> The guy was a rich coward who sat back and allowed others to do his dirty work (including suicide attacks) for him.
It’s possible that when it came time to face death, Bin Laden became a coward, but I doubt it. He was a rich person who could have led a relatively safe and self-indulgent life if he’d chosen not to become a terrorist. He knew he was putting his life on the line when he made that choice. I don’t doubt that evil fanatics are capable of being brave. (I think they’re typically more brave than the average person.) That doesn’t keep them from being contemptible, though.
My guess is that the reason he didn’t fight to the death (which would have enhanced his reputation as a heroic figure among those inclined to support him) is that he hoped to use his trial as a forum to spread his message. Killing him while he was unarmed — whether on purpose or because he really was thought to be resisting — isn’t going to hurt the U.S. much, though.
It’s hard for a terrorist of his notoriety to play the role of victim. Whatever victim value his being killed while being unarmed might have is more than counterbalanced by the detrimental effect of his not fighting to the death (when he had the opportunity to do so). Being killed while trying to surrender isn’t a heroic way to go.