I have been trying to figure out what is so wrong with the way Obama handled the killing of Osama bin Laden.  This should have been his shining moment.  Much of the country rejoiced at the news.  Republicans feared this great victory would propel Obama to an easy re-election.  However, that has not happened.  I wondered why?

Obama immediately set about on a campaign to make sure he got all of the credit.  The Navy Seals were told to keep their mouths shut, while the people representing Obama had diarrhea of the mouth.  In their rush to make sure Obama got all the credit, they released information that damaged our national security.  The response was disorganized and clumsy, but I don’t think that is the real problem.  I think the real problem is Obama himself. I believe this incident exposed a lack of character.

President Obama authorized the mission that killed Osama bin Laden. It is hard to criticize that decision, because most of us think it was a necessary decision.  We expect, a President to make the difficult decisions.  Sometimes those decisions result in the loss of human life.  But there is more to the story.   

I suspect that the Navy Seal who actually shot Osama bin Laden is glad he did his duty, but he is not bragging about it.  He probably doesn’t even want to talk about this, other than with his fellow Seals who understand how he feels.  The people who protect us don’t do so because they like killing people, they do so because it is their duty and because sometimes it is necessary.  Harry Truman ordered the use of atomic bomb against Japan, but he didn’t brag about it.  He believed this was the right decision and he never wavered from the responsibility for making that decision, but it was obvious that the enormity of this weighed on him.

That is what is wrong with Obama.  He does not appear to have the slightest moral qualm about this.  That is why he is so willing to talk and talk and talk about it.  The equivalent would be for the Governor who signed the death certificate authorizing an execution to go around bragging about it:  “Yup.  I was the one who signed Ted Bundy’s death certificate, just like I promised.”

There is also a big difference between:  “wanted dead or alive” and “wanted dead.”  It appears as if Obama wanted Osama bin Laden dead, because he didn’t know what to do with him if he was captured alive.  He didn’t want to take him to Guantanamo, because that would be admitting that Bush got that right.  Yet he couldn’t risk giving custody of him to someone else and he sure couldn’t bring him to the U.S.   He didn’t want to use an air strike because he wanted proof Osama bin Laden was dead.     Ultimately, he authorized a high risk mission designed to just kill him, document the death, and move on.  That is not a reflection on the Navy Seals involved.  The Seals did their duty.  If the Seals had been ordered to try and take Osama bin Laden alive, they would have done that.  No one has ever said the Seals were told to try and capture him alive.

George Bush had a policy of saying that the U.S. would do whatever it took to get Osama bin Laden and if he got killed in the process that was acceptable.  But, I think that if Bush ordered the Seals to go on that mission he would have told them to at least try and take Osama bin Laden alive.  He would have done so because it would have been an important moral distinction to him.  He would also have done so because while killing Osama bin Laden would have been justified, capturing him might just have given us information to completely destroy al Qaeda.

Let me be clear, with someone like Osama bin Laden there is no duty to put our people at risk to try and spare his life.  If Obama had ordered an airstrike that killed everyone in the area, that would have been acceptable.  He also would have been justified in authorizing the Seals to use whatever force is necessary to complete the mission, including killing Osama bin Laden, if required.  But, both of those are very different from an assassination.  Obama is well aware of the distinction.  That is why the U.S. denies that it is trying to kill Gadhafi.  We are blowing up buildings all over Tripoli and killing his family members, while solemnly declaring Gadhafi is not a target.

Those who are required to kill, in the line of duty, don’t brag about it.  They know they have done the right thing, but they are still impacted by the reality that they have killed someone, justified or not.  Obama apparently has no such qualm, which is why he is so willing to embark on what is now an international victory lap.  A truly moral man would never feel like bragging about ordering an assassination.

I know several people who are genuine combat veterans from Vietnam and have also met several imposters.  As a combat veteran myself, the difference is instant and obvious.  I have never met a genuine combat veteran who bragged about killing anyone.  In fact, they don’t want to talk about that at all.  But the imposters are quick to give vivid details of events that did not occur. 

If George Bush had given the order to assault Osama bin Laden, he wouldn’t be bragging about it.  He probably would have deferred questions to the military, just like he did when Saddam Hussein was captured.  Bush would have accepted responsibility, but he would have deferred credit to those who went on the actual mission.  There could not be a more stark contrast between the characters of a George W. Bush and a Barack H. Obama.  

This is why the killing of Osama bin Laden did not help Obama and may actually hurt him. It exposed a lack of character.  Even if people don’t understand why, instinctively they know something is very wrong. 

On this Memorial Day weekend, may we all pause to remember to honor those men and women of character who have kept this country free.  May we also be sure to understand the significance of character in those who lead us.

TDM