Embedding videos containing profanity is a violation of Dakka rules which normally merits an immediate suspension of posting privileges for several days at a minimum. However, given the occasion we will only give a warning. for future reference, if you wish to link a video containing profanty if must be a link, and must carry a NSFW label.
Shot to the head got him apparently, thinking from CIA agents in the field but unconfirmed. His body is reportedly going to be confirmed and cross check out the ass, then disposed of so a grave or tomb cannot be erected
I think we can all agree, Democrat, Republican, Labour, Communist, Jewish, Muslim, Christan, and Atheist, that we should be celebrating. We got the man behind 9/11, we got the man we were looking for, and now he's decaying in a ditch in east bumfeth, Afganistan.
Chowderhead is happy.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
halonachos wrote:
Chowderhead wrote:
Mistress of minis wrote:Its all over the cable news right now- guess they got him in Afghanistan.
Kudos to whoever pulled the trigger or pressed the button.
Kudos?
Bin Laden had a 27 million dollar price tag on his head! He got what he deserved, the bastard.
Kudos is a good thing, its like saying "Good job bro you just killed the most hated man in the world".
I know. I was saying his kudos would be the 27 mill.
LunaHound wrote:Nothing will change even if hes dead.
Meh, nothing really changes when a rapist is caught, the impact on the overall number of rapes committed doesn't really change. But it is still important that the rapist is brought to account for his crimes.
But it's a good thing when people are brought to justice. Bin Laden plotted the deaths of 3,000 people in one attack alone, it's good he was brought to account for that.
ChrisWWII wrote: BBC has it too. Feth sleep. I'm staying up to find out what oBama's saying.
He'll show his birth certificate, make fun of Donald Trump and Fox news, and then claim he killed BinLaden himself while humming 'Secret Agent Man'.
That was unnecessary.
Not the worst joke I've heard. I've heard jokes about him coming out to watch the wedding (which I did lol at) as well as over excited posters hitting 'obama' instead of 'obama'
LunaHound wrote:Nothing will change even if hes dead.
Meh, nothing really changes when a rapist is caught, the impact on the overall number of rapes committed doesn't really change. But it is still important that the rapist is brought to account for his crimes.
But it's a good thing when people are brought to justice. Bin Laden plotted the deaths of 3,000 people in one attack alone, it's good he was brought to account for that.
What it changes is the fact that it shows that America can indeed hunt down and kill its enemies. People are at the White House gates cheering and singing the national anthem.
Certainly his death means something. Figure heads may not singularly comprise a movement but they give it direction, hope and enthusiasm. This was the de facto figure head of anti-American extremists and while they will initially claim it false, then eventually elevate Bin Laden to martyrdom----those are compromises his death has forced on their movement.
I just hope the bastard's last months were comprised of countless, painful dialysis sessions and his one moment of clarity before his death was that this mortal realm is all there is.
While I understand the pride those are feeling outside the White House, I wish the press would not have spent so much time showing them cheering. I'm sure this will come across to much of the Middle East-----in the same manner the cheering 9/11 Palestinians came across to us. Hopefully Obama is somber and reflective on what was done---and why it's a good thing that a murderer of people, not just Americans---is a global victory.
sexiest_hero wrote:See Bush. THIS IS MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
Don't bring that crap into this moment, this is a good moment just revel in it. Osama Bin Laden was killed by an American, we have his body, and we should celebrate. Dance on his grave, bury him upside down, drag him through the streets of New York, it doesn't matter we got him and this is almost as big as when we beat Japan in WW2 if not bigger. I hope that this at least gives some comfort to the families of the 9/11 victims.
sexiest_hero wrote:See Bush. THIS IS MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
Don't bring that crap into this moment, this is a good moment just revel in it. Osama Bin Laden was killed by an American, we have his body, and we should celebrate. Dance on his grave, bury him upside down, drag him through the streets of New York, it doesn't matter we got him and this is almost as big as when we beat Japan in WW2 if not bigger. I hope that this at least gives some comfort to the families of the 9/11 victims.
It means one more villian that caused us so much confusion and pain and anguish has finally seen justice.
Read as you will into what justice means, but it means some form of resolution for thousands who died and tens of thousands who personally lost loved ones and the millions of people across the United States and other nations who were frustrated for years by a solitary individual.
sexiest_hero wrote:See Bush. THIS IS MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
Don't bring that crap into this moment, this is a good moment just revel in it. Osama Bin Laden was killed by an American, we have his body, and we should celebrate. Dance on his grave, bury him upside down, drag him through the streets of New York, it doesn't matter we got him and this is almost as big as when we beat Japan in WW2 if not bigger. I hope that this at least gives some comfort to the families of the 9/11 victims.
sexiest_hero wrote:See Bush. THIS IS MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
Don't bring that crap into this moment, this is a good moment just revel in it. Osama Bin Laden was killed by an American, we have his body, and we should celebrate. Dance on his grave, bury him upside down, drag him through the streets of New York, it doesn't matter we got him and this is almost as big as when we beat Japan in WW2 if not bigger. I hope that this at least gives some comfort to the families of the 9/11 victims.
I wouldn't really compare those two events...
Shuma, if you seriously start this.
You're comparing it to the defeat of an entire naton in world war two. Guess what? We're not leaving afghanistan. It's one dude.
AgeOfEgos wrote: Hopefully Obama is somber and reflective on what was done---and why it's a good thing that a murderer of people, not just Americans---is a global victory.
He seemed to do this well enough in this regard.
Even if(when) he's made into a matyr, this will no doubt have a serious affect on morale for both sides.
You're comparing it to the defeat of an entire naton in world war two. Guess what? We're not leaving afghanistan. It's one dude.
We didn't leave Japan either for....wait....we technically have never left.
We can draw a parallel between 9/11 and Osama Bin Laden's Death and the Bombing of Pearl Harbor and the Unconditional Surrender of Japan. All four events bridged an emotional and material cost our nation borne to right what was seen as a wrong dealt unfairly to American shores. Each starting event sparked a mobilization of war towards achieving a goal, and each end point meant a moral end to the effort, despite the fact the actual effort did not end.
We pulled off the greatest special forces operation in the history of the US. Hopefully the team and the man who pulled the trigger are thanked copiously, even though history will never know their names.
Either way, to all Americans, congratulations, but be cautious. Be happy and proud that you finally got the basterd, but be prepared. He was a fighter, which means his death will make him a matyr
NY Times wrote:Osama Bin Laden, considered the mastermind of Al Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks on the United States, is reportedly dead. Major news outlets have made the declaration, and President Barack Obama is expected to address the press, the nation, and the world shortly to confirm the reports.
The New York Times says that one of the officials reporting Bin Laden's death "said that American forces, acting on intelligence, launched a 'targeted assault' that killed Mr. Bin Laden, whose ability to elude capture for so long deeply frustrated the Bush administration." Live reports on CNN indicate that Bin Laden may have been killed, along with some of his family members, while he was inside a large residence near the capital of Pakistan. It is believed that the body is in the hands of U.S. officials, and that DNA has confirmed it is that of Bin Laden.
At about 7 p.m. Los Angeles time, the media began to report that Obama was planning to make an announcement from the East Room of the White House at 7:30 p.m. local time; his address has been delayed, though he is expected to speak shortly. Obama is reportedly making calls to top officials regarding national security and the anticipated declaration of Bin Laden's death.
UPDATE 8:49PM: Obama confirmed that Osama Bin Laden was killed by a U.S. attack, and that the body was taken into possession by U.S. forces. Bin Laden was killed today on a compound in Pakistan, and no Americans were harmed in the attack.
"We must, and we will, remain vigilant at home and abroad," cautions Obama, and gave a reminder that "we are not, and never will be, at war with Islam," pointing out that "Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader, he was a mass murderer of Muslims."
Emphasizing that the U.S. will continue to fight tirelessly against those who attack us and our allies, Obama offered gratitude to the troops who have fought, and in some cases given their lives, to protect the nation. “Finally, let me say to the families who lost loved ones on 9/11, that we have never forgotten your loss," remarked Obama.
Crowds have gathered outside the White House to sing, cheer, wave flags, and celebrate. Social media has been buzzing with the news, as well as with commentary, national pride, larger political speculation, and a great deal of witticism.
You're comparing it to the defeat of an entire naton in world war two. Guess what? We're not leaving afghanistan. It's one dude.
We didn't leave Japan either for....wait....we technically have never left.
We can draw a parallel between 9/11 and Osama Bin Laden's Death and the Bombing of Pearl Harbor and the Unconditional Surrender of Japan. All four events bridged an emotional and material cost our nation borne to right what was seen as a wrong dealt unfairly to American shores. Each starting event sparked a mobilization of war towards achieving a goal, and each end point meant a moral end to the effort, despite the fact the actual effort did not end.
And yet those efforts are entirely dissimilar. Osama wasn't even in afghanistan, nor has his killing or capture ever been materially meaningful in that struggle. He was a mass murderer, don't get me wrong. I'm happy he's gone. His killing came ten years too late. He hasn't been relavent for years. It's a score on the scoreboard and is totally meaningless on the field. Comparing this to a major military victory is akin to saying that it's a victory that you crossed the finish line a day after the race ended.
When japan surrendered it meant the military force we were fighting stopped fighting us. Now that Osamas dead tomorrow is just another day.
As much as i hate to celebrate the death of anyone: I'm glad he's dead. I wish we had been able to capture him, and bring him to trial, but, yeah, I can't seem to bring myself to be too sad about this.
That said, I worry for my friends in Afghanistan. Hopefully, they'll be okay.
You're comparing it to the defeat of an entire naton in world war two. Guess what? We're not leaving afghanistan. It's one dude.
We didn't leave Japan either for....wait....we technically have never left.
We can draw a parallel between 9/11 and Osama Bin Laden's Death and the Bombing of Pearl Harbor and the Unconditional Surrender of Japan. All four events bridged an emotional and material cost our nation borne to right what was seen as a wrong dealt unfairly to American shores. Each starting event sparked a mobilization of war towards achieving a goal, and each end point meant a moral end to the effort, despite the fact the actual effort did not end.
...Right. Are you gonna drop this silly anology now or keep going?
So, #1 - who else is worried about whatever remnants of al-Qaeda rushing a counter-strike?
#2, apparently Osama was taken out by Special Forces - I'd bet money he's been tied to the back of a Humvee, and they're jumping off hills at the moment.
You're comparing it to the defeat of an entire naton in world war two. Guess what? We're not leaving afghanistan. It's one dude.
We didn't leave Japan either for....wait....we technically have never left.
We can draw a parallel between 9/11 and Osama Bin Laden's Death and the Bombing of Pearl Harbor and the Unconditional Surrender of Japan. All four events bridged an emotional and material cost our nation borne to right what was seen as a wrong dealt unfairly to American shores. Each starting event sparked a mobilization of war towards achieving a goal, and each end point meant a moral end to the effort, despite the fact the actual effort did not end.
...Right. Are you gonna drop this silly anology now or keep going?
There were open reports from a variety of intelligence services that he was dead throughout the early 2000's. Remember that Bin Laden required kidney dialysis!!! Are we to really believe that he was getting kidney dialysis twice a week somewhere in a cave on the Afghanistan/Pakistan border? For a decade? Really? It begs credibility.
In 2007, Benazir Bhutto, the Prime Minister of Pakistan (who was later assassinated) was interviewed on television and explicitly stated that Bin Laden was dead. She also stated that he was killed by Saeed Sheikh, the same man who killed reporter Daniel Pearl. Here's a 2008 news report of it:
http://english.pravda.ru/world/asia/15-01-2008/103426-benazir_bhutto_osama-0/
I have no doubt that the United States Government has been keeping this one on an ice slab for some time now, waiting for the perfect propaganda moment to reveal it.
In NY, we haven't forgotten. This has been a long day coming, and it helps to close a chapter in this story with no winners.
You still have a bit empty pit where there should be a building. Try putting something there. It'll fill the hole in the heart to rebuild better then just putting a coffin in a freezer.
Lonecoon wrote:As much as i hate to celebrate the death of anyone: I'm glad he's dead. I wish we had been able to capture him, and bring him to trial, but, yeah, I can't seem to bring myself to be too sad about this.
That said, I worry for my friends in Afghanistan. Hopefully, they'll be okay.
Why even if he was captured he was gonna die. Besides the U.S. government wouldnt come up with a good enough execution (we need commissars)
You're comparing it to the defeat of an entire naton in world war two. Guess what? We're not leaving afghanistan. It's one dude.
We didn't leave Japan either for....wait....we technically have never left.
We can draw a parallel between 9/11 and Osama Bin Laden's Death and the Bombing of Pearl Harbor and the Unconditional Surrender of Japan. All four events bridged an emotional and material cost our nation borne to right what was seen as a wrong dealt unfairly to American shores. Each starting event sparked a mobilization of war towards achieving a goal, and each end point meant a moral end to the effort, despite the fact the actual effort did not end.
...Right. Are you gonna drop this silly anology now or keep going?
With respect, the treasure, lives, and mobilization effort spent on WWII was far more significant than that spent on the War on Terrorism.
But the key similarity is that the entry of the US into WWII and the War on Terrorism changed America. True, it changed us in different ways, but both events became a watershed in our history that would influence our foreign policy and politics for years afterwards.
Osama bin Ladin is dead By Laura Conaway - Sun May 1, 2011 10:51 PM EDT
The terrorist Osama bin Ladin is dead, NBC correspondent Andrea Mitchell reports. The United States has bin Ladin's body, NBC is reporting, and he is dead as the result of an American action in Pakistan Afghanistan (or Pakistan -- this point is not clear) Abbottabad, Pakistan.
"We could be turning to a new phase," Richart Engel is saying on TV. With democracy and the push for democracy taking root across the Middle East, bin Ladin had become "despicable" in the region, he says. And now the U.S. seems to have gotten the man sought by two presidents, in Pakistan, where he'd taken shelter. This so happens to be the eighth anniversary of President George W. Bush donning that flight suit and proclaiming "mission accomplished."
President Bush led the nation into war in Afghanistan to get bin Ladin and to break up the Afghan government that had given him a base for the 9-11 attacks. Mr. Bush then led the nation into war in Iraq under several discredited rationales. American troops continue to sacrifice their lives in both countries. After failing to catch bin Ladin in Afghanistan, the U.S. expanded into what amounts to a third, undeclared war in Pakistan, run by the CIA. NBC reports that bin Ladin was not killed by a drone strike, but rather a Special Ops action that had been months in the making. NBC reports that bin Ladin was shot in the head during a firefight.
A small crowd of 50 or so people has gathered outside the White House, singing the national anthem and cheering. President Obama is expected to speak momentarily.
"Nearly 3,000 citizens taken from us, leaving a gaping hole in our hearts," President Obama said, opening with a remembrance of 9-11. He says that since then, we've removed the Taliban government that supported bin Ladin and captured scores of terrorists. He says he directed CIA chief Leon Panetta to make capturing or killing bin Ladin the top priority. Last August, Mr. Obama says, he was briefed on a lead that bin Ladin was hiding in Pakistan. Last week, he believed the United States had enough information to act. Today, the U.S. struck the compound, and killed bin Ladin. "Over the years, I have repeatedly made clear that we would take action within Pakistan if we knew where he was," Mr. Obama said. He added, "On nights like this one, we can say to families who have lost loved ones to Al Qaeda's terror, justice has been done."
Among the many official statements to come tonight from elected leaders is one from former President Bush. He writes in part, "No matter how long it takes, justice will be done."
And this from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, whose primary election was scheduled for 9-11 and interrupted by the attacks: "The killing of Osama bin Laden does not lessen the suffering that New Yorkers and Americans experienced at his hands, but it is a critically important victory for our nation -- and a tribute to the millions of men and women in our armed forces and elsewhere who have fought so hard for our nation."
Rachel just tweeted, "In DC. People streaming on foot toward the WH. Car horns honking and much shouting. People hopping out of cabs in the middle of traffic. Guy on a bike just passed me with a US flag cape. Happy scrum in front of the White House -- USA! USA! Chants. One adorable very drunk guy yelling '10 Years!!'"
Lonecoon wrote:As much as i hate to celebrate the death of anyone: I'm glad he's dead. I wish we had been able to capture him, and bring him to trial, but, yeah, I can't seem to bring myself to be too sad about this.
That said, I worry for my friends in Afghanistan. Hopefully, they'll be okay.
Why even if he was captured he was gonna die. Besides the U.S. govenrment would come up with a good enough execution (we need commissars)
hell tie him to a stake in time square, 10 bucks to spit on him 20 bucks to piss on him, 50 bucks to punch him...
infinite_array wrote:#2, apparently Osama was taken out by Special Forces - I'd bet money he's been tied to the back of a Humvee, and they're jumping off hills at the moment.
I hope that I'm not the only one saying that he doesn't deserve to be near Americans, alive or dead.
halonachos wrote:What it changes is the fact that it shows that America can indeed hunt down and kill its enemies. People are at the White House gates cheering and singing the national anthem.
Really there is no more threat then there was yesterday, they are going to strike if and when they can. The big news is he was killed in a compound near Islamabad, not in some caves, you telling me Pakistan officials did not know? I hope we nuke the gak out of Pakistan, how's that for a response for telling us to halt our air strikes or else?
There were open reports from a variety of intelligence services that he was dead throughout the early 2000's. Remember that Bin Laden required kidney dialysis!!! Are we to really believe that he was getting kidney dialysis twice a week somewhere in a cave on the Afghanistan/Pakistan border? For a decade? Really? It begs credibility.
In 2007, Benazir Bhutto, the Prime Minister of Pakistan (who was later assassinated) was interviewed on television and explicitly stated that Bin Laden was dead. She also stated that he was killed by Saeed Sheikh, the same man who killed reporter Daniel Pearl. Here's a 2008 news report of it:
http://english.pravda.ru/world/asia/15-01-2008/103426-benazir_bhutto_osama-0/
I have no doubt that the United States Government has been keeping this one on an ice slab for some time now, waiting for the perfect propaganda moment to reveal it.
That or Bhutto wasn't a saint and traded in bad info.
In NY, we haven't forgotten. This has been a long day coming, and it helps to close a chapter in this story with no winners.
You still have a bit empty pit where there should be a building. Try putting something there. It'll fill the hole in the heart to rebuild better then just putting a coffin in a freezer.
Specifically, the hole reminds us of the ineffectiveness we exhibit once we lose focus and resolve in accomplishing something. Blame it on politics, views, ect. whatever, but the hole cannot be filled with the corpse of Osama Bin Laden. But it does help.
We cut off one of the hydra's heads and all we can do, as a nation, after 10 years of death and pain and sorrow is shout BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD AND SKULLS FOR HIS THRONE from every door, window, and forum.
There were open reports from a variety of intelligence services that he was dead throughout the early 2000's. Remember that Bin Laden required kidney dialysis!!! Are we to really believe that he was getting kidney dialysis twice a week somewhere in a cave on the Afghanistan/Pakistan border? For a decade? Really? It begs credibility.
In 2007, Benazir Bhutto, the Prime Minister of Pakistan (who was later assassinated) was interviewed on television and explicitly stated that Bin Laden was dead. She also stated that he was killed by Saeed Sheikh, the same man who killed reporter Daniel Pearl. Here's a 2008 news report of it:
http://english.pravda.ru/world/asia/15-01-2008/103426-benazir_bhutto_osama-0/
I have no doubt that the United States Government has been keeping this one on an ice slab for some time now, waiting for the perfect propaganda moment to reveal it.
Go put on your tinfoil hat and go somewhere else. We're celebrating.
Hargus56 wrote:Really there is no more threat then there was yesterday, they are going to strike if and when they can. The big news is he was killed in a compound near Islamabad, not in some caves, you telling me Pakistan officials did not know? I hope we nuke the gak out of Pakistan, how's that for a response for telling us to halt our air strikes or else?
The President explicitly stated this was done with the approval of the Pakistani government.
Slackermagee wrote:We cut off one of the hydra's heads and all we can do, as a nation, after 10 years of death and pain and sorrow is shout BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD AND SKULLS FOR HIS THRONE from every door, window, and forum.
When it comes down to it we all follow the blood god.
With the increase in U.S. security in the past 10 years, it is unlikely that the terrorists could do much to us here, but our soldiers who are still in Afghanistan are in danger. That's what I'm worried about.
Mike Noble wrote:With the increase in U.S. security in the past 10 years, it is unlikely that the terrorists could do much to us here, but our soldiers who are still in Afghanistan are in danger. That's what I'm worried about.
If they aren't in danger somewhere then we're paying them a lot of money for not a lot of use.
There were open reports from a variety of intelligence services that he was dead throughout the early 2000's. Remember that Bin Laden required kidney dialysis!!! Are we to really believe that he was getting kidney dialysis twice a week somewhere in a cave on the Afghanistan/Pakistan border? For a decade? Really? It begs credibility.
In 2007, Benazir Bhutto, the Prime Minister of Pakistan (who was later assassinated) was interviewed on television and explicitly stated that Bin Laden was dead. She also stated that he was killed by Saeed Sheikh, the same man who killed reporter Daniel Pearl. Here's a 2008 news report of it: http://english.pravda.ru/world/asia/15-01-2008/103426-benazir_bhutto_osama-0/
I have no doubt that the United States Government has been keeping this one on an ice slab for some time now, waiting for the perfect propaganda moment to reveal it.
Go put on your tinfoil hat and go somewhere else. We're celebrating.
He does have a right to voice his opinion. It means that we live in America where we can say things and criticize to our leisure.
In short:
USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA
Hargus56 wrote:Really there is no more threat then there was yesterday, they are going to strike if and when they can. The big news is he was killed in a compound near Islamabad, not in some caves, you telling me Pakistan officials did not know? I hope we nuke the gak out of Pakistan, how's that for a response for telling us to halt our air strikes or else?
The President explicitly stated this was done with the approval of the Pakistani government.
And he said he received intelligence months ago on lead, you telling me some Pakistani official wasn't told "hey they know, we gotta give him up or they stop payment on the $6 billion in aid every year"
WarOne wrote: In NY, we haven't forgotten. This has been a long day coming, and it helps to close a chapter in this story with no winners.
I suppose I understand that. I never really had an emotional reaction to 9/11 either, so this feels like a very odd level of enthusiasm.
Understood.
You have to been there when your teacher walks a television into your school room, turns it on, and shows you the dramatic event unfolding a short distance away, where your loved ones live and work and you have no idea if the events affect them in any way (thankfully for my family, there was no deaths due to 9/11).
The horror, confusion, and speculation of the event was a profound event for many here in NY and nearby. It's hard to describe unless you experience something as traumatic.
Hargus56 wrote:Really there is no more threat then there was yesterday, they are going to strike if and when they can. The big news is he was killed in a compound near Islamabad, not in some caves, you telling me Pakistan officials did not know? I hope we nuke the gak out of Pakistan, how's that for a response for telling us to halt our air strikes or else?
The President explicitly stated this was done with the approval of the Pakistani government.
And he said he received intelligence months ago on lead, you telling me some Pakistani official wasn't told "hey they know, we gotta give him up or they stop payment on the $6 billion in aid every year"
Osama's sucess in remaining hidden for a decade would not have been possible if he had involved the Pakistani government.
Asherian Command wrote:The head of the serpent is cut but the coils can still be deadly.
I think i can sleep better tonight knowing he is dead.
Osama wasn't in charge of anything any more. He wasn't the head of anything.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mike Noble wrote:
dogma wrote:
WarOne wrote:
In NY, we haven't forgotten. This has been a long day coming, and it helps to close a chapter in this story with no winners.
I suppose I understand that. I never really had an emotional reaction to 9/11 either, so this feels like a very odd level of enthusiasm.
You don't think it sucks that thousands of people died? I mean, I guess you may not consider that an emotional reaction, but still.
Over a quarter million have died in Iraq since we invaded. Who do we blame for that? Do we throw a parade when Rummy dies?
Again....there was no winners.
If you want to go back a bit further, we could conjecture if our foreign policy of the past is to blame for the events that lead up to 9/11, but I'll leave that line of thought for another day.
Hargus56 wrote:Really there is no more threat then there was yesterday, they are going to strike if and when they can. The big news is he was killed in a compound near Islamabad, not in some caves, you telling me Pakistan officials did not know? I hope we nuke the gak out of Pakistan, how's that for a response for telling us to halt our air strikes or else?
The President explicitly stated this was done with the approval of the Pakistani government.
And he said he received intelligence months ago on lead, you telling me some Pakistani official wasn't told "hey they know, we gotta give him up or they stop payment on the $6 billion in aid every year"
Osama's sucess in remaining hidden for a decade would not have been possible if he had involved the Pakistani government.
Nor would it have been possible without their tacit consent of islamic extremism within their borders as a weapon against India. Theres a reason he went to pakistan. It wasn't because they were gung ho about finding him.
WarOne wrote:If you want to go back a bit further, we could conjecture if our foreign policy of the past is to blame for the events that lead up to 9/11, but I'll leave that line of thought for another day.
That's probably for the best.
If people want to rehash that again they should probably start a new thread.
What's important here is that a very bad guy got his comeuppance.
LittleLeadMen wrote:The whole thing is a PSYOP. Has always been. First, Bin laden has been dead for some time.
Your conspiracy makes no sense. It relies on taking loose speculation as evidence. It posits that bin Laden had been in a cave, when we know by direct evidence of where he was killed that he was staying in a mansion in Pakistan. You suppose that they were waiting for the perfect time to reveal the body, without giving any reason as to why now might be that perfect time. And most ridiculously, it argues that the Bush administration would have accepted constant criticism for being unable to bring bin Laden to justice, while they were in possession of the corpse, and just never got around to announcing bin Laden's death while they were in office.
WarOne wrote:If you want to go back a bit further, we could conjecture if our foreign policy of the past is to blame for the events that lead up to 9/11, but I'll leave that line of thought for another day.
That's probably for the best.
If people want to rehash that again they should probably start a new thread.
What's important here is that a very bad guy got his comeuppance.
WarOne wrote:
In NY, we haven't forgotten. This has been a long day coming, and it helps to close a chapter in this story with no winners.
I suppose I understand that. I never really had an emotional reaction to 9/11 either, so this feels like a very odd level of enthusiasm.
Many of us did. My SO at the time lost one of her brothers in the towers. I drove her down that day from Boston to his house in Scarsdale, where the family gathered around his pregnant widow and twin young sons. Another of her brothers was a doctor in the city, and was the last to join us in the house, as he had made his way down the island trying to find more info. Yet another of her brothers and his wife also worked in the towers, liviing in Century City across the street and only weren't there yet because the babysitter was late. They were evacuated across the river by tugboat, and also joined us in the evening.
The day comes late, and probably makes little or no material difference to the war(s) now, but we are still glad it has come.
ShumaGorath wrote:Nor would it have been possible without their tacit consent of islamic extremism within their borders as a weapon against India. Theres a reason he went to pakistan. It wasn't because they were gung ho about finding him.
One thing to see that it was a friendly neighborhood, another to claim it was a government conspiracy.
Mike Noble wrote:With the increase in U.S. security in the past 10 years, it is unlikely that the terrorists could do much to us here, but our soldiers who are still in Afghanistan are in danger. That's what I'm worried about.
They were already in danger. What do you propose, not bring people to account for the murder of innocent civilians?
No, all we can do is back our guys to be more capable than their guys. And this is a good example of guys being more capable.
Go put on your tinfoil hat and go somewhere else. We're celebrating.
Not a tinfoil hat if you show the mainstream news reports that clearly state he was dead before this announcement. Benazir Bhutto was the head of Pakistan, and by extension, the Pakistani ISI, their equivalent of the CIA, or MOSSAD. Don't forget that the ISI was the mechanism that the US used to distribute training, equipment, and arms to the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan throughout the 1980's. They had a long a complicated relationship with Bin Laden, supporting him, them essentially forced to renounce him when the United States co-opted Pakistan to fight the war on terror.
That's not tinfoil hat, it's established facts, especially with regard to the mainstream reporting of Bin Laden's death multiple times over the last decade.
ShumaGorath wrote:Nor would it have been possible without their tacit consent of islamic extremism within their borders as a weapon against India. Theres a reason he went to pakistan. It wasn't because they were gung ho about finding him.
One thing to see that it was a friendly neighborhood, another to claim it was a government conspiracy.
No conspiracy. The pakistan government trains and bankrolls islamists so that they strike at India. Ask the CIA, they talk about it all the time.
Hargus56 wrote:And he said he received intelligence months ago on lead, you telling me some Pakistani official wasn't told "hey they know, we gotta give him up or they stop payment on the $6 billion in aid every year"
Uh, I don't think you really understand the complexity of Pakistani politics.
Emperors Faithful wrote:Last I checked those claims/rumours weren't substantiated with a body. This time looks different.
Oh, I don't mean the claims of Osama being there were substantiated. The claims of extremists in pakistan are substantiated every time we use a predator to shoot something there though. The CIA has always suspected that he was in Pakistan and their government has always been an obstacle in actually searching for him. Fortunately it looks like we stopped caring two years ago.
Asherian Command wrote:The head of the serpent is cut but the coils can still be deadly.
I think i can sleep better tonight knowing he is dead.
Osama wasn't in charge of anything any more. He wasn't the head of anything.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mike Noble wrote:
dogma wrote:
WarOne wrote:
In NY, we haven't forgotten. This has been a long day coming, and it helps to close a chapter in this story with no winners.
I suppose I understand that. I never really had an emotional reaction to 9/11 either, so this feels like a very odd level of enthusiasm.
You don't think it sucks that thousands of people died? I mean, I guess you may not consider that an emotional reaction, but still.
Over a quarter million have died in Iraq since we invaded. Who do we blame for that? Do we throw a parade when Rummy dies?
Comparing death in mutual open warfare started by an un-provoked attack ond the american people to the murder of innocent people is a logical stretch at best.
Osama Bin Laden is the single biggest serial killer in United States history. If some dude killed say...50 random men, women, and children, wouldn't you be happy he was caught. That's what this is, we brought a murderer to justice.
Nobody is saying this is going to stop terrorist attacks, if anything it will provoke even more. It's a great symbolic victory for us, and you can't even being to imagine how it must feel those thousands of people who's love ones were needlessly and thoughtlessly murdered because of this man.
ShumaGorath wrote:Nor would it have been possible without their tacit consent of islamic extremism within their borders as a weapon against India. Theres a reason he went to pakistan. It wasn't because they were gung ho about finding him.
One thing to see that it was a friendly neighborhood, another to claim it was a government conspiracy.
No conspiracy. The pakistan government trains and bankrolls islamists so that they strike at India. Ask the CIA, they talk about it all the time.
ShumaGorath wrote:Nor would it have been possible without their tacit consent of islamic extremism within their borders as a weapon against India. Theres a reason he went to pakistan. It wasn't because they were gung ho about finding him.
One thing to see that it was a friendly neighborhood, another to claim it was a government conspiracy.
No conspiracy. The pakistan government trains and bankrolls islamists so that they strike at India. Ask the CIA, they talk about it all the time.
The bit about them sheltering Osama would have to be a conspiracy. If the government was involved (or if any large number of people were involved) in his hiding, he would never have managed to avoid detection this long without someone giving serious thought to the prize bounty.
Asherian Command wrote:The head of the serpent is cut but the coils can still be deadly. I think i can sleep better tonight knowing he is dead.
Osama wasn't in charge of anything any more. He wasn't the head of anything.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mike Noble wrote:
dogma wrote:
WarOne wrote: In NY, we haven't forgotten. This has been a long day coming, and it helps to close a chapter in this story with no winners.
I suppose I understand that. I never really had an emotional reaction to 9/11 either, so this feels like a very odd level of enthusiasm.
You don't think it sucks that thousands of people died? I mean, I guess you may not consider that an emotional reaction, but still.
Over a quarter million have died in Iraq since we invaded. Who do we blame for that? Do we throw a parade when Rummy dies?
Comparing death in mutual open warfare started by an un-provoked attack ond the american people to the murder of innocent people is a logical stretch at best.
Osama Bin Laden is the single biggest serial killer in United States history. If some dude killed say...50 random men, women, and children, wouldn't you be happy he was caught. That's what this is, we brought a murderer to justice.
Nobody is saying this is going to stop terrorist attacks, if anything it will provoke even more. It's a great symbolic victory for us, and you can't even being to imagine how it must feel those thousands of people who's love ones were needlessly and thoughtlessly murdered because of this man.
We lost more people to the japanese and germans. How did Osama kill them more then hitler did? The comparison is facile, Osamas death is nothing like the surrender of japan.
LittleLeadMen wrote:The whole thing is a PSYOP. Has always been. First, Bin laden has been dead for some time.
Your conspiracy makes no sense. It relies on taking loose speculation as evidence. It posits that bin Laden had been in a cave, when we know by direct evidence of where he was killed that he was staying in a mansion in Pakistan. You suppose that they were waiting for the perfect time to reveal the body, without giving any reason as to why now might be that perfect time. And most ridiculously, it argues that the Bush administration would have accepted constant criticism for being unable to bring bin Laden to justice, while they were in possession of the corpse, and just never got around to announcing bin Laden's death while they were in office.
The theory makes no sense.
it's not MY conspiracy. I'm simply pointing out that he has been reported dead, by a variety of sources, including the head of Pakistan, multiple times over the last decade. that's not me, coming up with this stuff. The statements are a matter of public record- and I only supplied a few of them to you. There are far more out there.
I have no understanding nor rationale nor explanation as to the reasons for the "big reveal" now. I'm not here to speculate as to that.
For all we know, he WAS just killed. But he was a terribly sick man on dialysis over a decade ago- that was a matter of public record, even confirmed by the CIA. I'm simply pointing out that most people are unaware that he has been reported dead years ago, by mainstream established sources.
I'm certainly happy he's dead. I lived in NYC for 12 years, and suffered through 9/11 when it happened, lost good friends, as well. I also come from a background with a number of "friends" in intelligence, as well as having read a ridiculous number of books on the subject. it's a .... "hobby". I know enough from people in that "business" that the public story, the presented narrative, is rarely as tidy as it is shown.
ShumaGorath wrote:Nor would it have been possible without their tacit consent of islamic extremism within their borders as a weapon against India. Theres a reason he went to pakistan. It wasn't because they were gung ho about finding him.
They've engaged in open war with Islamic groups in that time.
Pakistani politics is the story of multiple groups with extremely different ideologies vying for domination within the government. Picking out one instance of support for an Islamic group and trying to use that to suggest the whole of the Pakistani government works that way is a mistaken approach.
Emperors Faithful wrote:The bit about them sheltering Osama would have to be a conspiracy. If the government was involved (or if any large number of people were involved) in his hiding, he would never have managed to avoid detection this long without someone giving serious thought to the prize bounty.
Pakistan's actual involvement of sheltering Osama will always remain in question by some fraction of our populace, especially when new media reports alway tell us how some terrorists seem to easily slip between the Pakistan/Afghanistan border and evade our net of capture.
LittleLeadMen wrote:The whole thing is a PSYOP. Has always been. First, Bin laden has been dead for some time.
Your conspiracy makes no sense. It relies on taking loose speculation as evidence. It posits that bin Laden had been in a cave, when we know by direct evidence of where he was killed that he was staying in a mansion in Pakistan. You suppose that they were waiting for the perfect time to reveal the body, without giving any reason as to why now might be that perfect time. And most ridiculously, it argues that the Bush administration would have accepted constant criticism for being unable to bring bin Laden to justice, while they were in possession of the corpse, and just never got around to announcing bin Laden's death while they were in office.
The theory makes no sense.
it's not MY conspiracy. I'm simply pointing out that he has been reported dead, by a variety of sources, including the head of Pakistan, multiple times over the last decade. that's not me, coming up with this stuff. The statements are a matter of public record- and I only supplied a few of them to you. There are far more out there.
I have no understanding nor rationale nor explanation as to the reasons for the "big reveal" now. I'm not here to speculate as to that.
For all we know, he WAS just killed. But he was a terribly sick man on dialysis over a decade ago- that was a matter of public record, even confirmed by the CIA. I'm simply pointing out that most people are unaware that he has been reported dead years ago, by mainstream established sources.
So you're saying you trust "the head of pakistan" and "mainstream media" over the united states government and it's president? Interesting. If they were so sure he was dead, why was a body never produced? Apparently, we now have this.
Emperors Faithful wrote:Last I checked those claims/rumours weren't substantiated with a body. This time looks different.
When the President of the United States states Osama is dead and we have the body, it does sorta say that Osama Bin Laden is dead.
+1
It's not like it's on some random blog.
ShumaGorath wrote:We lost more people to the japanese and germans. How did Osama kill them more then hitler did?
Are we not happy that Hitler is dead?
Way to Godwinize the thread though.
Hey mang, he brought up world war two. Not me. But hey, if anyone gets to be compared to hitler these days without it being a troll post at least it can be Osama.
ShumaGorath wrote:Hey mang, he brought up world war two. Not me. But hey, if anyone gets to be compared to hitler these days without it being a troll post at least it can be Osama.
Osama does not equal Hitler. 9/11 does not equal WWII. But both 9/11 and WWII had profound impacts on our society.
ShumaGorath wrote:Hey mang, he brought up world war two. Not me. But hey, if anyone gets to be compared to hitler these days without it being a troll post at least it can be Osama.
Osama does not equal Hitler. 9/11 does not equal WWII. But both 9/11 and WWII had profound impacts on our society.
I'm not going to believe Osama bin Laden is really dead until I see the long form death certificate. Why doesn't Obama release the long form death certificate? Don't believe the lame stream media without proof in the form of a long form death certificate. Where is the long form death certificate?
Griever wrote:So you're saying you trust "the head of pakistan" and "mainstream media" over the united states government and it's president? Interesting. If they were so sure he was dead, why was a body never produced? Apparently, we now have this.
1st of all, no need to use quotation marks, which implies that these aren't the sources listed. "head of Pakistan" was in fact, the Head of Pakistan, Benazir Bhutto. I certainly wouldn't write "President of the United States" that way, as it implies that it isn't true. Same goes for "Mainstream media". It was the Pakistan Observer, a well known news outlet in that part of the world, as well as reported on Reuters and Fox at the time.
And, for the record, I don't recall the USA president actually producing the body on live TV, either. Maybe in the coming days. Again, I'm not doubting that the dude is dead. He's dead. There's considerable reporting that states he may have been dead for some time. Maybe its true and he just got killed. Either way, there is more than one narrative going on here over the years, and they conflict.
schadenfreude wrote:I'm not going to believe Osama bin Laden is really dead until I see the long form death certificate. Why doesn't Obama release the long form death certificate? Don't believe the lame stream media without proof in the form of a long form death certificate. Where is the long form death certificate?
Genius.
LittleLeadMen wrote:And, for the record, I don't recall the USA president actually producing the body on live TV, either. Maybe in the coming days.
This conjured a Weekend at Bernie's type image in my mind, with Obama running around with Bin Laden's corpse. Hilarity ensues.
You're the one who is here arguing it. Take ownership.
I'm simply pointing out that he has been reported dead, by a variety of sources, including the head of Pakistan, multiple times over the last decade. that's not me, coming up with this stuff. The statements are a matter of public record- and I only supplied a few of them to you. There are far more out there.
And it is clear the statements were matters of opinion and speculation, with no substantiated evidence behind them.
I have no understanding nor rationale nor explanation as to the reasons for the "big reveal" now. I'm not here to speculate as to that.
In order to speculate that a conspiracy might exist, you need a plausible reason for the conspiracy to exist. You need a 'why' before it can even start being considered for plausibility.
For all we know, he WAS just killed.
He was. To speculate otherwise we'd need actual evidence, and all we have is speculation from people years ago.
I know enough from people in that "business" that the public story, the presented narrative, is rarely as tidy as it is shown.
That's just lazy. While it is good to be skeptical of the media we're presented with, that skepticism should drive you to examine and study the stories, not just say 'who knows anything' and then start making up whatever we think is the most exciting possibility.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
WarOne wrote:Pakistan's actual involvement of sheltering Osama will always remain in question by some fraction of our populace, especially when new media reports alway tell us how some terrorists seem to easily slip between the Pakistan/Afghanistan border and evade our net of capture.
Pakistan is not a person, it is not a single entity with a single belief set and single method of operating. If it were it'd be doing a whole lot better, either as an oppressive theocracy or as a modern, liberal state.
It is absolutely true that citizens in Pakistan helped shelter Osama. It is almost certainly true that elements within Pakistani government helped shelter Osama. But it also true elements in the Pakistani government aided the US in trying to track him down, and were aware of this operation.
Good riddance/
as for revenge attacks. He would have planned attacks against us so killing him does not change things substantially. We would have been attacked anyway, so eliminating him, though not a profound change in world events does send a message.
This was a good thing.
WarOne wrote:Pakistan's actual involvement of sheltering Osama will always remain in question by some fraction of our populace, especially when new media reports alway tell us how some terrorists seem to easily slip between the Pakistan/Afghanistan border and evade our net of capture.
Pakistan is not a person, it is not a single entity with a single belief set and single method of operating. If it were it'd be doing a whole lot better, either as an oppressive theocracy or as a modern, liberal state.
It is absolutely true that citizens in Pakistan helped shelter Osama. It is almost certainly true that elements within Pakistani government helped shelter Osama. But it also true elements in the Pakistani government aided the US in trying to track him down, and were aware of this operation.
I got lazy there and should of said Pakistani government.
Asherian Command wrote:The head of the serpent is cut but the coils can still be deadly.
I think i can sleep better tonight knowing he is dead.
Osama wasn't in charge of anything any more. He wasn't the head of anything.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mike Noble wrote:
dogma wrote:
WarOne wrote:
In NY, we haven't forgotten. This has been a long day coming, and it helps to close a chapter in this story with no winners.
I suppose I understand that. I never really had an emotional reaction to 9/11 either, so this feels like a very odd level of enthusiasm.
You don't think it sucks that thousands of people died? I mean, I guess you may not consider that an emotional reaction, but still.
Over a quarter million have died in Iraq since we invaded. Who do we blame for that? Do we throw a parade when Rummy dies?
Comparing death in mutual open warfare started by an un-provoked attack ond the american people to the murder of innocent people is a logical stretch at best.
Osama Bin Laden is the single biggest serial killer in United States history. If some dude killed say...50 random men, women, and children, wouldn't you be happy he was caught. That's what this is, we brought a murderer to justice.
Nobody is saying this is going to stop terrorist attacks, if anything it will provoke even more. It's a great symbolic victory for us, and you can't even being to imagine how it must feel those thousands of people who's love ones were needlessly and thoughtlessly murdered because of this man.
We lost more people to the japanese and germans. How did Osama kill them more then hitler did? The comparison is facile, Osamas death is nothing like the surrender of japan.
Agreed. If people want a comparable event, then the assassination of Admiral Yamamoto by the U.S. would fit better.
Forget it Sebster. I'm not going to go 12 rounds with all of you here on Dakka Dakka. I gave you a few documented (there are plenty more) statements of his death. They weren't speculation, they were news stories. In the case of Pakistan, you had the head of a major government involved in that area stating he was dead. There are plenty more like that, including from CIA sources.
Obviously, no man dies multiple times. So they can't all be accurate. But, by the same token, when's the last time you read multiple accounts of any major figure's death? It's bizarre.
I'm not going to defend anything to you just for argument's sake. There's no purpose for it, as you don't really want to look at the information anyhow. But don't pin this gak on me- I simply pointed out that there are plenty of other reports before todays, and given my knowledge of people in the "company", this looks and smells like a "company production". The end result is still f-ing GRAVY and GREAT NEWS.
The sad truth is people like you want to shout people like me down as tinfoil hat kind of people, despite a tremendous amount of documentation of the actions our intelligence agencies engage in , day after day, year after year, for decades on end. I'm not against their actions either, because they seem to be keeping us safe. But it's not a clean world, by any definition of the word.
Do yourselves a favor, and read "Legacy of Ashes". it won the Pulitzer Prize (is that mainstream enough for you guys?) and it is the 1st "On the Record" history of the CIA, from interviews and recently declassified documents. It will spin your head around with how extreme and crazy the stuff they've done is. Stuff so crazy, that people like you would claim I was a nutcase if I stated it years ago, because it is so extreme as to beg credibility. The lie so big that nobody questions it, so to speak. A lot of those kinds of actions are now documented and on the record. I'll also point out, that some of it was so extreme and big and done at the beginning of the agency. One can only wonder what they do now... what they are capable of.
In any event, You want to enjoy the mainstream narrative? Enjoy it. Either way the dude is dead (really this time, it seems) so there's plenty of cause for celebration.
ShumaGorath wrote:We lost more people to the japanese and germans. How did Osama kill them more then hitler did? The comparison is facile, Osamas death is nothing like the surrender of japan.
Agreed. If people want a comparable event, then the assassination of Admiral Yamamoto by the U.S. would fit better.
The death of Admiral Yamamoto was a great psychological toll on the Japanese. It did inspire the morale of the Americans and made Japan realize America was capable of fighting even after losing so much after Pearl Harbor.
We will have to see what else comes of Osama Bin Laden's death other than the emotional outpour wrought by his death. However, do mark May 1st, 2011 as DOOD (Death of Osama Day).
I don't think anyone should be celebrating anyone's death, even Bin Laden's. Sure, a man who did horrible things is dead, but it's not going to bring back any of the people who's deaths he's responsible for. It doesn't suddenly make it any better.
US warns of anti-American violence after bin Laden
AP
MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Matthew Lee, Associated Press – 24 mins ago
WASHINGTON – The State Department early Monday put U.S. embassies on alert and warned of the heightened possibility for anti-American violence after the killing of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden by American forces in Pakistan.
In a worldwide travel alert released shortly after President Barack Obama late Sunday announced bin Laden's death in a U.S. military operation, the department said there was an "enhanced potential for anti-American violence given recent counterterrorism activity in Pakistan."
"Given the uncertainty and volatility of the current situation, U.S. citizens in areas where recent events could cause anti-American violence are strongly urged to limit their travel outside of their homes and hotels and avoid mass gatherings and demonstrations," it said.
The alert said U.S. embassy operations would continue "to the extent possible under the constraints of any evolving security situation." It noted that embassies and consulates may temporarily close or suspend public services, depending on conditions.
LittleLeadMen wrote:it's not MY conspiracy. I'm simply pointing out that he has been reported dead, by a variety of sources, including the head of Pakistan, multiple times over the last decade.
Bin Laden was no longer the brains of Al Qaeda, nor the mastermind behind Al Qaeda, but he was the heart of Al Qaeda. As Al Qaeda's most famous member he was a vital tool for both recruiting and fund raising. Terrorism like all other human endeavors is dependent on resources and manpower, and loosing some of their ability to recruit and/or raise funds is a severe blow.
Al Qaeda has now issued a fatwā declaring Mark Zuckerberg as the "Great Satan", and I hate to say this but for the first time to a small degree I have to agree with them....
Now on a more serious note: Can we feed Bin Laden's body to the pigs?
ShumaGorath wrote:We lost more people to the japanese and germans. How did Osama kill them more then hitler did? The comparison is facile, Osamas death is nothing like the surrender of japan.
Agreed. If people want a comparable event, then the assassination of Admiral Yamamoto by the U.S. would fit better.
The death of Admiral Yamamoto was a great psychological toll on the Japanese. It did inspire the morale of the Americans and made Japan realize America was capable of fighting even after losing so much after Pearl Harbor.
We will have to see what else comes of Osama Bin Laden's death other than the emotional outpour wrought by his death. However, do mark May 1st, 2011 as DOOD [u](Death of Obama Day)[/u].
I do not condone his actions however as one who loves and reads up on wars and tyrants of all kinds I must say I have to respect a man who brought a nation to its knees single handed, specially one as powerful as the U.S.A. and I repeat for those who are selective readers, I do not condone his actions however respect the idea of an individual who had the ability to bring a nation down single handed. Much like Hitler whose military prowess (pre-1942) was insane, I do not condone his actions however respect his intelligence. I am not trying to offend anyone here.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Fafnir wrote:I don't think anyone should be celebrating anyone's death, even Bin Laden's. Sure, a man who did horrible things is dead, but it's not going to bring back any of the people who's deaths he's responsible for. It doesn't suddenly make it any better.
I agree with this, however I think it is the ideal that they believe dead and what he represented that they celebrate and not the individual.
schadenfreude wrote:Bin Laden was no longer the brains of Al Qaeda, nor the mastermind behind Al Qaeda, but he was the heart of Al Qaeda. As Al Qaeda's most famous member he was a vital tool for both recruiting and fund raising. Terrorism like all other human endeavors is dependent on resources and manpower, and loosing some of their ability to recruit and/or raise funds is a severe blow.
"Al Quaeda" is somewhere between what is effectively a brand name franchise and a "someone did/might have done something, we need a name to put on it" bogeyman (like Carlos the Jackal). Remember Qaddafi blaming the revolution on Al Quaeda agents giving LSD to kids? That's pretty much all the name is used for now.
Sir P, I think that's a bit more cynical than I'm prepared to be. Al Q is closer to the "brand name franchise" as far as I can tell. They've had an existence since the USSR's efforts in Afghanistan. And while I think some parties have exaggerated their actions/threat, that doesn't mean they're not real people, doing actual terrible things.
Mannahnin wrote:Sir P, I think that's a bit more cynical than I'm prepared to be. Al Q is closer to the "brand name franchise" as far as I can tell. They've had an existence since the USSR's efforts in Afghanistan. And while I think some parties have exaggerated their actions/threat, that doesn't mean they're not real people, doing actual terrible things.
As an organization they are incredibly distributed and they totally lack any sort of C&C infrastructure or set if truly unifying principles. It's fairly unique in that regard.
He didn't bring a nation to its knees, nor did he do anything single handed.
By your very constitution am I allowed to voice my opinion without fear of prejudice. One of the benefits of living in N.America. And yes, his organization (Although I believe otherwise) apparently infiltrated the USA and for some time panic and chaos ensued, with ridiculous security counter measures now in place and an America now changed forever. He had a tremendous impact which sucks but it is very true.
I do not condone his actions however as one who loves and reads up on wars and tyrants of all kinds I must say I have to respect a man who brought a nation to its knees single handed, specially one as powerful as the U.S.A. and I repeat for those who are selective readers, I do not condone his actions however respect the idea of an individual who had the ability to bring a nation down single handed. Much like Hitler whose military prowess (pre-1942) was insane, I do not condone his actions however respect his intelligence. I am not trying to offend anyone here.
I'll avoid Osama, but I'll correct you on Hitler.
Hitler wasn't a military genius. Hitler was a charismatic idiot who managed to get himself into power. If you have any respect for Hitler, have respect for his powess and charisma as a politician. His ability to enthrall an entire nation into following him all the way tot he bitter end.
If you want to respect Nazi Germany's military prowess respect Guderian, Rommel, Dönitz. You can respect Albert Speer for keeping Germany's economy working for the war years, and I do respect those men for that. Don't dishonor their contributions by attributing their victories to Hitler.
Edit:
You don't have the right to speak free of prejudice. We can't stop you from speaking, but we can form our own opinions of you based on your speech.
He didn't bring a nation to its knees, nor did he do anything singlehanded.
By your very constitution am I allowed to voice my opinion without fear of prejudice. One of the benefits of living in N.America.
Freedom of speech doesn't extend to the internet. This isn't a public space.
Not a public... are you for real?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ChrisWWII wrote:
happydude wrote:R.I.P. Bin Laden
I do not condone his actions however as one who loves and reads up on wars and tyrants of all kinds I must say I have to respect a man who brought a nation to its knees single handed, specially one as powerful as the U.S.A. and I repeat for those who are selective readers, I do not condone his actions however respect the idea of an individual who had the ability to bring a nation down single handed. Much like Hitler whose military prowess (pre-1942) was insane, I do not condone his actions however respect his intelligence. I am not trying to offend anyone here.
I'll avoid Osama, but I'll correct you on Hitler.
Hitler wasn't a military genius. Hitler was a charismatic idiot who managed to get himself into power. If you have any respect for Hitler, have respect for his powess and charisma as a politician. His ability to enthrall an entire nation into following him all the way tot he bitter end.
If you want to respect Nazi Germany's military prowess respect Guderian, Rommel, Dönitz. You can respect Albert Speer for keeping Germany's economy working for the war years, and I do respect those men for that. Don't dishonor their contributions by attributing their victories to Hitler.
Edit:
You don't have the right to speak free of prejudice. We can't stop you from speaking, but we can form our own opinions of you based on your speech.
Not genius, prowess, synonymous with daring. The courage and genius do actually lie with those aforementioned men.
He didn't bring a nation to its knees, nor did he do anything singlehanded.
By your very constitution am I allowed to voice my opinion without fear of prejudice. One of the benefits of living in N.America.
Freedom of speech doesn't extend to the internet. This isn't a public space.
Not a public... are you for real?
Yes. Freedom of speech protects you from governmental censorship, not rules set within private space. This is dakkdakka.com. Not "the internet". The administrators and site owners have control here and their laws supersede freedom of speech. They can disallow you for essentially whatever they wish.
Drop the ideological load, learn the laws and rules as they actually exist.
He didn't bring a nation to its knees, nor did he do anything singlehanded.
By your very constitution am I allowed to voice my opinion without fear of prejudice. One of the benefits of living in N.America.
Freedom of speech doesn't extend to the internet. This isn't a public space.
Not a public... are you for real?
Yes. Freedom of speech protects you from governmental censorship, not rules set within private space. This is dakkdakka.com. Not "the internet". The administrators and site owners have control here and their laws supersede freedom of speech. They can disallow you for essentially whatever they wish.
Drop the ideological load, learn the laws and rules as they actually exist.
I understand how those attacks and what that man represented and I know although it has been some time some wounds are still fresh. My apologies my brothers to the south.
Shuma is correct. DakkaDakka is a private organization, and they have the right to censor your speech if they so please. If you were in my house, I'd have the similar right to demand you stop speaking, or get out, and I wouldn't be violating your freedom of speech.
You can stand outside my house on a public street shouting whatever you want, but not inside it.
He didn't bring a nation to its knees, nor did he do anything singlehanded.
By your very constitution am I allowed to voice my opinion without fear of prejudice. One of the benefits of living in N.America.
Freedom of speech doesn't extend to the internet. This isn't a public space.
Not a public... are you for real?
Yes. Freedom of speech protects you from governmental censorship, not rules set within private space. This is dakkdakka.com. Not "the internet". The administrators and site owners have control here and their laws supersede freedom of speech. They can disallow you for essentially whatever they wish.
Drop the ideological load, learn the laws and rules as they actually exist.
And shuma please attempt to refrain from being rude.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ChrisWWII wrote:Shuma is correct. DakkaDakka is a private organization, and they have the right to censor your speech if they so please. If you were in my house, I'd have the similar right to demand you stop speaking, or get out, and I wouldn't be violating your freedom of speech.
You can stand outside my house on a public street shouting whatever you want, but not inside it.
After what I wrote there is not one American here who is not ready to leap all over this and attack so I'll leave it be, I would rather not get into this silliness over the internet.
He didn't bring a nation to its knees, nor did he do anything singlehanded.
By your very constitution am I allowed to voice my opinion without fear of prejudice. One of the benefits of living in N.America.
Freedom of speech doesn't extend to the internet. This isn't a public space.
Not a public... are you for real?
Yes. Freedom of speech protects you from governmental censorship, not rules set within private space. This is dakkdakka.com. Not "the internet". The administrators and site owners have control here and their laws supersede freedom of speech. They can disallow you for essentially whatever they wish.
Drop the ideological load, learn the laws and rules as they actually exist.
And shuma please attempt to refrain from being rude.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ChrisWWII wrote:Shuma is correct. DakkaDakka is a private organization, and they have the right to censor your speech if they so please. If you were in my house, I'd have the similar right to demand you stop speaking, or get out, and I wouldn't be violating your freedom of speech.
You can stand outside my house on a public street shouting whatever you want, but not inside it.
After what I wrote there is not one American here who is not ready to leap all over this and attack so I'll leave it be, I would rather not get into this silliness over the internet.
I don't care about what you said. I care about people who are ignorant of what "freedom of speech" is.
I regarded this as a public forum. I forgot how things work around here.
Thats why you don't see much porn. Also, "Public" forums can't really be created by private citizens. That would involve a totally public ISP functioning globally.
I do not condone his actions however as one who loves and reads up on wars and tyrants of all kinds I must say I have to respect a man who brought a nation to its knees single handed, specially one as powerful as the U.S.A. and I repeat for those who are selective readers, I do not condone his actions however respect the idea of an individual who had the ability to bring a nation down single handed. Much like Hitler whose military prowess (pre-1942) was insane, I do not condone his actions however respect his intelligence. I am not trying to offend anyone here.
You're greatly exaggerating both their accomplishments there. He bloodied our nose and gave a bunch of opportunists something scary with which to rally votes for themselves and pet projects related to security theater, from which they embezzled money while gutting actual security. Hitler was a buffoon who sabotaged his own war effort at every turn.
Mannahnin wrote:Sir P, I think that's a bit more cynical than I'm prepared to be. Al Q is closer to the "brand name franchise" as far as I can tell. They've had an existence since the USSR's efforts in Afghanistan. And while I think some parties have exaggerated their actions/threat, that doesn't mean they're not real people, doing actual terrible things.
I should have qualified it with an "at this point". It's a banner that gets taken up by organizations with no link to the actual/original organization, who may or may not actually accomplish anything (note that even without backing or contacts, a bunch of angry people with access to weapons can still do a great deal of damage, even when they're nothing more than the local equivalent of street gangs), as well as serving as a convenient buzzword for "terrorist/insurgent" for people who either want to portray the disparate groups of assorted militants as a monolithic structure, genuinely don't understand they're not, knows the people they're talking to don't, or wants some shadowy bogeyman to slander their political opponents with. That's not to say there's not probably some of the old network still left, but being relentlessly hounded and taken apart at every level by every intelligence agency on Earth tends to pretty bad things to one's ability to operate.
I do not condone his actions however as one who loves and reads up on wars and tyrants of all kinds I must say I have to respect a man who brought a nation to its knees single handed, specially one as powerful as the U.S.A. and I repeat for those who are selective readers, I do not condone his actions however respect the idea of an individual who had the ability to bring a nation down single handed. Much like Hitler whose military prowess (pre-1942) was insane, I do not condone his actions however respect his intelligence. I am not trying to offend anyone here.
You're greatly exaggerating both their accomplishments there. He bloodied our nose and gave a bunch of opportunists something scary with which to rally votes for themselves and pet projects related to security theater, from which they embezzled money while gutting actual security. Hitler was a buffoon who sabotaged his own war effort at every turn.
Mannahnin wrote:Sir P, I think that's a bit more cynical than I'm prepared to be. Al Q is closer to the "brand name franchise" as far as I can tell. They've had an existence since the USSR's efforts in Afghanistan. And while I think some parties have exaggerated their actions/threat, that doesn't mean they're not real people, doing actual terrible things.
I should have qualified it with an "at this point". It's a banner that gets taken up by organizations with no link to the actual/original organization, who may or may not actually accomplish anything (note that even without backing or contacts, a bunch of angry people with access to weapons can still do a great deal of damage, even when they're nothing more than the local equivalent of street gangs), as well as serving as a convenient buzzword for "terrorist/insurgent" for people who either want to portray the disparate groups of assorted militants as a monolithic structure, genuinely don't understand they're not, knows the people they're talking to don't, or wants some shadowy bogeyman to slander their political opponents with. That's not to say there's not probably some of the old network still left, but being relentlessly hounded and taken apart at every level by every intelligence agency on Earth tends to pretty bad things to one's ability to operate.
A buffoon? He brought 60+ million Germans OUT of the Great Depression within 6 Months of his Election, with Flying Colors, and put every Unemployed Person to Work, and still needed more Workers, who Built up and Supervised one of the the Greatest Armies who ever Fought, who Conquered more Nations in less Time with less Loss of Lives than any other Leader who ever Lived during all of Modern History, who still holds those Records until this very Day.
Happydude- If you follow up a post wishing Bin Laden to "Rest in Peace" with posts defending Hitler, there is a high likelihood that the moderators will decide that you're just trolling. This is a warning. Please choose your words with care, and exercise good taste to the best of your ability, at least when we are talking about mass-murderers, expecially ones whose organizations have murdered people that some of us personally knew.
This is splendid news to wake up to on a fresh Bank Holiday morning!
I had supposed that Bin Laden probably died years ago, if not in the original attack on Tora Bora then illness while hiding out in Pakistan.
It is very gratifying to have his death confirmed.
There may be a backlash, so we shall have to take care.
There'll be no more videos to sustain the spirit of Al Qaeda. I'm worried that the movement has enough momentum to keep going without Bin Laden around.
I do not condone his actions however as one who loves and reads up on wars and tyrants of all kinds I must say I have to respect a man who brought a nation to its knees single handed, specially one as powerful as the U.S.A. and I repeat for those who are selective readers, I do not condone his actions however respect the idea of an individual who had the ability to bring a nation down single handed. Much like Hitler whose military prowess (pre-1942) was insane, I do not condone his actions however respect his intelligence. I am not trying to offend anyone here.
You're greatly exaggerating both their accomplishments there. He bloodied our nose and gave a bunch of opportunists something scary with which to rally votes for themselves and pet projects related to security theater, from which they embezzled money while gutting actual security. Hitler was a buffoon who sabotaged his own war effort at every turn.
Mannahnin wrote:Sir P, I think that's a bit more cynical than I'm prepared to be. Al Q is closer to the "brand name franchise" as far as I can tell. They've had an existence since the USSR's efforts in Afghanistan. And while I think some parties have exaggerated their actions/threat, that doesn't mean they're not real people, doing actual terrible things.
I should have qualified it with an "at this point". It's a banner that gets taken up by organizations with no link to the actual/original organization, who may or may not actually accomplish anything (note that even without backing or contacts, a bunch of angry people with access to weapons can still do a great deal of damage, even when they're nothing more than the local equivalent of street gangs), as well as serving as a convenient buzzword for "terrorist/insurgent" for people who either want to portray the disparate groups of assorted militants as a monolithic structure, genuinely don't understand they're not, knows the people they're talking to don't, or wants some shadowy bogeyman to slander their political opponents with. That's not to say there's not probably some of the old network still left, but being relentlessly hounded and taken apart at every level by every intelligence agency on Earth tends to pretty bad things to one's ability to operate.
A buffoon? He brought 60+ million Germans OUT of the Great Depression within 6 Months of his Election, with Flying Colors, and put every Unemployed Person to Work, and still needed more Workers, who Built up and Supervised one of the the Greatest Armies who ever Fought, who Conquered more Nations in less Time with less Loss of Lives than any other Leader who ever Lived during all of Modern History, who still holds those Records until this very Day.
You are attributing a significant amount to hitler that he had little but supervisory input with. Hitler placed some very dedicated and intelligent people into power, but the structures and systems put in place were not designed not implemented by him in exclusivity.
WarOne wrote:I got lazy there and should of said Pakistani government.
But it's still the same problem, the Pakistani government is full of competing interests. Did you read my post?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
LittleLeadMen wrote:Forget it Sebster. I'm not going to go 12 rounds with all of you here on Dakka Dakka.
If you announce absurd things, you should expect to be challenged on them. If you can substantiate them, good luck to you. If you can't... then maybe you should stop believing absurd things.
I gave you a few documented (there are plenty more) statements of his death. They weren't speculation, they were news stories.
Stories about the death of someone that doesn't actually show the body, or include any statements from people saying they've seen the body, are speculative news stories.
It doesn't make them not-news, but it does mean that they really, really can't be counted as evidence years later.
Obviously, no man dies multiple times. So they can't all be accurate. But, by the same token, when's the last time you read multiple accounts of any major figure's death? It's bizarre.
It really isn't. I go so far as to say it's expected, especially when someone someone is hiding out, with covert ops teams trying to kill them.
I mean, Christ, Jeff Goldblum was announced dead on Australian tv, and he was never in hiding, and no-one was even trying to kill him. Steve-O from JackAss was similarly announced dead, despite being in the middle of filming a tv series.
I'm not going to defend anything to you just for argument's sake.
Defend because you think it's defensible and it's something people ought to know. If you make a good case I'd be happy to accept it. But right now your case is terrible, because you have offered absolutely no reaon why any group in the US would keep his death a secret until just now.
The sad truth is people like you want to shout people like me down as tinfoil hat kind of people, despite a tremendous amount of documentation of the actions our intelligence agencies engage in , day after day, year after year, for decades on end.
I've read plenty about the terrible and plainly illegal operations undertaken by US intelligence services. I have absolutely no idea why they'd keep him on ice until now to announce the death. It makes no sense.
But their operations, while frequently abhorrent and often utterly fantastical, tend to have some kind of logic or reason behind them. The conspiracy yuo're proposing here makes no damn sense.
Do yourselves a favor, and read "Legacy of Ashes". it won the Pulitzer Prize (is that mainstream enough for you guys?)
I've read it, and it's wonderful. But the sticker on my copy says it won the National Book Award, not the Pulitzer.
And while I came away from the book with a more complete understanding of the things the CIA will get up to for percieved national interest, nowhere in there did I conclude that the CIA does so for the lulz, which is the only reason you've yet managed to suggest the US killed him years ago and kept him on ice until today.
happydude wrote:I do not condone his actions however as one who loves and reads up on wars and tyrants of all kinds I must say I have to respect a man who brought a nation to its knees single handed,
But he didn't. The impact on the US as a political and economic entity was minimal.
happydude wrote:By your very constitution am I allowed to voice my opinion without fear of prejudice.
Sure, and we're allowed to tell you we believe you're wrong.
One of the benefits of living in N.America. And yes, his organization (Although I believe otherwise) apparently infiltrated the USA and for some time panic and chaos ensued, with ridiculous security counter measures now in place and an America now changed forever.
"He cause the US to begin a series of protocols that annoy airline travellers" is not exactly comparable with 'installed a fascist regime in one of the most powerful nations in the world then plunged the world into war".
happydude wrote:I do not condone his actions however as one who loves and reads up on wars and tyrants of all kinds I must say I have to respect a man who brought a nation to its knees single handed,
But he didn't. The impact on the US as a political and economic entity was minimal.
Really? How much money was spent on military funding afterward? Security? How many soldiers paid the ultimate price because of those actions with the military campaigns that ensued?
On facebook some groups and comments are getting out of hand, are you guys seeing half of this stuff? I knew people would be happy but there is no need for racial slurs and comments. Nothing towards this thread just spouting what I am seeing.
happydude wrote:Really? How much money was spent on military funding afterward? Security? How many soldeirs paid the ultimate price because of those actions? NEVER call that minimal...
But you respect the guy that caused those soldiers to have to pay the "Ultimate Price?"
This forum is on a server bought and paid for by private citizens. You're on someone's property, you should respect their rules.
I have tended to that refer to the later posts.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Monster Rain wrote:
happydude wrote:Really? How much money was spent on military funding afterward? Security? How many soldeirs paid the ultimate price because of those actions? NEVER call that minimal...
But you respect the guy that caused those soldiers to have to pay the "Ultimate Price?"
That doesn't make sense.
I can respect certain actions of certain tyrants. I am actually quite fond of Caligula...
It's not in my nature to celebrate the death of anyone, not even someone as evil as Osama. But I shall neither mourn nor regret his passing. In the days to come, we will all argue and discuss the repercussions of this monumental event. Until then, let's all raise a glass to our soldiers and veterans who, through their blood, sweat, and tears have made this possible. Closure has been brought to many people, including myself. September 11th, 2001/May 1st, 2011: Never forget.
Lusall wrote:It's not in my nature to celebrate the death of anyone, not even someone as evil as Osama. But I shall neither mourn nor regret his passing. In the days to come, we will all argue and discuss the repercussions of this monumental event. Until then, let's all raise a glass to our soldiers and veterans who. through their blood, sweat, and tears have made this possible. Closure has been brought to many people, including myself. September 11th, 2001/May 1st, 2011: Never forget.
Totally agree to this. i really never meant to offend anyone here, especially my brothers to the south, I mean we need you guys to buy our hockey players and in turn you all win cups ;p But seriously a toast not only to soldiers in this war but fallen soldiers on all sides who made the ultimate sacrifice for what they believed in, whether right or wrong. * Actually taking a moment of silence *
happydude wrote:Really? How much money was spent on military funding afterward? Security? How many soldiers paid the ultimate price because of those actions with the military campaigns that ensued?
There's been about 1,200 US deaths, and spent around $400 billion. Which sucks for those soldiers and their families, and it'd be nice to have $400 billion less on the deficit, but in terms of "bringing a nation to its knees" the claim makes no sense.
But what has Osama achieved? What one thing that he might want has actually happened? What goals had he so amazingly achieved that he might demand respect?
happydude wrote:Really? How much money was spent on military funding afterward? Security? How many soldiers paid the ultimate price because of those actions with the military campaigns that ensued?
There's been about 1,200 US deaths, and spent around $400 billion. Which sucks for those soldiers and their families, and it'd be nice to have $400 billion less on the deficit, but in terms of "bringing a nation to its knees" the claim makes no sense.
But what has Osama achieved? What one thing that he might want has actually happened? What goals had he so amazingly achieved that he might demand respect?
American popularity dropped significantly in the wake of the war on terror and quite a few of the skeletons in our collective closet were let loose. I think by letting our baser instincts run wild he accomplished a pretty mean feat; that being the debasement and corruption of the "american dream" in the eyes of the world.
ShumaGorath wrote:American popularity dropped significantly in the wake of the war on terror and quite a few of the skeletons in our collective closet were let loose. I think by letting our baser instincts run wild he accomplished a pretty mean feat; that being the debasement and corruption of the "american dream" in the eyes of the world.
Indeed, the war on terror should have been fought with hearts and minds, not guns and bombs. It is a lot cheaper to build schools, hospitals, homes and infrastructure than it is to fight wars. There is a lot less collateral damage and bad feeling too.
happydude wrote:Really? How much money was spent on military funding afterward? Security? How many soldiers paid the ultimate price because of those actions with the military campaigns that ensued?
There's been about 1,200 US deaths, and spent around $400 billion. Which sucks for those soldiers and their families, and it'd be nice to have $400 billion less on the deficit, but in terms of "bringing a nation to its knees" the claim makes no sense.
But what has Osama achieved? What one thing that he might want has actually happened? What goals had he so amazingly achieved that he might demand respect?
9/11 really screwed up the judgement of Bush/Cheney. The bad post 9/11 judgement within the Bush administration combined with the political capitol gained by the 9/11 attacks were the 2 main reasons why the Iraq war actually became a war. Without 9/11 there would be no Iraq war. I'm not saying Hussein had anything to do with 9/11, because he didn't and Hussein was actually an enemy of Al Qaeda. What I'm saying is without 9/11 the Bush administration would never have had the political capitol or motivation to actually make the Iraq war a reality. The goal of terrorism is often to goad a nation into doing something stupid, and in the case of 9/11 it was an astounding success because we did make a stupid mistake after 9/11 by invading Iraq.
That being said the real cost of both the Iraq and Afghanistan war is far more than $400 billion and 1,200 lives. Add on top of that another mistake by the Bush administration was the sub prime bubble which in the short term injected a lot of money into the American economy. Much of the sub prime bubble was used to counteract the post 9/11 recession and turn it into an economic boom even while we were fighting 2 wars. If we were not entrenched in 2 very expensive wars 1 of which was becoming unpopular during the 2004 election Bush probably would not have milked the sub prime bubble for all it's worth, but he kind of had to milk the sup prime bubble for all it's worth to stimulate the economy to win a 2nd term because the combination of the Iraq war and a down economy would have lost him the election.
Almost all of Bush's bad decisions go against the principles Bush had in his 2000 election, and were a direct or indirect result of 9/11. The goal of terrorism is often to goad a nation into doing something stupid, and in the case of 9/11 it was an astounding success
Not to say I disagree with most of that, except the central thesis:
Do we have good reason to believe that the specific goal of the 9/11 attacks was to goad us into doing something generically stupid, or invade Afghanistan and Iraq specifically?
I would rather doubt that they actually wanted us to invade Afghanistan and get rid of their nice convenient training camps.
Mannahnin wrote:Not to say I disagree with most of that, except the central thesis:
Do we have good reason to believe that the specific goal of the 9/11 attacks was to goad us into doing something generically stupid, or invade Afghanistan and Iraq specifically?
I would rather doubt that they actually wanted us to invade Afghanistan and get rid of their nice convenient training camps.
I think to some extent, we responded in exactly the way they thought or hoped we would. But they (vastly) miscalculated the magnitude with which we would respond.
Happydude- If you follow up a post wishing Bin Laden to "Rest in Peace" with posts defending Hitler, there is a high likelihood that the moderators will decide that you're just trolling. This is a warning. Please choose your words with care, and exercise good taste to the best of your ability, at least when we are talking about mass-murderers, expecially ones whose organizations have murdered people that some of us personally knew.
Back at the end of last year they caught on that one of the men working in the post office of the town where Osama was staying was leading a Saudi terrorist suspect around.
The CIA tailed him and one of the Bali bombing masterminds was caught in Jan 11.
That Osama would stick around when his minions were getting picked up shows tremendous stupidity or a great hope that he was too clever by half.
I'm glad the Bugger got slotted, but a few things.
Obama didn't kill him, some brave servicemen did, the death of one guy will make feth all difference to the situation in Ganners and the whooping and hollering is childish considering all the death in the last 12 years.
And parts of the presidents speech made me cringe.
Other than that, a scumbag is dead, whippee doo.
The dead are still dead, AQ are still kicking, and Islam is still inherently offensive to anyone with any regard for truth and equality.
Back at the end of last year they caught on that one of the men working in the post office of the town where Osama was staying was leading a Saudi terrorist suspect around.
The CIA tailed him and one of the Bali bombing masterminds was caught in Jan 11.
That Osama would stick around when his minions were getting picked up shows tremendous stupidity or a great hope that he was too clever by half.
He was confident in his precautions and thought he'd be safe.
Lusall wrote:It's not in my nature to celebrate the death of anyone, not even someone as evil as Osama. But I shall neither mourn nor regret his passing. In the days to come, we will all argue and discuss the repercussions of this monumental event. Until then, let's all raise a glass to our soldiers and veterans who, through their blood, sweat, and tears have made this possible. Closure has been brought to many people, including myself. September 11th, 2001/May 1st, 2011: Never forget.
You have hit the nail on the head.Im in complete agreement and believe your post to be one of the most sensible yet posted in this thread.
mattyrm wrote:I'm glad the Bugger got slotted, but a few things.
Obama didn't kill him, some brave servicemen did, the death of one guy will make feth all difference to the situation in Ganners and the whooping and hollering is childish considering all the death in the last 12 years.
And parts of the presidents speech made me cringe.
Other than that, a scumbag is dead, whippee doo.
The dead are still dead, AQ are still kicking, and Islam is still inherently offensive to anyone with any regard for truth and equality.
Entirely agree with you. The cheering American crowds in the news footage didn't half remind me of the cheering crowds burning American flags/etc in the Middle East...
mattyrm wrote:I'm glad the Bugger got slotted, but a few things.
Obama didn't kill him, some brave servicemen did, the death of one guy will make feth all difference to the situation in Ganners and the whooping and hollering is childish considering all the death in the last 12 years.
And parts of the presidents speech made me cringe.
Other than that, a scumbag is dead, whippee doo.
The dead are still dead, AQ are still kicking, and Islam is still inherently offensive to anyone with any regard for truth and equality.
Entirely agree with you. The cheering American crowds in the news footage didn't half remind me of the cheering crowds burning American flags/etc in the Middle East...
Other than the whole hating an evil person versus slandering the symbol of an entire nation thing right?
mattyrm wrote:I'm glad the Bugger got slotted, but a few things.
Obama didn't kill him, some brave servicemen did, the death of one guy will make feth all difference to the situation in Ganners and the whooping and hollering is childish considering all the death in the last 12 years.
And parts of the presidents speech made me cringe.
Other than that, a scumbag is dead, whippee doo.
The dead are still dead, AQ are still kicking, and Islam is still inherently offensive to anyone with any regard for truth and equality.
Entirely agree with you. The cheering American crowds in the news footage didn't half remind me of the cheering crowds burning American flags/etc in the Middle East...
Other than the whole hating an evil person versus slandering the symbol of an entire nation thing right?
And yet I am the one getting rules violation warnings...
lucasbuffalo wrote:Other than the whole hating an evil person versus slandering the symbol of an entire nation thing right?
I see you are failing to see that to them, America is the evil. What you are both doing is exactly the same just from opposite ends of the spectrum.
America has, both now and in the past, caused a lot of pain and suffering to the world. There is no denying that. You are not the shining light of the world bring peace, prosperity and the American way to the world.
It is natural that there is a lot of resentment towards this, even hatred.
It is the same reason I can accept that a lot of people feel the same about the UK - in the past we claimed vast quantities of the world as our territory and had occasion to treat the native peoples rather badly. More recently we have tagged along with the US in invading various countries. I accept that we have brought far more death and destruction to the places we (as a collective force) have been attempting to "save".
Your nation's seeming blindness to this is another factor that perpetuates the hatred.
You cheer the death of a person responsible for thousands of deaths, they demonstrate against the nation/nations that have caused hundreds of thousands of deaths. Can you really not see how it could be seen that you are as bad as each other? I have no more love of totalitarian regimes, religious extremists, repression, etc than anyone else, however, I can see and empathise with the viewpoints of both sides and if anything they have more "justification" for feeling as they do.
As I said above - you don't fight this kind of war with guns and bombs - you fight it with hearts and minds.
Yes, bin Laden is dead. It cost a lot to accomplish that feat. Too much by some estimates.
But now that that is done, what's next? I fear that we have been so focused on that one goal, we never though about the afterwards. There are still key members of the AQ that are running things, and they are now probably pretty POed. Best to keep a look out on things to come.
I aint buying it until I see a pic of his body so far the only pic is a fake. They buried his body at sea and hes only been dead around 12h this whole thing smells of something the man had alot of body doubles also. ps I dont mean to cause contreversy guys
lucasbuffalo wrote:Other than the whole hating an evil person versus slandering the symbol of an entire nation thing right?
I see you are failing to see that to them, America is the evil. What you are both doing is exactly the same just from opposite ends of the spectrum.
America has, both now and in the past, caused a lot of pain and suffering to the world. There is no denying that. You are not the shining light of the world bring peace, prosperity and the American way to the world.
It is natural that there is a lot of resentment towards this, even hatred.
It is the same reason I can accept that a lot of people feel the same about the UK - in the past we claimed vast quantities of the world as our territory and had occasion to treat the native peoples rather badly. More recently we have tagged along with the US in invading various countries. I accept that we have brought far more death and destruction to the places we (as a collective force) have been attempting to "save".
Your nation's seeming blindness to this is another factor that perpetuates the hatred.
You cheer the death of a person responsible for thousands of deaths, they demonstrate against the nation/nations that have caused hundreds of thousands of deaths. Can you really not see how it could be seen that you are as bad as each other? I have no more love of totalitarian regimes, religious extremists, repression, etc than anyone else, however, I can see and empathise with the viewpoints of both sides and if anything they have more "justification" for feeling as they do.
As I said above - you don't fight this kind of war with guns and bombs - you fight it with hearts and minds.
I see your point.
I disagree with you only on the point of motive.
America (at least it is the hope and belief of the citizens which unite under said flag) may not be a "shining light of the world bring peace, prosperity" but I hope that such is the intent. That each action started by my country, even if it ends poorly, was the result of some hope for causing a positive change.
Somehow getting into a war trying to do what you think is best and causing a lot of problems, and convincing people to smash planes into civilian areas rings a little different in my ears.
I'm sure my viewpoint is idealistic and simplistic, but I'm both of those things at time, as is America in general IMO.
America (at least it is the hope and belief of the citizens which unite under said flag) may not be a "shining light of the world bring peace, prosperity" but I hope that such is the intent. That each action started by my country, even if it ends poorly, was the result of some hope for causing a positive change.
Somehow getting into a war trying to do what you think is best and causing a lot of problems and convincing people to smash planes into civilian areas rings a little different in my ears.
I'm sure my viewpoint is idealistic and simplistic, but I'm both of those things at time, as is America in general IMO.
Unfortunately, most American foreign escapades tend to result from simple self-interest, as opposed to 'hope for causing a positive change'.
But that's the way of the world. It has been for a long time, and recognised as such ever since Clausewitz and Lenin published on the affair.
"He's the face the media have decided to put on terror, but it doesn't mean he's actually running the operation. It's kind of like Kentucky Fried Chicken. Just because the Colonel's picture's on the bucket, doesn't mean he's actually making the chicken."
America (at least it is the hope and belief of the citizens which unite under said flag) may not be a "shining light of the world bring peace, prosperity" but I hope that such is the intent. That each action started by my country, even if it ends poorly, was the result of some hope for causing a positive change.
Somehow getting into a war trying to do what you think is best and causing a lot of problems and convincing people to smash planes into civilian areas rings a little different in my ears.
I'm sure my viewpoint is idealistic and simplistic, but I'm both of those things at time, as is America in general IMO.
Unfortunately, most American foreign escapades tend to result from simple self-interest, as opposed to 'hope for causing a positive change'.
But that's the way of the world. It has been for a long time, and recognised as such ever since Clausewitz and Lenin published on the affair.
Again, I agree. I guess I just see more to the American flag, the symbol of my nation, than the result of plans laid by the s that make bad calls when given too much power.
Then again, there are people who are burning Korans due to Al Qaeda's actions, so I guess it's a back and forth of blaming the sins of the few on the faces of the many.
But still, an evil, civilian-slaying monster is dead. I'll continue my celebration regardless of criticism.
ShumaGorath wrote:American popularity dropped significantly in the wake of the war on terror and quite a few of the skeletons in our collective closet were let loose. I think by letting our baser instincts run wild he accomplished a pretty mean feat; that being the debasement and corruption of the "american dream" in the eyes of the world.
American popularity soared in the wake of 9/11, and only dropped once the Bush began the diplomatic dance in the build up to Iraq.
Iraq was an incredibly stupid thing, but it was the product of a very stupid single minded determination on the part of the Bush administration, not the product of Osama's attack on 9/11.
schadenfreude wrote:9/11 really screwed up the judgement of Bush/Cheney.
I would argue their judgement was fairly terrible before then, and there's every chance 9/11 delayed the drive towards Iraq by forcing the US into Afghanistan first.
What I'm saying is without 9/11 the Bush administration would never have had the political capitol or motivation to actually make the Iraq war a reality.
That could be true, I'm not sure. I know the US has never really had much difficulty in convincing the population to go off and fight wars before, but Iraq would have been a harder sell than most that had come before.
The goal of terrorism is often to goad a nation into doing something stupid,
I don't believe this. I believe the goals of terrorism vary considerably, and hoping to cause the enemy to respond in a foolish and incorrect manner can be a medium term goal, but only really in the sense of hoping the response will be so disproportionate and harmful to the local population that it ends up building support for the terrorists.
Long term you actually need achievable goals, and bin Laden had no such thing. When trying to make a case that you might 'respect' a mass killer, you need to claim what he achieved with his killing. bin Laden achieved nothing.
Add on top of that another mistake by the Bush administration was the sub prime bubble which in the short term injected a lot of money into the American economy.
The origins of the sub-prime bubble come from deregulation undertaken in the 90s, arguably in the 80s. It was across politics, the product of free market kool aid drunk not only by both sides of US politics, but most mainstream political parties across the developed world.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
paulguise wrote:Yes, bin Laden is dead. It cost a lot to accomplish that feat. Too much by some estimates.
But now that that is done, what's next? I fear that we have been so focused on that one goal, we never though about the afterwards. There are still key members of the AQ that are running things, and they are now probably pretty POed. Best to keep a look out on things to come.
There's been a lot of work done to dismantle AQ and try to change the social conditions in places that have produced most terrorists. It's been pretty widely documented that most anti-terror work has been focussed towards that goa, not towards catching bin Laden.
It's good that he's dead, but I tend to think the idea of responding to this event by running through the streets chanting and waving flags is a little tacky. Gloating over the death of another human being dishonours you.
But well done to the US servicemen involved in this operation - as ever, they seem to have discharged their duties with skill and professionalism.
Oh, happy day. The retaliatory attacks will give you plenty of new excuses to invade other sovereign nations that just happen to have great strategic or economic value.
marv335 wrote:Time for a a quote from Rich Hall I think...
"He's the face the media have decided to put on terror, but it doesn't mean he's actually running the operation. It's kind of like Kentucky Fried Chicken. Just because the Colonel's picture's on the bucket, doesn't mean he's actually making the chicken."
Bin Laden being dead means nothing.
Excellent news, but i have to agree, Osama's death will only put a morale boost into yihadist troops, its like that thorn that annoys you, only to be far worse when you put it out...
The response to the criticism I have about the theories that he's not really dead is as follows. If he weren't really dead, and Obama had announced he was dead...and then it later came out that he was wrong, and Osama was really alive, the political defeat for the OBama administration would be crushing. The death of Osama bin Laden is not something you announce unless you're damn sure he's really dead.
Automatically Appended Next Post: BBC says he was buried at sea in order to keep to Islamic tradition and avoid creating a memorial to him.
ChrisWWII wrote:The response to the criticism I have about the theories that he's not really dead is as follows. If he weren't really dead, and Obama had announced he was dead...and then it later came out that he was wrong, and Osama was really alive, the political defeat for the OBama administration would be crushing. The death of Osama bin Laden is not something you announce unless you're damn sure he's really dead.
Automatically Appended Next Post: BBC says he was buried at sea in order to keep to Islamic tradition and avoid creating a memorial to him.
Unless he's been dead for ages, and they've just decided to use this now for some reason. Bit conspiracy-theory-ish, but possible.
Yugsor2011 wrote:I fear for the coming weeks I hope there isnt a string of terorr attacks etc
Indeed, because Islamic fundamentalist terrorists have been looking for an excuse. It has been all restraint and diplomacy from those guys so far, but now after decades of peace they may turn violent.
Fafnir wrote:I don't think anyone should be celebrating anyone's death, even Bin Laden's. Sure, a man who did horrible things is dead, but it's not going to bring back any of the people who's deaths he's responsible for. It doesn't suddenly make it any better.
Lusall wrote:It's not in my nature to celebrate the death of anyone, not even someone as evil as Osama. But I shall neither mourn nor regret his passing.
Flashman wrote:As Lusall said, death is never really to be celebrated, but this is one of those occasions where I would have to say, "No great loss."
shingouki wrote:
Lusall wrote:It's not in my nature....
You have hit the nail on the head. I'm in complete agreement.
Albatross wrote:It's good that he's dead, but I tend to think the idea of responding to this event by running through the streets chanting and waving flags is a little tacky. Gloating over the death of another human being dishonours you.
I'm glad to see my sentiments are shared by others on this forum. Bin Laden was a terrible human being. I accept that. But celebrating his death in this way is to my mind deplorable. Despite the emotions felt during 9/11 (which I shared), quiet satisfaction would be the appropriate response, not parties, flag waving, and pictures of the president holding Osama's head.
I do not know the details of the operation, and at this point no-one but those involved does; but I firmly believe that he should have been captured, not killed. He should have stood trial at the Hague, found guilty, sentenced and punished. He should have been an example in the same way that Saddam Hussein was. Instead, an old man was killed in an obscure part of the world. Despite his crimes, he should have been treated better than that. Remember: In a world where its an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth, no-one wins.
Furthermore, he has become a martyr to his casue. The USA has again confirmed in the eyes of their detractors that they are brutal, unforgiving, and uncaring (however untrue this statement is). This act will generate further attacks in retribution. To use a 40k analogy, Hive Fleet Behemoth may have been defeated, but it will now be shattered. Each barb as poisonous as the last.
Keeping him alive, and allowing the process of law to take its course may have spared us that.
sebster wrote:
I would argue their judgement was fairly terrible before then, and there's every chance 9/11 delayed the drive towards Iraq by forcing the US into Afghanistan first.
That could be true, I'm not sure. I know the US has never really had much difficulty in convincing the population to go off and fight wars before, but Iraq would have been a harder sell than most that had come before.
It's absolutely true. One of the biggest silent motivators behind the Iraq war was the desire/demand to punish somebody, specifically an Arab state, since Afghanistan does not qualify, for 9/11.
Your thing about the ease of convincing Americans to go to war is a huge overstatement/generalization. Maybe you could say that pre-Vietnam, but not in the context of the early 2000s. Not at all.
Ketara wrote:Why? It ain't got nothing to do with us.
Uhh... al Qaeda was responsible for the most severe terrorist attack in British history, the 2005 transit bombings in London. So it's got a bit to do with you.
I'm not sure due legal course would have spared us that. It also raises the question of where he should be tried, and what for. Much easier for those who want him gone to have it this way. Not better, just easier.
Ketara wrote:Why? It ain't got nothing to do with us.
September 11th was the worst terror attack in British history too, in terms of Britons killed in the atrocity.
Really? More than any IRA attacks or the old Anarchist ones in the nineteenth century? I did not know that. Do you have numbers? Sorry, that sounds a bit morbid, but I am geniunely suprised to learn this.
Hooray! Now we can repeal the Patroit Act and start on looking at the longterm by focusing on things like space exploration and finding replacements for gasoline...
daedalus wrote:Hooray! Now we can repeal the Patroit Act and start on looking at the longterm by focusing on things like space exploration and finding replacements for gasoline...
May we also take this time in our rejoicing to remember the 3000+ fallen from 9/11- men women and children tragicly taken from our world in such unbelievable circumstances. Now Pray for all of us... I am sure AlQaeda will not take lightly. May we all hold our loved ones closer to our hearts tonight.
Medium of Death wrote:I think Albatross means the greatest amount of British deaths on a single day, caused by terrorism, was on Sept 11 2001.
66 on September 11 2001
That's what I figured, thanks for the stat. It's more than I realised, although I shouldn't be surprised. I was still in school when it happened and my English teacher had a British friend who worked in the WTC. Naturally concerned, she sent him an email asking him if he was alright. Turns out he was off sick that day, she found out later. At first, she just received a short email saying only:
"I'm OK. Friends all dead."
Really brought the whole thing into some perspective for my simple teen-age mind.
WarOne wrote:I got lazy there and should of said Pakistani government.
But it's still the same problem, the Pakistani government is full of competing interests. Did you read my post?
I did. And you will still have Americans who will not trust the Pakistani government because they believe some element of it probably helped Osama Bin Laden.
How many Americans do you think go beyond the generalized level of talking about a national government without going into detail about political factions, various levels of governance, ect.?
Reaction of various world leaders, courtesy of CNN:
(CNN) -- World reaction poured in early Monday after President Barack Obama's announcement that terror leader Osama bin Laden was killed in Pakistan. The United States put its diplomatic facilities around the world on high alert and issued a global travel warning for Americans.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai
Karzai said he hopes the world believes that his country is "not the place of terrorism" after the announcement that the al Qaeda leader was killed in neighboring Pakistan.
"If the international troops/forces are true allies of the Afghans -- they should come out and say that the killing of Afghans, children and elders which took place over the many years on a daily basis was not a good idea," Karzai said on RTA TV.
Afghan opposition leader Abdullah Abdullah, Hope and Change
Bin Laden's killing proves that Pakistan is a "haven" for terror groups, according to Abdullah.
"Killing of Osama bin Laden is pleasant news for Afghans, and now it's proven that al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations are not based in Afghanistan and Pakistan is a haven for them," he said.
Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard
Gillard congratulated the U.S. on the operation, and said she acknowledges the role of Pakistan in the fight against terror.
"Our fight against terrorism does not end with bin Laden's death. We must remain vigilant against the threat posed by al Qaeda and the groups it has inspired," she said.
"We will continue our support for the counterterrorism efforts of the United States and our partners, and we will continue our efforts in Afghanistan to ensure that the country never again becomes a safe haven for terrorism."
British Prime Minister David Cameron
The leader said he welcomed news of bin Laden's death.
"Osama bin Laden was responsible for the worst terrorist atrocities the world has seen -- for 9/11 and for so many attacks, which have cost thousands of lives," he said. "This is a time to remember all those murdered by Osama bin Laden, and all those who lost loved ones," he said. "It is also a time too to thank all those who work round the clock to keep us safe from terrorism."
European Commission President Barroso and European Council President Van Rompuy
The leaders said bin Laden's death shows that bad deeds do not go unpunished.
"Osama bin Laden was a criminal responsible for heinous terrorist attacks that cost the lives of thousands of innocent people," both said in a joint statement. "His death makes the world a safer place and shows that such crimes do not remain unpunished."
French President Nicolas Sarkozy
Sarkozy said bin Laden's death was a result of a "remarkable U.S. commando" operation.
"Osama Bin Laden was a promoter of the ideology of hatred and was the chief of a terrorist organization responsible for the deaths of thousands of victims, especially in Muslim countries," he said.
"For his victims, justice has been done. Today, in France, we think of them and their families."
German Chancellor Angela Merkel
Merkel said the death is a major setback for the terror group.
"With the commando action against Osama bin Laden and his killing, the U.S. military has achieved a decisive strike against al Qaeda," she said.
"At his command and in his name, terror was enforced into many countries against men women and children, Christians as well as Muslims. Osama bin Laden suggested that he was operating in the name of Islam, but in reality he makes a mockery of the fundamental values of his own and every other religion."
Ismail Haniyeh, prime minister for the Hamas government in the Gaza Strip
The prime minister condemned the killing, describing bin Laden as a Muslim "mujahid" or holy warrior.
Al Qaeda and the Islamist radical group Hamas have no official relationship, but the Palestinian conflict with Israel has been the subject of frequent audio messages from al Qaeda.
India's external affairs minister M. Krishnas
India applauded the killing as a "historic development and victorious milestone in the global war" against terror.
"Over the years, thousands of innocent lives of men, women and children have been tragically lost at the hands of terrorist groups," the minister said.
"The world must not let down its united effort to overcome terrorism and eliminate the safe havens and sanctuaries that have been provided to terrorists in our own neighborhood."
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
The prime minister applauded the development in the war against terror.
"Israel joins in the joy of the American people on this historic day in which Osama bin Laden was killed. ... This is a resounding victory for justice, freedom and for the joint values of all the countries that fight side by side determinedly against terror."
Israeli President Shimon Peres
"The end of bin Laden is a great piece of news for the free world," he said.
"This man was a mega murderer, he killed thousands and thousands of people, people who were totally innocent, and would continue to kill, his purpose in life was to kill anybody who doesn't belong to him."
Italian foreign Minister Franco Frattini
The foreign minister said "this is a great victory for the United States and for the entire international community" in the fight against terror.
"It is a victory made possible by the determination of the United States in their hunt against the one responsible for the most tragic episode at the beginning of this century, 9/11 and numerous other tragedies," he said. " A victory that rewards the efforts that all of us next to the United States have fought and continue to fight against terrorism. A victory of good against evil, of justice against malignancy. It is a victory of the free and democratic world."
Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan's office
Spokesman Noriyuki Shikata said the nation would continue its work with the international community to combat terrorism.
"We pay our respects to the efforts of those concerned, including the U.S. and Pakistan. We regard this as part of a united effort to fight against terrorism," Shikata said. "Japan has been working on assistance to both Pakistan and Afghanistan, and proactively tackling the issue of terrorism."
Kenyan government spokesman Alfred Mutua
The nation, which was bombed by al Qaeda in 1998, called his killing a "defining moment in the fight against" terrorism.
"Kenya was the first country to be attacked by al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden's death comes as a relief to many of the victims of the bombings in East Africa," the spokesman said.
NATO
"This is a significant success for the security of NATO allies and all the nations which have joined us in our efforts to combat the scourge of global terrorism to make the world a safer place for all of us," it said in a statement. "NATO made clear that it considered the September 11 attacks on the United States an attack against all allies. We remember the thousands of innocent lives lost to terrorist atrocities in so many of our nations, in Afghanistan, and around the world."
Pakistan foreign ministry
The Pakistani foreign ministry issued a statement confirming the terror leader's death.
"In an intelligence driven operation, Osama bin Laden was killed in the surroundings of Abbottabad in the early hours of this morning. This operation was conducted by the U.S. forces in accordance with declared U.S. policy that Osama bin Laden will be eliminated in a direct action by the U.S. forces, wherever found in the world," the ministry said.
"Earlier today, President Obama telephoned President Zardari on the successful U.S. operation which resulted in killing of Osama bin Laden."
The ministry said the killing highlights the resolve of Pakistan and the international community to combat terrorism.
Russia
Russia said it is ready to help step up efforts to combat terror, saying only joint efforts can produce results.
"Russia was among the first countries to face the dangers inherent in global terrorism, and unfortunately knows what al Qaeda is not from hearsay," the Kremlin said. "Retribution will inevitably reach all terrorists."
Spain's ruling Socialist Party
"This is good news because it has put an end to the symbolic leader of international jihadi terrorism, the al Qaeda chief, the head of the most dangerous terrorist organization in the world."
Turkish President Abdullah Gul
Gul said he welcomed the news of bin Laden's death.
"Terrorists and leaders of terrorists are captured alive or dead sooner or later," Gul said at a news conference. "It should teach a lesson that the leader of the world's most dangerous and sophisticated terrorist organization is captured this way.
Uganda government spokesman Fred Opolot
The east African nation pledged to continue its fight against terrorism. Ugandan troops are part of an African Union force helping fight the al-Shabaab -- an al Qaeda proxy -- in Somalia.
"Uganda shall continue to support the ongoing fight against global terrorism and renews its commitment to bring to justice those who commit acts of terror in the country," the spokesman said.
The Vatican spokesman, Father Federico Lombardi
"Osama bin Laden, as we all know, had the very grave responsibility of spreading division and hatred amongst the people, causing the death of countless of people, and of instrumentalizing religion for this end," he said. "In front of the death of man, a Christian never rejoices but rather reflects on the grave responsibility of each one in front of God and men, and hopes and commits himself so that every moment not be an occasion for hatred to grow but for peace."
Yemeni government official
A government official described the death of Osama bin Laden as "a truly historic moment."
We welcome the news ... millions of people will sleep in peace tonight," the official said. "Osama bin Laden was more of a symbolic figure, a spiritual leader for al Qaeda."
The official said it is too early to determine how his death will affect the war against terror.
"But this is definitely a strong blow to the organization," said the official, who did not want to be named because he is not authorized to talk to the media.
Embassy of the Republic of Yemen
"The government of the Republic of Yemen welcomes the elimination of Usama Bin Laden, the founding father of the al Qaeda terrorist network. The successful operation, spearheaded by U.S. forces, marks a monumental milestone in the ongoing global war against terrorism."
Ketara wrote:Why? It ain't got nothing to do with us.
September 11th was the worst terror attack in British history too, in terms of Britons killed in the atrocity.
Even if this is the case (the figure of 66 people is quoted above), the incidental killing of 66 British citizens in a terrorist attack on another regime is no basis for the British forces to be assassinating leaders of that terrorist attack in another country, risking war, life and limb.
Ketara wrote:Why? It ain't got nothing to do with us.
September 11th was the worst terror attack in British history too, in terms of Britons killed in the atrocity.
Even if this is the case (the figure of 66 people is quoted above), the incidental killing of 66 British citizens in a terrorist attack on another regime is no basis for the British forces to be assassinating leaders of that terrorist attack in another country, risking war, life and limb.
Hmm....what do you think should the response be then Ketara? What do you think the UK government should do in this case?
Ketara wrote:Why? It ain't got nothing to do with us.
September 11th was the worst terror attack in British history too, in terms of Britons killed in the atrocity.
Even if this is the case (the figure of 66 people is quoted above), the incidental killing of 66 British citizens in a terrorist attack on another regime is no basis for the British forces to be assassinating leaders of that terrorist attack in another country, risking war, life and limb.
Ketara wrote:Why? It ain't got nothing to do with us.
September 11th was the worst terror attack in British history too, in terms of Britons killed in the atrocity.
Even if this is the case (the figure of 66 people is quoted above), the incidental killing of 66 British citizens in a terrorist attack on another regime is no basis for the British forces to be assassinating leaders of that terrorist attack in another country, risking war, life and limb.
hmm, fair enough.
Another reason would be that the man and his organisation pose a significant threat to India, with whom Britain has very close relations and a financial obligation to. If Al Qaeda gained power in Pakistan, a not unlikely scenario, India would come under serious threat. Nuclear arsenals are at play on that level, we're not talking about 66 people in that case. Shadows cast by a giant like the British Empire take a very long time to fade.
Heh, over here in the UK I'm labeled the 'creepy American flatmate' for wearing red white and blue and openly stating that this is a great victory for the US. Ah well.
Ketara wrote:Why? It ain't got nothing to do with us.
September 11th was the worst terror attack in British history too, in terms of Britons killed in the atrocity.
Even if this is the case (the figure of 66 people is quoted above), the incidental killing of 66 British citizens in a terrorist attack on another regime is no basis for the British forces to be assassinating leaders of that terrorist attack in another country, risking war, life and limb.
Hmm....what do you think should the response be then Ketara? What do you think the UK government should do in this case?
What should we do? Well, I would have avoided Iraq and Afghanistan for one thing. A full scale war over some incidental deaths from an attack not even targeted at us is a ridiculously disproportionate response. To quote Terry Pratchett: 'You did this to people because they stole your hat? What do you do if they spit in your eye, blow up the country?'
If there are evil organisations abroad plotting the downfall of the British government, let them stay there. Intelligence operations and diplomacy are for taking care of that kind of thing. But in this case, our dead were simply caught up in the misfortune of another nation altogether. To quote myself, 'It ain't got nothing to do with us.'
htj wrote:
Lord Harrab wrote:
Ketara wrote:
Albatross wrote:
Ketara wrote:Why? It ain't got nothing to do with us.
September 11th was the worst terror attack in British history too, in terms of Britons killed in the atrocity.
Even if this is the case (the figure of 66 people is quoted above), the incidental killing of 66 British citizens in a terrorist attack on another regime is no basis for the British forces to be assassinating leaders of that terrorist attack in another country, risking war, life and limb.
hmm, fair enough.
Another reason would be that the man and his organisation pose a significant threat to India, with whom Britain has very close relations and a financial obligation to. If Al Qaeda gained power in Pakistan, a not unlikely scenario, India would come under serious threat. Nuclear arsenals are at play on that level, we're not talking about 66 people in that case. Shadows cast by a giant like the British Empire take a very long time to fade.
If Al Qaeda come into power in Pakistan, and are a legitimate government, then they are subjected to the regular rules of war. In other words, an attack on us from that position would be an attack upon a NATO member. A terrorist group arranging an attack is one thing, and the problem of the respective government they are opposed to. An attack by an established government is a whole different ball game. You mention nukes as some sort of decider, but the truth is, even if they gained control of Pakistanian nukes, they wouldn't possess the delivery means to hit us with it, and even if they did, they'd be looking at immediate nuclear retaliation and the complete destruction of Pakistan.
But then we're wandering far, far off the original scenario of, 'some citizens got caught up in an incident of some foreigners killing some other foreigners'.
ChrisWWII wrote:Heh, over here in the UK I'm labeled the 'creepy American flatmate' for wearing red white and blue and openly stating that this is a great victory for the US. Ah well.
How is it a great victory? You caught a guy with a beard who doesn't do much more than send out offensive videos these days. Sure, he's mass murderer, but would you describe every arrested chainsaw wielding maniac a great victory?
I'm pretty sure every time we caught a member of the IRA, we wouldn't label it a 'great victory'.
I suppose what I'm saying is that the phrase has far too many jingoistic connotations for me.
I consider it a great victory for the US just because it brings the man who killed 3,000 of my countryment to justice. To me that's a great victory, I mean...I wish I could have been in D.C. or NYC with those crowds. I'm jealous of my friends who went to Georgetown, Columbia, and all those other schools for that reason alone.
It may jsut be that I'm an American, but the fact that Osama bin Laden, the face of terrorism to the West has been taken down is enough to be a great victory. It's completely arbitrary, yes, but still.
Mark Twain wrote:"I've never wished a man dead, but I have read some obituaries with great pleasure."
That's basically how I feel right now. Is it irrational? Yes, I freely admit that. Will it make a big impact in the grand scheme? Who know? We have to wait for events to unfold. But for the time being, I am calling it a victory, if for nothing more than my own perverse joy at seeing Osama taken down.
I'm not talking about them hitting us, I'm talking about them hitting India, which they very much have the power to do. I'm not saying it's right, just that it's not as simple as just getting revenge for dead UK civilians.
I'm not talking about them hitting us, I'm talking about them hitting India, which they very much have the power to do. I'm not saying it's right, just that it's not as simple as just getting revenge for dead UK civilians.
Oookay, so a theoretical nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India has......what to do with us? I'm sorry, I don't even see how that's relevant. You can say it might kill british citizens there, affect our trade with the place, etc, but it'll do that for every nation on the planet. What makes it specific to this case, and the British in particular? Surely in that case, it should be the Indians trying to assassinate the chap, not us.
I'm not talking about them hitting us, I'm talking about them hitting India, which they very much have the power to do. I'm not saying it's right, just that it's not as simple as just getting revenge for dead UK civilians.
Oookay, so a theoretical nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India has......what to do with us? I'm sorry, I don't even see how that's relevant. You can say it might kill british citizens there, affect our trade with the place, etc, but it'll do that for every nation on the planet. What makes it specific to this case, and the British in particular? Surely in that case, it should be the Indians trying to assassinate the chap, not us.
Because of the Commonwealth! Like I said in my earlier post, we have a financial burden invested in India's wellbeing. If they're nuked, that's going to cost us more than any other country in the world. Er, except India, obviously.
I'm not talking about them hitting us, I'm talking about them hitting India, which they very much have the power to do. I'm not saying it's right, just that it's not as simple as just getting revenge for dead UK civilians.
Oookay, so a theoretical nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India has......what to do with us? I'm sorry, I don't even see how that's relevant. You can say it might kill british citizens there, affect our trade with the place, etc, but it'll do that for every nation on the planet. What makes it specific to this case, and the British in particular? Surely in that case, it should be the Indians trying to assassinate the chap, not us.
Because of the Commonwealth! Like I said in my earlier post, we have a financial burden invested in India's wellbeing. If they're nuked, that's going to cost us more than any other country in the world. Er, except India, obviously.
But....that's like saying the Chinese should be trying to take out the Iranians in case they come up with a bomb, hit America with it, and China loses money.....
wut?
I'm sorry, this scenario is so far off on its own tangent now, I have no idea why this is relevant to Osama Bin Laden beign dead any more.
The goal of terrorism is often to goad a nation into doing something stupid,
I don't believe this. I believe the goals of terrorism vary considerably, and hoping to cause the enemy to respond in a foolish and incorrect manner can be a medium term goal, but only really in the sense of hoping the response will be so disproportionate and harmful to the local population that it ends up building support for the terrorists.
Long term you actually need achievable goals, and bin Laden had no such thing. When trying to make a case that you might 'respect' a mass killer, you need to claim what he achieved with his killing. bin Laden achieved nothing.
Making the assumption than your enemies have no strategic goals is the worst possible assumption that can be made in a war.
Actualy Bin Laden did have long term strategic goals. He was very vocal about them and would frequently broadcast them to the world, but most Americans never listened to him or even bothered to ask what our enemies are trying to achieve. The long term strategic goal that Bin Laden frequently advocated was to take down the US as a superpower by slowly bleeding us of money until we suffer an economic collapse similar to what the Soviet Union experienced in 1991. The slow long term bleed is very long term generational goal that is much like how the North Vietnamese were planning to have their grandchildren continue on with the Vietnam war. Being a veteran of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan Bin Laden knew the best way to bleed the US of cash would be a long drawn out ground war. Now $400 billion for Afghanistan won't break the back of the US treasury, but the 2 trillion or so for the Iraq war is what Bin Laden had in mind. The primary goal of 9/11 was to cause damage to our stock market costing us money, followed by a ground war in Afghanistan which ended up costing us about $40 billion a year which isn't too bad because if you drag the war out over 40 years it comes to 3.6 trillion dollars. The other goal was to goad us into do something stupid which has much bigger potential rewards (like the Iraq war), but is not reliable and thus may never come to fruition.
Basically I'm just saying that hunting down Al Qaeda is about more than revenge for dead Brits. But clearly I'm making a mess of it, so I'll leave it at that.
Ketara wrote:
How is it a great victory? You caught a guy with a beard who doesn't do much more than send out offensive videos these days. Sure, he's mass murderer, but would you describe every arrested chainsaw wielding maniac a great victory?
I'm pretty sure every time we caught a member of the IRA, we wouldn't label it a 'great victory'.
I suppose what I'm saying is that the phrase has far too many jingoistic connotations for me.
Its a great victory for us because it happened when a lot of us were alive and it was the main reason why we invaded Afghanistan, did you invade Ireland based on the attacks of the IRA? No, but we invaded an entire country to get the guy so getting him is kind of a big deal.
Comparing the IRA and Britains response can't be compared to Bin Laden and America's response. Eat your heart out Shuma.
Ketara wrote:
How is it a great victory? You caught a guy with a beard who doesn't do much more than send out offensive videos these days. Sure, he's mass murderer, but would you describe every arrested chainsaw wielding maniac a great victory?
I'm pretty sure every time we caught a member of the IRA, we wouldn't label it a 'great victory'.
I suppose what I'm saying is that the phrase has far too many jingoistic connotations for me.
Its a great victory for us because it happened when a lot of us were alive and it was the main reason why we invaded Afghanistan, did you invade Ireland based on the attacks of the IRA? No, but we invaded an entire country to get the guy so getting him is kind of a big deal.
Comparing the IRA and Britains response can't be compared to Bin Laden and America's response. Eat your heart out Shuma.
I suppose. Ours was somewhat more proportionate and restrained.....then again, this is of course presupposing you invaded Iraq to get him, and that all that oil was just an welcome coincidence.
So the conclusion is that because America invaded a country and slaughtered thousands to get one man, its clearly reason for a street party!
(no, I don't believe that, but that's basically what halo just said...)
Slaughtered? That's kind of harsh and shows some latent anger at this. You're bitter and that's all there is.
Besides, Bin Laden was in charge of the Taliban when 9/11 occured and took responsibility for the attack. The Taliban were the ruling government of Afghanistan at the time, put two and two together and we have a good reason to invade. Bin Laden evaded us for 10 years and we finally got him, its a big thing.
halonachos wrote:Wow, you really are bitter Ketara.
Slaughtered? That's kind of harsh and shows some latent anger at this. You're bitter and that's all there is.
Besides, Bin Laden was in charge of the Taliban when 9/11 occured and took responsibility for the attack. The Taliban were the ruling government of Afghanistan at the time, put two and two together and we have a good reason to invade. Bin Laden evaded us for 10 years and we finally got him, its a big thing.
Good news indeed. Osama got all the justice he deserved for a man who dedicated his life to murdering as many civilians as possible, all to try and reshape the world to fit his crazy vision for it.
His death wont change anything though its merely symbolic, plenty more muppets out there that think killing you on your way to work will make the world a better place for them and there fellow nutters.
halonachos wrote:Wow, you really are bitter Ketara.
Slaughtered? That's kind of harsh and shows some latent anger at this. You're bitter and that's all there is.
Besides, Bin Laden was in charge of the Taliban when 9/11 occured and took responsibility for the attack. The Taliban were the ruling government of Afghanistan at the time, put two and two together and we have a good reason to invade. Bin Laden evaded us for 10 years and we finally got him, its a big thing.
Bitter?
You evil man, you just made me burst out laughing quite loudly in a library full of people working silently on their dissertations.
I'm sorry, but you might want to try playing the amateur psychologist elsewhere. Considering I had family killed by Saddam Hussein and his missiles in Israel, I'm hardly the sort of person to have....'latent anger' at his removal.
No, I just find it highly amusing when people like you attempt to portray American expansionism and financial colonialism as some sort of justified, humane thing.
Note that I have no objection to either of those things, they're the way the world works, I just find it funny when people blatantly try and dress it up to look pretty.
And Bin Laden was in charge of the Al Quaeda AND the Taliban? My word. Busy fellow. I must have missed him being elected the President of Afghanistan. Must have happened whilst I was in the corner eating lemons and haribo sour, whilst cursing the Western infidel dogs who dared to imprison the great Bin Laden! You know, being 'bitter' and all.
Get over yourself Ketara, what kind of economic opportunity does Afghanistan present to us? Its a desert without oil, it has nothing we want except for Bin Laden but now that he's gone they just lost part of their major export.
Iraq was a different animal, and if we were there for economic reasons only, then why does China own most of the rights to Iraqi oil fields?
.....this is so off topic now, I'm not even going to bother.
I'll call it a day there in this thread gents. I concede to halo that America is magnanimous nation with nothing but goodwill and benevolent Uncle Sams apple pie for the Middle East, which they distribute in between righting wrongs, saving kittens up trees, and arresting evil bank robbers in black and white carrying bags marked 'Swag'.
TIME wrote: Do oil and Islam mix? Several prominent Iraqi exiles have tentatively endorsed a plan from the U.S. designed to give Iraq's vast oil reserves to "the Iraqi people." The plan defines oil as a government asset, but recommends sharing production with foreign oil companies in exchange for development costs. Now many scholars of Islamic law (Shari'a) say the U.S. plan inadvertently (or perhaps cunningly) delivers a more "Islamic" arrangement than the one followed in supposedly Islamic Saudi Arabia.
Where the U.S. plan intends to give ownership to a democratically elected government, the Saudi royal family collects all revenue and administers it on behalf of the kingdom. Some Islamic critics, following edicts that say buried treasures, like gold and salt, should be shared among the people, claim the Saudi royal family has grabbed too much oil booty for itself. Critics of the U.S. plan, however, say the proposed production-sharing don't meet Shari'a edicts requiring compensation to be defined before work is carried out.
Yeah, get off your high horse.
BBC wrote: joint venture between the UK's Shell and Malaysia's Petronas oil companies has won the right to develop Iraq's giant Majnoon oil field.
Ketara wrote:
So the conclusion is that because America invaded a country and slaughtered thousands to get one man, its clearly reason for a street party!
(no, I don't believe that, but that's basically what halo just said...)
Wow. Talk about changing the fact to fit your world view. One of my best friends just got back from his second tour in Afghanistan where he spent his time building roads and schools, bringing power to towns, and helping civilians to become self-reliant and secure. Lighten up, life's better when you're not a hater.
Ketara wrote:
So the conclusion is that because America invaded a country and slaughtered thousands to get one man, its clearly reason for a street party!
(no, I don't believe that, but that's basically what halo just said...)
Wow. Talk about changing the fact to fit your world view. One of my best friends just got back from his second tour in Afghanistan where he spent his time building roads and schools, bringing power to towns, and helping civilians to become self-reliant and secure. Lighten up, life's better when you're not a hater.
I had a friend who came back from Iraq and gave away one of his hats, he was wearing the hat when an IED went off and he didn't want the memories anymore. One of my other friends who's looking at the marine corp had wanted one of those hats from before so the friend from Iraq gave it to him. The inside of the hat is lighter than the outside thanks to blood being on it.
It's one of those 'Infidel' hats which are hard to get unless you're in the military.
Ketara wrote:
I'll call it a day there in this thread gents. I concede to halo that America is magnanimous nation with nothing but goodwill and benevolent Uncle Sams apple pie for the Middle East, which they distribute in between righting wrongs, saving kittens up trees, and arresting evil bank robbers in black and white carrying bags marked 'Swag'.
Phototoxin wrote:Is he dead - magically fast dna tests, burial at sea (so we cannot see the corpse for ourselves)
Information from gunantanemo detainees (thus justifying it in the first instance)
Then it takes place in pakistan without their knowledge or consent.. sounds like war moves to me..
Sounds like a whole load of smoke and mirrors to me at a time when obama needs voters back on his side, bush style.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nasakenai wrote:
Ketara wrote:
So the conclusion is that because America invaded a country and slaughtered thousands to get one man, its clearly reason for a street party!
(no, I don't believe that, but that's basically what halo just said...)
Wow. Talk about changing the fact to fit your world view. One of my best friends just got back from his second tour in Afghanistan where he spent his time building roads and schools, bringing power to towns, and helping civilians to become self-reliant and secure. Lighten up, life's better when you're not a hater.
He is not kidding, look at the Iraq initial bombings and their targets...
Ketara wrote:Why? It ain't got nothing to do with us.
September 11th was the worst terror attack in British history too, in terms of Britons killed in the atrocity.
Even if this is the case (the figure of 66 people is quoted above), the incidental killing of 66 British citizens in a terrorist attack on another regime is no basis for the British forces to be assassinating leaders of that terrorist attack in another country, risking war, life and limb.
I respectfully disagree. I think that is the ideal basis for assassinating terrorist leaders - second only, of course, to the perpetrators of attacks that take place on our own soil.
That said, it doesn't matter who 'got' him, just that he was 'got'. I must say, I'm finding all the American chest-beating a little distasteful and crass. I would have been nice if they could have dealt with this news by showing quiet dignity and paying sombre tribute to those who perished on that awful day, but perhaps I'm expecting them to be British, when in fact they are American.
Oh well, it's still good news. Especially for Obama.
halonachos wrote:Get over yourself Ketara, what kind of economic opportunity does Afghanistan present to us? Its a desert without oil, it has nothing we want except for Bin Laden but now that he's gone they just lost part of their major export.
Albatross wrote:That said, it doesn't matter who 'got' him, just that he was 'got'. I must say, I'm finding all the American chest-beating a little distasteful and crass. I would have been nice if they could have dealt with this news by showing quiet dignity and paying sombre tribute to those who perished on that awful day, but perhaps I'm expecting them to be British, when in fact they are American.
Albatross wrote:I must say, I'm finding all the American chest-beating a little distasteful and crass.
A good deal of it is justified...to an extent. Remember what Al Qaeda did to America: it fundamentally changed our political and foreign stance with the world (I would argue that America has lost significant prestige since 9/11 due to the attacks and our own actions; however that is another debate yet again), it altered the mentality of our society with regards to saftey and security, and for those personally affected, it meant the loss of friends and loved ones for reasons to which almost all of them didn't deserve to die.
For this event, I think people are interpreting the death of Osama Bin Laden as a victory for America that is far more significant than anything else this nation has experienced in quite some time. Not many other events to this generation stand out. We don't have a Victory in Europe day or the 1980 Miracle On Ice victory over the Soviets. This could be the watershed event that defines what many will talk about positively years down the road.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1984459.stm wrote:Mr Razim said US energy company Unocal was the "lead company" among those that would build the pipeline, which would bring 30bn cubic meters of Turkmen gas to market annually.
Unocal - which led a consortium of companies from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Japan and South Korea - has maintained the project is both economically and technically feasible once Afghan stability was secured.
"Unocal is not involved in any projects (including pipelines) in Afghanistan, nor do we have any plans to become involved, nor are we discussing any such projects," a spokesman told BBC News Online.
The US company formally withdrew from the consortium in 1998.
Okay, so in 1998 a US company withdrew from taking over the pipeline that was planned for 2008.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world/asia/14minerals.html wrote: In 2004, American geologists, sent to Afghanistan as part of a broader reconstruction effort, stumbled across an intriguing series of old charts and data at the library of the Afghan Geological Survey in Kabul that hinted at major mineral deposits in the country. They soon learned that the data had been collected by Soviet mining experts during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s, but cast aside when the Soviets withdrew in 1989.
The Soviets actually discovered the Litium deposits, but we discovered the charts. Don't say that the USSR never did anything for us.
wiki wrote:On 27 October 1997, CentGas was incorporated in formal signing ceremonies in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan by several international oil companies along with the Government of Turkmenistan. In January 1998, the Taliban, selecting CentGas over Argentinian competitor Bridas Corporation, signed an agreement that allowed the proposed project to proceed. In June 1998, Russian Gazprom relinquished its 10% stake in the project. Unocal withdrew from the consortium on 8 December 1998.
wiki wrote:The cost of the pipeline is estimated cost at US$7.6 billion. The project is to be financed by the Asian Development Bank.
A lot of this breaks down to one simple concept for some of our non-U.S. people commenting in this thread.
You don't live in this country, therefore you weren't affected by what happend on Sept. 11th.
Somehow that gives you a right to say we're wrong to have trailed down this man who through his personal financing, ideology and actions, destroyed quite a few more than just 3,000 lives on that day.
Far as i'm concerned, you can go hide in a hole somewhere, stay in your country, and spout as much as you'd like about how wrong we are.
We're celebrating something you'll hopefully never have to understand.
happydude wrote:Some things that hopefully he will one day think better of.
I did not post what I posted out of any desire to be involved in any 'America-bashing'. I have tremendous respect and admiration for our American friends, and using this occasion to talk gak on them is just as distasteful and crass as some of the behaviour I was talking about. I'm not talking gak on them, I'm saying that some of their citizens are perhaps going a little overboard with the celebrations. But hey, every country has it's mouth-breathers - Britain has plenty, and I'm sure Canada does too. In fact, I'm certain of it....
spyfunk wrote:A lot of this breaks down to one simple concept for some of our non-U.S. people commenting in this thread.
You don't live in this country, therefore you weren't affected by what happend on Sept. 11th.
Somehow that gives you a right to say we're wrong to have trailed down this man who through his personal financing, ideology and actions, destroyed quite a few more than just 3,000 lives on that day.
Far as i'm concerned, you can go hide in a hole somewhere, stay in your country, and spout as much as you'd like about how wrong we are.
We're celebrating something you'll hopefully never have to understand.
How about the canadians and other foreign persons who died? the entire world was affected however thank you for finally displaying the selfish elitist attitude that the world hates your country for. And believe me i will stay up here,away from idiotic comments and attitudes like yours..
They buried him at sea because they couldn't keep his body more than 24 hours.
Not buried on land so the Nut cases wouldn't have a place to enshrine their Martyr. Can't visit his resting place out in the middle of the Ocean you know.
Albatross wrote:not talking gak on them, I'm saying that some of their citizens are perhaps going a little overboard with the celebration
Understood.
Personally, I went to our local 9/11 memorial here in Calverton (not to far from our Grumman memorial where the F-14 Tomcat was tested and produced), saluted our flag, then went hope to bask in the celebration of others on TV while having a spot of wine.
While criticism of and observations on foreign policy are not necessarily inappropriate, blanket bashing or denigration of any country or religion is totally inappropriate.
Thread reopened because I have great faith in MOST of your ability to remain polite and civil with one another.
yes! 
YEA!!!!
