Killing Bin Laden

[Binarycow]

Killing a human being, for whatever reason, is to act uncivilized.

Every time a human being is purposely killed this has a profound negative impact that is often ignored.

We are slowly killing any degree of cilivization we have left in the world by killing human beings on purpose.

boo hoo, go cry me river. You sounded like someone who either has never been outside the protective circle of one's mommy's skirt or has the head so far up in the clouds. Humans are civilized savages at best. It all comes down to a game of numbers; if getting rid of a first-class ahole with a bullet might save the lives of many other innocents then please send me the bill for the ammo.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

I read from time to time that Bush closed down the CIA's group hunting for OBL. However, we recently read that "John" guy from the CIA who was outed has been on the hunt for OBL from the get go, and possibly one of the single most important players in the hunt. So what gives?

And do you think he was running around Pakistan in his own for 10 years or did he require resources on the ground and in the air to gather the necessary intel?

Bush diverted considerable resources away from the hunt for bin Laden due to the desire to occupy Iraq. Closed is too strong a word for the CIA group hunting bin laden but severely limited in resources is not an unfair description.

 

[cwjerome]

You giving Bush credit for killing Bin laden, when he publicly said he didn't care about him and closed the CIA group tasked to hunting him down is DEFINITELY funny (and sad).

You're too dumb to even understand what you're saying, just blindly spitting talking points. Your worthless spin doesn't change the fact that hundreds of people directly and indirectly worked to locate Bin Laden for nearly a decade. It was a systemic success, initiated and cultivated by the Bush administration, and continued strongly under Obama.

Cherry pick situations out of context and without regard to the larger picture if you must. Exploit Bush's horrible speaking skills to send the wrong message if you must. But anyone with half a brain can see you have no credibility based on such disingenuous bullshit.

 

[werepossum]

You're too dumb to even understand what you're saying, just blindly spitting talking points. Your worthless spin doesn't change the fact that hundreds of people directly and indirectly worked to locate Bin Laden for nearly a decade. It was a systemic success, initiated and cultivated by the Bush administration, and continued strongly under Obama.

Cherry pick situations out of context and without regard to the larger picture if you must. Exploit Bush's horrible speaking skills to send the wrong message if you must. But anyone with half a brain can see you have no credibility based on such disingenuous bullshit.

I largely agree with your analysis, but while I think Bush would make that same decision, Obama DID make that decision. I award credit for what a politician does, not what he says he wants to do or what I think he would do had the occasion arisen.

 

[zinfamous]

Actually, this is all due to Bush(43).

/facepalm x eleventybillion.

just give it the fuck up. credit where credit is due.

 

[zinfamous]

First I have little to no faith in any so called news sites. They are all fucked up in the head.

Yes, I have lots of opinions. Sometimes I even make a serious post of my opinions.

I hope you don't vote.

you are a disaster.

 

[Ackmed]

I think full credit needs to be given to President Obama

I 100% disagree.

But he sure did claim he was the reason for it to happen in his speech several times. Which is pretty typical of a politician though.

 

[werepossum]

I 100% disagree.

But he sure did claim he was the reason for it to happen in his speech several times. Which is pretty typical of a politician though.

Presidents typically get blame or credit for pretty much everything that happens under their watch, and invariably try to maximize the latter while deflecting the former. It was amusing how Obama made himself out to be pretty much the whole operation, but he did make the hard decisions. As far as politicians go, he deserves the lion's share of the credit - just as he would have reaped the lion's share of the blame had the operation gone horribly wrong.

The lion's share of the credit of course goes to the CIA & defense analysts and operatives, and of course to the SEALs and their support network themselves. But in the end, one man had to take responsibility for the whole operation, and that is Obama.

 

[zinfamous]

I 100% disagree.

But he sure did claim he was the reason for it to happen in his speech several times. Which is pretty typical of a politician though.

yet, you 100% would have given him the credit if it had failed, SEALs taken hostage, Pakistan relations soured, etc.

amirite?

No one else made that decision but him. He did not kill bin Laden. of course he didn't.

But only the president makes that call. And he was the president at the time. pretty fucking simple.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

yet, you 100% would have given him the credit if it had failed, SEALs taken hostage, Pakistan relations soured, etc.

amirite?

No one else made that decision but him. He did not kill bin Laden. of course he didn't.

But only the president makes that call. And he was the president at the time. pretty fucking simple.

The right still gives Reagan 100% credit for the Iran hostage crisis and they were freed as he was being sworn in because "they were afraid of Reagan".

But Obama can't have any credit for this and that won't change. Just sad.

 

[a777pilot]

I hope you don't vote.

you are a disaster.

I vote multiple times per election. If it's good enough for Cook County, then it's good enough for Denton County.

 

[a777pilot]

Presidents typically get blame or credit for pretty much everything that happens under their watch, and invariably try to maximize the latter while deflecting the former. It was amusing how Obama made himself out to be pretty much the whole operation, but he did make the hard decisions. As far as politicians go, he deserves the lion's share of the credit - just as he would have reaped the lion's share of the blame had the operation gone horribly wrong.

The lion's share of the credit of course goes to the CIA & defense analysts and operatives, and of course to the SEALs and their support network themselves. But in the end, one man had to take responsibility for the whole operation, and that is Obama.

I agree with just about all you posted, with the exception of ....

just as he would have reaped the lion's share of the blame had the operation gone horribly wrong.

If the mission had failed Mr. Panetta would be bouncing under the bus.

 

[cwjerome]

No one else made that decision but him. He did not kill bin Laden. of course he didn't.

But only the president makes that call. And he was the president at the time. pretty fucking simple.

Man I agree with you, Obama's the man in the hotseat, he gets credit or blame and he did well.

But isn't it sorta funny that Rainsford questions me about who exactly is saying Bush (more specifically his policies) didn't help set the stage, and Phuknut comes in and takes it a step farther by saying Bush actually tried NOT to catch Osama. They're out there folks...

The whole credit thing is tiring and purely political.

 

[sarsipias1234]

boo hoo, go cry me river. You sounded like someone who either has never been outside the protective circle of one's mommy's skirt or has the head so far up in the clouds. Humans are civilized savages at best. It all comes down to a game of numbers; if getting rid of a first-class ahole with a bullet might save the lives of many other innocents then please send me the bill for the ammo.

Then please go out and murder all the human beings you want in the name of justice.

By the abusive nature of your post in attacking me personally I can tell you routinely ignore your own negative impact on society.

Thank you for displaying your anti-social behavior.

This is now the 5th time i have been personally attacked by senior members of this forum.

 

[Craig234]

IMO the killing of bin Laden is a totally unremarkable issue for how a President is doing.

It was simply an order to the people who have that role to do it. He might have increased the resources, increased the priority, made the crew's extraction a priority.

But that's just a basic police/military function. It's sexy and visible not because of anything to do with it being something great the President does but only because it seems important because the nation fixated on it for years. How has the President done expanding the rights and freedoms of the citizens, their economic prosperity, at battling the powerful in society on behalf of the people? Those are questions more relevant for a President. And Obama doesn't score too well, nor does any President in a while.

 

[a777pilot]

How many jobs did the killing of bin Laden create?

 

[Rainsford]

Man I agree with you, Obama's the man in the hotseat, he gets credit or blame and he did well.

But isn't it sorta funny that Rainsford questions me about who exactly is saying Bush (more specifically his policies) didn't help set the stage, and Phuknut comes in and takes it a step farther by saying Bush actually tried NOT to catch Osama. They're out there folks...

The whole credit thing is tiring and purely political.

Yeah, I think my questions is more or less answered...

I agree that the debate is stupid, to be perfectly honest. In fact it's beyond stupid, because it's more or less JUST politics. Most people truly have no idea what they're talking about when it comes to stuff like intelligence and covert operations, but they're willing to yammer on anyways, because, why not? And isn't it lucky for everyone that their no doubt expert analysis of the situation just happens to support their political point of view. "Hey, waterboarding clearly works!" say the folks who supported it from day one. "See, Obama's better than Bush at fighting terrorists" say the folks who would say that no matter what happened. Usually politics interprets the data, in this case I think it's mostly inventing it...

 

[zinfamous]

I vote multiple times per election. If it's good enough for Cook County, then it's good enough for Denton County.

OK, I lol at that.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Per one source, apparently the New Yorker may not have had/told the full story.

And politicians twisted the story around.:thumbsdown: (this everyone expected)

Correcting the ‘fairy tale’: A SEAL’s account of how Osama bin Laden really died

Forget whatever you think you know about the night Osama bin Laden was killed. According to a former Navy SEAL who claims to have the inside track, the mangled tales told of that historic night have only now been corrected.
“It became obvious in the weeks evolving after the mission that the story that was getting put out there was not only untrue, but it was a really ugly farce of what did happen,” said Chuck Pfarrer, author of Seal Target Geronimo: The Inside Story of the Mission to Kill Osama Bin Laden.
In an extensive interview with The Daily Caller, Pfarrer gave a detailed account of why he believes the record needed to be corrected, and why he set out to share the personal stories of the warriors who penetrated bin Laden’s long-secret compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.
In August the New Yorker delivered a riveting blow-by-blow of the SEALs’ May 1, 2011 raid on bin Laden’s hideaway. In that account, later reported to lack contributions from the SEALs involved, readers are taken through a mission that began with a top-secret helicopter crashing and led to a bottom-up assault of the Abbottabad compound.
Freelancer Nicholas Schmidle wrote that the SEALs had shot and blasted their way up floor-by-floor, finally cornering the bewildered Al-Qaida leader:
“The Al Qaeda chief, who was wearing a tan shalwar kameez and a prayer cap on his head, froze; he was unarmed. ‘There was never any question of detaining or capturing him—it wasn’t a split-second decision. No one wanted detainees,’ the special-operations officer told me. (The Administration maintains that had bin Laden immediately surrendered he could have been taken alive.) Nine years, seven months, and twenty days after September 11th, an American was a trigger pull from ending bin Laden’s life. The first round, a 5.56-mm. bullet, struck bin Laden in the chest. As he fell backward, the SEAL fired a second round into his head, just above his left eye.”
Chuck Pfarrer rejects almost all of that story

“The version of the 45-minute firefight, and the ground-up assault, and the cold-blooded murder on the third floor — that wasn’t the mission,” Pfarrer told TheDC.

The SEALs then dropped down from the roof, immediately penetrated the third floor, and hastily encountered bin Laden in his room. He was not standing still.
“He dived across the king-size bed to get at the AKSU rifle he kept by the headboard,”

 

[airdata]

When you hear that we've killed the worlds most wanted man and dumped him in the ocean in the same sentence, you'd be an idiot to not say.. huh?

Are any of the seal time alive still? Didn't most of them die in a helicopter accident?

Why do government accounts of events never add up?

 

[zinfamous]

Per one source, apparently the New Yorker may not have had/told the full story.

And politicians twisted the story around.:thumbsdown: (this everyone expected)

Correcting the ‘fairy tale’: A SEAL’s account of how Osama bin Laden really died

interesting....

I like how he mentions that the announcement basically rendered all of the intelligence gathered moot--The Admin could have kept the mission secret, gathered the intel and worked under the curtain, as it were, to dismantle Al Qaeda.

Not sure how that could have played out, though, or if that really would be the better situation--keeping the knowledge in the dark and released months later would, invariably, bring out more of the conspiracy nuts and political whackjobs to cry foul. Imgine those that still hate on Obama's handling of that, and what they would say if this was kept in the dark for so long.

 

[EagleKeeper]

With the political announcement; AQ started scrambling to determine how much was compromised and went into damage control.

It would have taken much longer to the news to spread if everyone kept their mouth shut. Typical government

I suspect that the ISI and the Pakistani government would not have leaked it publicly - look at the egg on their face that they received and the tap dancing that ensured as a result.

Eventually the ISI/government supporters would have gotten the information out through channels; but some of those channels would have been compromised and used to track the targets.

It was a political coup to have the US government announce it, but they could not even get their facts straight; causing more confusion on what happened and why -more support for the CT crowd.

 

[airdata]

I liked the plug for the book about the whole story at the end of the article. only $15 on amazon!

 

[davmat787]

I wonder if the fact that the crashed helicopter was left behind had anything to do with announcing the operation the same day. Maybe (but I doubt it) the Obama administration originally planned on waiting to announce until the intel was sifted through, but the flaming carcass of the StealthHawk made that impossible. I would like to think it was at least considered, and not immediately announced for the most political points possible.

 

[woolfe9999]

With the political announcement; AQ started scrambling to determine how much was compromised and went into damage control.

It would have taken much longer to the news to spread if everyone kept their mouth shut. Typical government

I suspect that the ISI and the Pakistani government would not have leaked it publicly - look at the egg on their face that they received and the tap dancing that ensured as a result.

Eventually the ISI/government supporters would have gotten the information out through channels; but some of those channels would have been compromised and used to track the targets.

It was a political coup to have the US government announce it, but they could not even get their facts straight; causing more confusion on what happened and why -more support for the CT crowd.

Not announcing it immediately was a non-starter for the reasons already given. The decision wasn't so that the administration could "take credit" for it. They were going to take credit for it whether they did so immediately or several weeks later. The issue was that too many people wouldn't believe it had it been announced retrospectively, and without a doubt it would have leaked out to the general public through one channel or another, probably within days. The administration needed to get on top of the story before it leaked.

The botching of the details by people making unauthorized leaks is hardly surprising, though the administration should have done a better job in controlling that. Still, these new revelations hardly stimulate conspiracy theories. So they landed on the roof instead of the ground, and the helicopter crashed after OBL was killed rather than before? The fact that someone on the ground, who is actually accusing the administration of getting many of the details wrong, is corroborating this kill is not exactly a positive development for the CT crowd.

- wolf