outside of those who died in the incident - acted conspiratorially it is unlikely that there will be a direct order in existence.
In that case the likelihood would be that bin Laden would be charged on evidence of guilt by association. The prosecution would assume the character of a political show trial.
Their is a parallel. It is widely asserted that Sinn Fein leaders Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness are also de facto leaders of the provisional IRA.
Consider whether the British government would have been right or justified in seizing and trying Adams and McGuinness for the many violent attacks, both on servicemen, and sometimes on civilians, by members of the IRA.
I think most people would understand that that was a political attack masquerading as justice.
The difficult thing for the US public is that the actual perpetrators of the attack are well-known to us, and beyond justice.
Frustration at that does not give you the right to associate someone with the 'political' aims of the attackers, and try that person for the action.
As long as working class people in America fail to develop a distinct political agenda from their rulers, they will not free themselves.
In message <p05100311b7cbe8f66254@[192.168.1.100]>, Doug Henwood
<dhenwood at panix.com> writes
>Max Sawicky wrote:
>
>>In a nutshell,
>>it's a demand to the Gov to find the guilty parties
>>and those closely associated and blow them to kingdom
>>come
>
>I'm curious how many folks here are opposed to tracking down the
>perps and dealing with them in some form, whether it's blowing them
>to kingdom come, or some Fisk-like trial in an international court.
>Is the revolutionary defeatist position that the U.S. should do
>nothing against OBL, assuming it was his crew that did the work?
>
>Doug
-- James Heartfield