Justification Of Operation Geronimo And The Assassination Of Osama Bin Laden

There is a fine line between what humanity believes what is right and what is wrong. If we learned anything from history, it is that calculated and precise decisions are crucial factors in any outcome otherwise history is doomed to repeat itself. That is certainly the case when it comes to Operation Geronimo. I believe that President Barack Obama had the legal authority to order Operation Geronimo which led to the assassination of Osama Bin Laden, the founder and the first leader of the Islamic terrorist group, Al-Qaeda.

On September 11, 2001, the entire landscape of the United States shifted in the blink of an eye. It was early on a Tuesday morning when four airplanes were hijacked and initiated to carry out a suicide mission when the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York City were hit. Two of the four planes that were hijacked were aimed to target the twin towers and it was categorized as a terrorist attack. At that moment, the United States quickly realized that it was under attack and it triggered President George W. Bush’s reaction for a counterattack. Reportedly, the masterminds behind the terrorist attacks were the Islamic terrorist group, Al Qaeda who was led by Osama Bin Laden. Osama Bin Laden remained at the top of the most wanted list and was at large until Operation Geronimo would take effect. Around 2007, one of Osama Bin Laden’s closest couriers was identified which aided U.S. Intelligence officials in grasping ideas and theories on where the radical terrorist may be located. By the time 2010 came about, intelligence officials were able to pinpoint the courier to a compound in Pakistan known as Abbottabad. Once the compound was identified and verified as it being Osama Bin Laden’s hideout, President Barack Obama acted on getting the stamp of approval on Operation Geronimo. Operation Geronimo’s main objective was to capture Osama Bin Laden, dead or alive. President Obama organized a small special operations team known as SEAL Team Six, who were authorized to carry out the capture mission. On the morning of May 2, 2011, the mission would officially begin as a group of 25 Navy SEALs assumed to raid the compound. Osama Bin Laden was located on the third floor of the compound and was shot in the head as he was trying to resist. As SEAL Team Six was wrapping up their historic mission, they would clean up any remaining debris and/or destroying evidence such as demolishing one of their helicopters that crashed before capturing Osama Bin Laden. After proper identification was made that it was indeed Bin Laden, President Obama would address the nation and Osama Bin Laden’s body was buried at sea as it was compliable to the Islamic Law.

Operation Geronimo is believed to be a lawful military operation, however a lot of eyebrows were still being raised questioning the legality of the mission. Many believe that just because the world be better if Osama Bin Laden met his demise, doesn’t mean that conducting a raid without legitimate approval it isn’t breaking the law. President Barack Obama initially had to rely on Congressional approval but ordered the mission to take out an international threat that we have been hunting for about a decade. It came to a bit of a surprise to the masses throughout the country that the President and his legal team offered careful consideration and paid critical legal attention before moving forward with the Osama Bin Laden operation. Many would argue that it was unlawful or even unethical due to the fact that the Al-Qaeda leader was unarmed and/or did not indicate hostile intent. However, the “Rules of Engagement” within military operations would come to the conclusion that Osama Bin Laden was in fact a “combat-based target”. An article was written shortly after the raid giving key points on how targets can be identified regarding the “Rules of Engagement”:

“People who act in a hostile manner or display hostile intent. Hostile actions are easy to identify. (If a cabdriver fires a rifle at a soldier, he instantly becomes a combatant.) Establishing hostile intent is harder. (If a cab is racing toward a soldier, is the driver’s intent hostile, or is he drunk?) Whenever a soldier uses force, the rules say, his reaction must be proportional to the threat. In part because judging intent and proportionality are subjective, the Army scrutinizes every incident in which one of its weapons is discharged.”

The quote stated above would support the fact that Osama Bin Laden did display hostile intent despite being unarmed. The assumption can be made by the Navy SEALs involved that the mere presence of Osama Bin Laden would indicate hostile and criminal intent. His bodyguards were surrounding the Al-Qaeda leader shooting at the SEALs to ensure the safety of Bin Laden. Also due to past history of terrorist attacks, you never know who under Osama Bin Laden’s command can be wearing suicide vests, immediately putting the Navy SEALs lives in danger. These are heavily armed men who are categorized as “extremely dangerous individuals” that would save their leader by any means necessary. Many implications can be made on why anyone in support of Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda in general would have hostility in their blood. Thus, giving SEAL Team Six a justifiable alibi in order to move forward with the mission resulting in the assassination of the long-time Al-Qaeda patriarch. The outcome would result in major controversy due to President Obama jumping ahead of the congressional green light so to speak. The “International Humanitarian Law” also came into play due to the actions. The “International Humanitarian Law” was created simply to minimize armed conflict between host nations. It is also known as the “Law of War” which has the primary objective of protecting individuals who are no longer portraying malice intent or behavior. Many would argue that President Obama violated the “International Humanitarian Law” when he orchestrated and presumed Operation Geronimo due to the fact that Osama Bin Laden was unarmed and incognito. I personally believe that Al-Qaeda relinquished whatever rights they had within the “International Humanitarian Law” as they continue to plan attacks on the United States as recent events would show. President Obama was doing what was right in order to protect innocent civilians in the great country of the United States. Al-Qaeda’s criminal behavior clearly makes it problematic for the United States to cooperate with them under the “International Humanitarian Law” as it was understandably indicated that they were simply following orders of Osama Bin Laden. Such orders that would put ordinary citizens in danger and feel unsafe.

“We all agree that we've got to bring these terrorists to justice and to make sure that they're never allowed to perpetrate such an evil act as they did. And so all of us are dealing with that. We know that the President has the authority to go to war under the War Powers Act.” The quote above is stating the full support of a Congresswoman regarding the president’s decision under the “War Powers Act of 1973”. The “War Powers Act of 1973” also known as the “War Powers Resolution” was officially initiated on November of 1973 following administrative preclusion by President Richard Nixon. The law’s judicial outline explain that the president’s as well as Congress’ decision will be taken into consideration when it comes to armed forces being deployed overseas. I support President Barack Obama’s decision. I believe that he had free reign and was exercising his rights under the ‘War Powers Act”. It is also led to believe that the law itself is an essential verification on the president’s ability to come to significant conclusions without official consent of the Congress. Many would believe that the President is challenging the War Powers Act due to him disregarding consent from Congress, however many attempts by Congress to take the matter to court have been ineffective. President Obama did what he and many believe what is wrong. The president acted on instinct in order to prevent further terrorism and save many innocent and law-abiding citizens from any future danger and/or threats for the time-being. This can be summed up as President Obama properly abiding by the “Law of Armed Conflict” in order to go after and capture a threat that has been at large for nearly a decade. One of the laws talk about preventing violations of the “Law of War” among others such as fighting only enemy combatants. Al-Qaeda has been our enemy since the infamous twin tower attacks and President Barack Obama did what was necessary.

In conclusion, I fully support President Barack Obama’s decision in ordering Operation Geronimo. Although many have arguments, I believe that the supporting facts in why it was a completely lawful military operation outweigh the people going against it. His legality is supported by the “International Humanitarian Law” which gave him full jurisdiction to engage the enemy identified as an international threat in order to save innocent lives. His “challenge” against the “War Powers Act of 1973” which resulted in the president acting without official consent from the Congress, showed outstanding leadership skills that saved innocent civilians as well. As the President of the United States of America, you must always lead by example and that is exactly what Barack Obama did.