But don't people get drunk at wakes? There it's part of celebrating the life of the deceased. So why not celebrate the destruction of an enemy?
People were mostly celebrating because of a misplaced feeling of superiority. That has nothing to do with what an Irish wake is about.
Really, you don't have to feel sorry for the guy. That's not the point. The problem here is mainly that people are celebrating the actions of a state which has killed many more people than Bin Laden was responsible for. They're celebrating the use and perpetuation of violence in defiance of international law and legally binding treaties, also known as terrorism—except when the US does it, it's called "counter-terrorism". It also shows the basic hypocrisy: if it benefits their side, it's bad, but if it benefits your side, it's good.
Which is not to say that I don't understand why the sentiment exists, but you should give this some thought.
That means, I don't believe that any of it happened the way it's been presented to me and everyone involved from the event itself to how I hear about it is probably exploiting somebody and lying all over the place.
At this rate it hardly matters. There's no independent verification that I know of, so it's remotely possible that Bin Laden wasn't killed that night. In that case, he would have already been dead. I don't think that's the case, though. It probably happened mostly how the US said it did: they went in and killed him, and then dumped his body into the sea. (Which, by the way, is kind of a big fuck you to the Islamic world because it has absolutely nothing to do with proper Islamic burial practices like they awkwardly claimed.)
The most important questions as to how this came to be are related to the Pakistani government and military, but I won't bore you with the details.