The news now is that OBL was unarmed, but "resisted." Part of me knows that we're safer with him dead and not an inviting target for some rescue mission, but another part of me wonders if could've gotten him alive and gotten more intel out of him if the SEALs had responded with a taser or rifle butt instead of a double-tap to the noggin.

I dont think they ever planned to take him alive, and i still think its 50/50 if it was seal killing him or if he had a bodyguard end his miserable life so he wouldnt be taken alive. Hes dead though and thats all i care about.

I can't really see AQ executing any kind of daring assault on Gitmo or whatever military base he ended up imprisoned on. ;)

I hope aq comes out of the woodwork looking for revenge, if you can see it you can kill it.

Think about it...

(1.) Bin Laden was chronically ill (which is why I personally had always believed he might be dead before now) and almost surely not physically capable of planning any day-to-day operations within the Al-Qaeda leadership or broader network. Even if he was physically able to continue his work, it would be too risky for other Al-Qaeda members to work with him due to his most-wanted status. His role in Al-Qaeda since Tora Bora has almost surely been as a symbol, not much more. Therefore, what useful intel could he provide that any of his subordinates could not?

(2.) His death has greater political significance than his capture ever could: Obama always said that we would leave Afghanistan when we were sure Al-Qaeda was destroyed and Bin Laden killed. There was always an implication that when the latter happened, the former would be accomplished (obviously, this is not true in reality, but symbolically, such a claim has resonance in the U.S.). Obama obviously would prefer we left Afghanistan given that we're never going to defeat the Taliban and the war is a drain on our resources. Now that Bin Laden is dead, he can claim we "won" in Afghanistan.

(3.) If Bin Laden had been captured, what do you think Al-Qaeda would do to get him out? Obviously, there is still a (perfectly legitimate) fear that they'll retaliate for his death, but isn't it still preferable that we not have to be put in a position where we have to choose between releasing Bin Laden and sacrificing lives?

Sorry, but I think Obama made the right call this time. Maybe I'm giving him too much credit, but I would expect that he and his staff carefully considered the value of Bin Laden alive vs. Bin Laden dead before they made the decision. Besides, considering Obama's reputation, did you really expect him to greenlight this kind of operation? That's what's so beautiful about it - the most liberal President we've ever had has just authorized the killing (without due process) of the world's most evil terrorist. Obama may talk naive bullshit on foreign policy and terrorism, but Carter, he ain't. Good for him.

I had an "Executive Decision" scenario in mind.

And if that ever happened, we would call on Kurt Russell?

And kill Steven Seagal before he can do anything?

I'd go with Option 1A, capture him, but tell the world he's dead and buried, and then interrogate him for all he's worth.

We've been hearing about the ill health thing since like 2003. Was it kidneys or something? If he can order men to fly planes into buildings, I don't think he'd be above ordering men to give him their organs.

If you were the world's most wanted man, you'd probably be more than a little nervous about letting anyone with a scalpel near you.