Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Osama Bin Laden is Dead


Smallc

Recommended Posts

Guest American Woman

He he....great pun. The mission was to find and kill Bin Laden....imperative after previous failures. Egress to the Vinson with a body, not a prisoner. Pakistani military could have intercepted any time.

It was a great pun. Too bad I didn't realize it until you pointed it out. :P

Sound like a crock to me.

Somehow I'm not surprised.

The guy had been hiding in plain sight for God knows how long:

In plain sight of who?

did they figure he'd spend day and night with a few pounds of C4 under his Fruit of the Looms?

They obviously figured he could have had some sort of suicide device on his body. Wouldn't necessarily have to be as you describe it to be effective. I know if it were me having to take him, I wouldn't have wanted to take the chance since there would be no second chances if he had any type of bomb rigged that he could set off. Especially since he wasn't found wearing fruit of the Looms.

Now, I have little doubt they found and killed the guy, but this smacks of post facto response to the question of if this guy was such a great terror mastermind, why did they splatter that mind all over the wall?

You think they should have risked their lives and spared him because he was a great terror mastermind? I'm not following.

Edited by American Woman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 486
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You think they should have risked their lives and spared him because he was a great terror mastermind? I'm not following.

Well they guy who actually admitted to planning the 9/11 attacks has been behind bars for some years. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Bin Laden never took responsibility for the 9/11 attacks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Sheikh_Mohammed

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was a member of Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda organization, although he lived in Kuwait rather than Afghanistan, heading al-Qaeda's propaganda operations from sometime around 1999. The 9/11 Commission Report alleges that he was "the principal architect of the 9/11 attacks." He is also alleged to have confessed to a role in many of the most significant terrorist plots over the last twenty years, including the World Trade Center 1993 bombings, the Operation Bojinka plot, an aborted 2002 attack on the U.S. Bank Tower in Los Angeles, the Bali nightclub bombings, the failed bombing of American Airlines Flight 63, the Millennium Plot, and the murder of Daniel Pearl.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was captured in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, on March 1, 2003, by the Pakistani ISI, possibly in a joint action with agents of the American Diplomatic Security Service, and has been in U.S. custody since that time. In September 2006, the U.S. government announced it had moved Mohammed from a secret prison to the facility at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp.[9] The Red Cross, Human Rights Watch and Mohammed have claimed that the harsh treatment and waterboarding he received from U.S. authorities amounts to torture.[10][11]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

Well they guy who actually admitted to planning the 9/11 attacks has been behind bars for some years. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Bin Laden never took responsibility for the 9/11 attacks.

Edited by American Woman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, I have little doubt they found and killed the guy, but this smacks of post facto response to the question of if this guy was such a great terror mastermind, why did they splatter that mind all over the wall?
So that the cowards that send out the "fighters" to their death, for the sole purpose of slaughtering others, know that it won't end well for them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somehow I'm not surprised.

You should be. I'm the least conspiracy minded person around.

In plain sight of who?

One of the big issues to come out of this is how he was able to stay in a custom built compound a few miles from a small city and one of Pakistan's main military bases.

They obviously figured he could have had some sort of suicide device on his body. Wouldn't necessarily have to be as you describe it to be effective. I know if it were me having to take him, I wouldn't have wanted to take the chance since there would be no second chances if he had any type of bomb rigged that he could set off. Especially since he wasn't found wearing fruit of the Looms.

I don't care if he had a single stick of dynamite shoved up his ass: this was a guy we've been told for 10 years is the main man behind the terrorist boogeyman. You'd think they'd make some effort to nab him. I mean, they sacrificed 5,000 U.S. troops to look for imaginary WMD over in Iraq, what's a couple SEALs more or less?

You think they should have risked their lives and spared him because he was a great terror mastermind? I'm not following.

Yes. Navy SEALs are quite expendable. You'd only get one chance to capture this target and pick his brains, so it's surprising that the leadership would order a kill mission and pass up the chance to gather important intel on Al Qaeda. Unless they figured they had nothing of value to learn from him, which seems odd given that he was the big bad and all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So that the cowards that send out the "fighters" to their death, for the sole purpose of slaughtering others, know that it won't end well for them.

gee, I'm sure they'd be surprised.

Come on. You can't even square your narratives. On the one hand you expect us to believe these dudes are serious threats to our civilization because they have no values and no respect for life (which, logically, includes their own), but on the other you think they can get intimidated by this? I'm pretty sure the idea that they're pretty much living on borrowed time isn't a newsflash: it's part of the job description of "terrorist mastermind".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've posted one article where it was suspected Bin Laden was dead ... here is another .. from 2002.

http://articles.cnn.com/2002-01-18/world/gen.musharraf.binladen_1_bin-mullah-mohammed-omar-pakistan-s-musharraf?_s=PM:asiapcf

Pakistan's president says he thinks Osama bin Laden is most likely dead because the suspected terrorist has been unable to get treatment for his kidney disease.

"I think now, frankly, he is dead for the reason he is a ... kidney patient," Gen. Pervez Musharraf said on Friday in an interview with CNN.

Musharraf said Pakistan knew bin Laden took two dialysis machines into Afghanistan. "One was specifically for his own personal use," he said.

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2002/me_terrorism_10_16.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sound like a crock to me. The guy had been hiding in plain sight for God knows how long: did they figure he'd spend day and night with a few pounds of C4 under his Fruit of the Looms?

Now, I have little doubt they found and killed the guy, but this smacks of post facto response to the question of if this guy was such a great terror mastermind, why did they splatter that mind all over the wall?

Personally, i think they just didn't want to get greedy. Kill the mofo, let it be done. If they took him alive, what if they were attacked on the way to the chopper by ISI or some bin Laden guards hiding down the street that were alerted? What if he was taken alive and the the chopper crashed like the other one, or was shot down, and he escaped?

I think that its likely the chopper that crashed changed the game plan a bit also, ie: ok Plan B, just shoot the mofo and get outta here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

gee, I'm sure they'd be surprised.

I'm sure some likely were. The fact that bin Laden had eluded capture for almost ten years didn't go unnoticed. You think that didn't give them confidence/a sense of security?

Come on. You can't even square your narratives. On the one hand you expect us to believe these dudes are serious threats to our civilization because they have no values and no respect for life (which, logically, includes their own),

Why would it "logically include their own?"

but on the other you think they can get intimidated by this? I'm pretty sure the idea that they're pretty much living on borrowed time isn't a newsflash: it's part of the job description of "terrorist mastermind".

Not really. The "terrorist mastermind" gets to live behind the scenes, sending others out to their deaths; it's part of the job description, which is why they were never physically involved in the plans they masterminded. It's why others died executing their plans, while they lived.

What's your point? No one's refuting the fact that there have been times in the past that people have speculated that bin Laden had died. This is a different situation entirely, and bin Laden's daughter has confirmed that it was her father that was killed. This isn't a "we think he might have been killed" situation. That's not the way this has gone down at all.

Personally, i think they just didn't want to get greedy. Kill the mofo, let it be done. If they took him alive, what if they were attacked on the way to the chopper by ISI or some bin Laden guards hiding down the street that were alerted? What if he was taken alive and the the chopper crashed like the other one, or was shot down, and he escaped?

You raise some good points. They "almost" got him in the past, and I'm sure they didn't want this to turn into another "almost" scenario. The decision to kill him was likely based on a number of factors. As long as he was alive, there was the risk of losing him again.

According to articles I've read, the raid did result in a "a treasure trove" of information:" A "treasure trove" of computers, CDs, data sticks, DVDs and paperwork was quickly pulled together to provide intelligence. They lugged out about 100 thumb drives, DVDs and computer disks, along with 10 computer hard drives and five computers to be pored over by computer forensic experts and intelligence officers for evidence of future plots and clues to the shape of the organisation Bin Laden was leaving behind.

Having to act quickly, before Pakistani intelligence got wind of the operation, likely entered into the decision, too. If Pakistani officials had arrived, would the U.S. have been forced to hand bin Laden over to them if he had still been alive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure some likely were. The fact that bin Laden had eluded capture for almost ten years didn't go unnoticed. You think that didn't give them confidence/a sense of security?

And yet he's going to be packing a bomb on his person 24/7. Okay.

Why would it "logically include their own?"

Because it's a fairly high-risk profession?

Not really. The "terrorist mastermind" gets to live behind the scenes, sending others out to their deaths; it's part of the job description, which is why they were never physically involved in the plans they masterminded. It's why others died executing their plans, while they lived.

Yeah, I'm sure he was totally unaware that they were the most hunted man in the fucking world. "I'm untouchable!" was probably the second last thing that went through Osama's mind before the MP5 bullet.

According to articles I've read, the raid did result in a "a treasure trove" of information:" A "treasure trove" of computers, CDs, data sticks, DVDs and paperwork was quickly pulled together to provide intelligence. They lugged out about 100 thumb drives, DVDs and computer disks, along with 10 computer hard drives and five computers to be pored over by computer forensic experts and intelligence officers for evidence of future plots and clues to the shape of the organisation Bin Laden was leaving behind.

...which could have been nicely supplemented by human intelligence. You know, the kind that led them to OBL in the first place?

Having to act quickly, before Pakistani intelligence got wind of the operation, likely entered into the decision, too. If Pakistani officials had arrived, would the U.S. have been forced to hand bin Laden over to them if he had still been alive?

Yeah, I'm sure the ISI or the Pakistani government is in a position to tell the U.S. what to do.

The more you argue the point, the more this looks like a big operational fuck up, actually. Mission accomplished? Sure. But was it as rousing a success as we're being led to believe? The shifting story seems to imply otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The shifting story seems to imply otherwise.

The shifting story is due to the reluctance of the White House to admit Obama ordered an assassination. They're already very uncomfortable for keeping most of the Bush/Cheney anti-terrorism mechanisms in place. And for using intelligence gathered by enhanced interrogation during the Bush/Cheney years in office. So having to actually confess to ordering an assasination is probably much too much for them at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So having to actually confess to ordering an assasination is probably much too much for them at this point.

True. It is still illegal to kill people in cold blood. Even people who totally deserve it. Time to rejoice in the closure that he's dead and move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

The more you argue the point, the more this looks like a big operational fuck up, actually. Mission accomplished? Sure. But was it as rousing a success as we're being led to believe? The shifting story seems to imply otherwise.

Who's arguing the point? I'm discussing it. Saying what's on my mind. Thoughts I've had, questions I've had. You don't like it, don't respond. I sure won't lose any sleep if you don't. But since the mission was accomplished, it was a success. Not surprised in the least that you see it as a big operational fuck up, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True. It is still illegal to kill people in cold blood. Even people who totally deserve it. Time to rejoice in the closure that he's dead and move on.

I'm not sure if it's illegal to kill people that have declared war on you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who's arguing the point? I'm discussing it. Saying what's on my mind. Thoughts I've had, questions I've had. You don't like it, don't respond. I sure won't lose any sleep if you don't. But since the mission was accomplished, it was a success. Not surprised in the least that you see it as a big operational fuck up, though.

I wouldnt waste your time American Woman. Black Dog sympathizes with people like Bin Laden. Probably wishes he was still alive. That's why they're so bothered by the successful operation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True. It is still illegal to kill people in cold blood. Even people who totally deserve it. Time to rejoice in the closure that he's dead and move on.

Not in this case...just like any other military action that kills people in "cold blood". Even the UN is happy...ding dong...Osama is dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much better to have killed him quickly and efficiently. Otherwise he'd be getting free publicity from the media for the next 10 years while his trial progressed. Not to mention the whole process would cost billions and billions of dollars.

And that's the US. Wouldn't even want to consider what it'd be like if Canada got him. He'd probably serve a few years, get early release, and then get a few hundred million dollar settlement after suing the government cause some soldier didn't quite fully respect his rights at some point.

Edited by Bonam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

It was a military operation, ambushing a compound, was it not? Ambushes have been part of military operations since the beginning of time. Now suddenly it becomes "cold blood" to have killed a man under such conditions in war; a man the world has on tape admitting to planning the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians. A man who had declared war and the desire to kill as many westerners as possible and was doing just that.

I honestly wonder where people are coming from sometimes, especially since it seems a lot of these same people seem to say that the Pentagon was a legitimate military target on 9-11. Yet now we have to justify killing a cold-blooded murderer of innocent civilians during a military operation in a declared war. It was a clean kill in that most people were left alive. That required care and precision on our part. Yet we are the ones who did wrong.

I honestly wonder what this world is coming to sometimes. In an effort to critique/find fault with the western world and be tolerant of everyone else, it seems as if things are sometimes half-ass backwards. I hope Obama doesn't go overboard explaining the killing to the point of becoming defensive. Sometimes one has to take a stand; the more those questioning it are catered to, the stronger their voice/stand becomes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who's arguing the point? I'm discussing it. Saying what's on my mind. Thoughts I've had, questions I've had. You don't like it, don't respond. I sure won't lose any sleep if you don't. But since the mission was accomplished, it was a success. Not surprised in the least that you see it as a big operational fuck up, though.

I'm getting a little tired of your feeble insinuations. Got something to say? Say it. Don't be so chickenshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

I'm getting a little tired of your feeble insinuations. Got something to say? Say it. Don't be so chickenshit.

I did say it. There was no insinuation. If you can't understand what I said, I'll try to put it more clearly. I'm not surprised at all that you see anything/everything the U.S. does as a big operational fuck up, even as you admit to the success of said big operational fuck up. Was that clear enough for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly wonder where people are coming from sometimes, especially since it seems a lot of these same people seem to say that the Pentagon was a legitimate military target on 9-11.

I think they just want to hear your very long-winded rants about how victimized you feel.

Tell me again about how 9/11 had nothing to do with Islam. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman

I think they just want to hear your very long-winded rants about how victimized you feel.

Tell me again about how 9/11 had nothing to do with Islam. :lol:

Again with the "victimized" response, eh? *yawn* Got nothing else, eh? No response to what was actually said. Again. Why am I not surprised? Keep coming back with it, though, as there are times I could use a good snooze and need a little help getting there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did say it. There was no insinuation. If you can't understand what I said, I'll try to put it more clearly. I'm not surprised at all that you see anything/everything the U.S. does as a big operational fuck up, even as you admit to the success of said big operational fuck up. Was that clear enough for you?

Crystal clear. You're a moron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...