OSAMA BIN LADEN IS DEAD

[Joe Redifer]

Denis Leary tweeted it best:

"Michael Moore thinks we should have captured Bin Laden.  Yeah - like he was a fucking butterfly."


Anyway, it may be easy for you to armchair quarterback this one,Ragtime, but you weren't there.

[Arkhan Asylum]

Well I heard Bin Ladle was reaching for his gat, so they capped him.

Its a thugs life, niggas.

That was what President Obama said at first, but new reports are saying that Osama Bin Laden was unarmed

its stupidity like that that gets you shanked when you aren't looking, or blown up.

Hes some kind of terrorist dickhead.  Assume hes armed.  I dont care if hes reaching for a frigging breath mint.  He could have it laced with explosives.  The tic-tac box could be wired to torch the place.

If the guy didn't see troops rolling in and immediately throw his arms up and then lay face down on the dirt, he was probably asking to get blasted.  I wouldn't take any chances seeing if the shmuck is going to comply.

[nectarsis]

In 1963, a Japanese court ruled that the atomic bombings in Japan were violations of international law at the time they took place.

LOL I'm sorry this made me LMAO.  REALLY...you're going to use a JAPANESE court case as "proof"?   The country that to this day warps history they teach, and denies/downplays most of the atrocities, etc. THEY committed in WWII.   Even now (and even more so in 1963) there is NO way they would EVER rule in any way that it was legal/"they had it coming", etc.

[rag-time4]

 

Denis Leary tweeted it best:

"Michael Moore thinks we should have captured Bin Laden.  Yeah - like he was a fucking butterfly."


Anyway, it may be easy for you to armchair quarterback this one,Ragtime, but you weren't there.

I don't think it's fair to say that I'm armchair quarterbacking. I'm not all up in arms about it, but I do feel that it's right to be critical about whether or not they did the right thing. I do think that capturing him and putting him on trial would have been a superior outcome.

In 1963, a Japanese court ruled that the atomic bombings in Japan were violations of international law at the time they took place.

LOL I'm sorry this made me LMAO.  REALLY...you're going to use a JAPANESE court case as "proof"?   The country that to this day warps history they teach, and denies/downplays most of the atrocities, etc. THEY committed in WWII.   Even now (and even more so in 1963) there is NO way they would EVER rule in any way that it was legal/"they had it coming", etc.

Nec, if you're advancing the argument that Japanese courts are inferior to U.S. courts, I disagree with you. Furthermore, based on my understanding of the Hague conventions, I agree with the ruling of the Japanese court on the matter of the legality of the atomic bombing of civilians. I would take it a step further and add that the firebombings were also violations of international law.

I agree with you though when it comes to the presentation of history in Japan. However, I would point out that right-wing elements in our own society are trying to eliminate diversity in our own presentation of history. The same as in Japan, where study of Japan's true history is not universally encouraged, the argument is advanced that ethnic studies in the U.S.  "promotes resentment" towards white people. So while you're right that Japan has her own issues with teaching history, so does the U.S.

By the way, I graduated from UC Davis with a minor in African-American studies, and overall it was my favorite part of my time there.

[OldRover]

My stance on the whole thing:

Whatever.

One tyrant down, seventy million still remain... including most of the leaders of the "free world". And by leaders, I don't mean figureheads, I mean the ones actually making the decisions and giving the orders... these are almost never actual public figures.

[VestCunt]

Denis Leary tweeted it best:

"Michael Moore thinks we should have captured Bin Laden.  Yeah - like he was a fucking butterfly."

Yeah, human rights are a hassle.  Fuck 'em.

Anyway, it may be easy for you to armchair quarterback this one,Ragtime, but you weren't there.

Neither were you; don't pretend your argument is more valid just because you're siding with the prevailing belief (or at least the loudest one in mainstream U.S. media, everyone I've talked to in Belgium and Germany this week is shocked that we simply shot him in the head).  Discussion and analysis of conflicting news sources is a good thing.

[CrackTiger]

Well I heard Bin Ladle was reaching for his gat, so they capped him.

Its a thugs life, niggas.

That was what President Obama said at first, but new reports are saying that Osama Bin Laden was unarmed

The military or whoever has already said that they wouldn't have considered him unarmed and arrested him unless they found him completely naked. Sure enough, if you believe anything that the government has said, they found a couple phones and cash sewn into his clothing.

If you believe anything about what Al Qaeda has done, whether the U.S. governemt, Al Qaeda, Bin Laden or anyone else has claimed it, then the soldiers had every reason to assume that Bin Laden in particular could've detonated explosives or set off any other kinds of traps at any second with as little as the push of a button on a phone or any number of other ways. The building was clearly setup to anticipate an invasion.

It wasn't just because they thought that the guy was evil and deserved to die, or because they were just following orders, or anything else. The soldiers who moved in on him had to believe that every second he remained alive they could all die. He was much more dangerous and a legitimate threat, naked or not, without a gun in his hand in the middle of his own fortress than any kind of random "combatant" armed with a gun in the middle of a battlefield. Bin Laden had spent years convincing people of this. This wasn't some anti-government cult with some rifles holed up in a barn within America somewhere. This was a a group of suicidal terrorists/freedom fighters. Whether you're rooting for one side or the other.

It's unfortunate that any fighting or killing has ever happened between anyone throughout history. But unless you believe that the U.S. was unjust to kill in any way, any time, in any shape or form for any reason, then there's no reason to question why they admit to killing someone like Osama Bin Laden.

[OldRover]

Sociopaths are not dangerous people by themselves... they are dangerous because they command the loyalty of sometimes thousands or even millions of violent people who are willing to die for whatever cause it is. Martyrdom is a huge bonus for these people... "my legacy will live on even after I join my God in the afterlife".

The photos of the aftermath are not available to the public because the US government fears backlash from the Islamic extremists. However, I can tell you that he was shot more than once. From what I was able to find out, Osama bin Laden was hit with at least seven bullets from multiple shooters. There were other casualties as well, though not a single US soldier was even bruised, and there were no civilians harmed whatsoever. It was about as exacting as it gets... not once during GWB's reign of terror was a mission carried out with such surgical precision... not since the Clinton-commanded raid of a bunker in the former Czechoslovakia in his seventh year as President was a mission planned out and executed so flawlessly. I wasn't able to get any further information though, so I don't know if there were any prisoners taken or what else happened; it was a DOA mission and ended up with the former option multiple times. I'll keep trying to get more information, if anyone wants it.

[VestCunt]

This was a a group of suicidal terrorists/freedom fighters.

Word.  If someone's wife lunged at me and my eighty commandos, I'd shoot him in the head too.

[Arkhan Asylum]

My stance on the whole thing:

Whatever.

lol, isn't that your stance on like every debate/loldrama we talk about?

[Joe Redifer]

I don't think it's fair to say that I'm armchair quarterbacking. I'm not all up in arms about it, but I do feel that it's right to be critical about whether or not they did the right thing. I do think that capturing him and putting him on trial would have been a superior outcome.

Who said life is fair?  I agree with that but I am not sad that he is dead.

Neither were you; don't pretend your argument is more valid just because you're siding with the prevailing belief

That's right, I wasn't.  But where did I say what my beliefs are?  The best you could do is the Denis Leary quote which I thought was funny.  The point I am trying to make is that shit happens, none of us were there and NONE of us can say "Hey, you should have done this or that" or even "Hey, you did exactly what you should have done".  I'm not sure if I've mentioned it in this particular thread, but I found it very distasteful that people were celebrating in the streets about the news of his death.  Hindsight is 20/20.  People always seem to demand 100% perfection from those in the military, police and other authoritative services and really get their panties in a wad if something bad happens.  People forget that those units are comprised of people, too.

everyone I've talked to in Belgium and Germany this week is shocked that we simply shot him in the head

No, we shot him in the chest first.  But again, "everyone" in Belgium and Germany wasn't there.  Isn't anyone surprised that the information has come out about Osama being unarmed?  That info came straight out of the US Government themselves.  Why would they let this be known?  If they screwed up, you think they'd keep that secret... you know... like the aliens they are hiding?  Or that they destroyed the World Trade Center themselves?  Or that Elvis is alive and playing poker with Jimmy Hoffa?.. or that the moon landings were faked?

[OldRover]

lol, isn't that your stance on like every debate/loldrama we talk about?

Yep... pretty much.

[Joe Redifer]

I've got an argument you might care about, Old Rover:

If God doesn't exist, and Dinosaurs were real, how did they have sex?
Atheists - 0
Christians - 1

[Arkhan Asylum]

I WOULD HAVE SEX WITH A DINOSAUR.

[OldRover]

Joe, that's not even a properly formed question; the first point is irrelevant to the second... and neither is relevant to the question.

[Joe Redifer]

I know, it is a troll question.

[blueraven]

HAHAHAHA

[CrackTiger]

This was a a group of suicidal terrorists/freedom fighters.

Word.  If someone's wife lunged at me and my eighty commandos, I'd shoot him in the head too.

Like I said, this wasn't just some random place they happened to come across some unidentified people. This was Big Boss holed up in Outer Heaven.

Whether you think that they were in any way affiliated with Al Qaeda or not, many women, sometimes with children have carried out public suicide bombings in Afganistan. Are women some how less threatening than men? Al Qaeda has taken credit for and promised to so many things at least as bad. Is it okay to behead journalists, missionaries or any other non-combatants?

There have been many reports of U.S. Soldiers doing far worse things in Iraq and Afganistan. I'm not glad that Bin Laden or any one else was executed. I just don't see how anyone can be surprised that the U.S. carried out its plans to kill Osama Bin Laden. What did you expect them to do? Two wrongs don't make a right, but what do you think that Bin Laden would gave done if the roles were reversed?

Most people would say that he was already respinsible for much more killing of defenseless innocents.

[Arkhan Asylum]

What was the last thing to go through Osamas mind before he died?


BULLETS

[VestCunt]

Does anyone honestly believe we ever had any intention of capturing him?  Bottom line is this was a political assassination and a violation of human rights.  I guess it can be argued that it was worth it in this one instance, but, as much as I hate to grant lunatic, death machines like Bin Laden their rights, if we start drawing lines in the sand some Christianist, Tea Party zealot is going to take things a step further.

Besides stirring up a hornets' nest in Pakistan and enraging tons of Muslims, stunts like this and waterboarding suspects also break down the Geneva Convention and endanger our troops when they fall into enemy hands.

Furthermore, assassinating this SOB doesn't change shit.  We're still fighting a faceless, international enemy, and, just as we trained, funded, and created Bin Laden and Hussein, we're still supporting murdering dictatorships in Ethiopia, Honduras, and god-knows-where else.

you know... like the aliens they are hiding?  Or that they destroyed the World Trade Center themselves?  Or that Elvis is alive and playing poker with Jimmy Hoffa?.. or that the moon landings were faked?

Don't lump differing opinions in with a bunch of unrelated topics and absurdity.  There's probably a logical fallacy about that somewhere.

But where did I say what my beliefs are?

Prefacing quotes with "said it best" will lead reasonable people to summarize your opinion.

[nectarsis]

Besides stirring up a hornets' nest in Pakistan and enraging tons of Muslims, stunts like this and waterboarding suspects also break down the Geneva Convention and endanger our troops when they fall into enemy hands.

Honest question.  Do you think that if those things weren't done, that the terrorists would be more peaceful/not decapitate REPORTERS (non combatants), take hostages, bomb embassies, etc.?

[Joe Redifer]

Vestcunt for president!  He has it all figured out.  He knows what to do.

In all seriousness, though, shit like this happens a lot.  There is no "non-evil" country in the world.  I am not arguing that we can do no wrong.

[VestCunt]

Honest question.  Do you think that if those things weren't done, that the terrorists would be more peaceful/not decapitate REPORTERS (non combatants), take hostages, bomb embassies, etc.?

Sounds like a rhetorical question to me - of course not.  

Antagonistic question:  Do you think we should throw out human rights and international conventions every time someone commits an atrocity?

EDIT:  Sorry about that "antagonistic question" bit.  Obviously, I think the answer is "no"; the end does not justify the means and if we don't raise the bar no one will.

[Tatsujin]

I really enjoy reading in this thread

[SuperDeadite]

OMG!!!!!!!!!!

BRUCE LEE IS DEAD!
AND SO IS HIS SON!

1111323123!~2@(*U!@EQHADOQ@I!

[nectarsis]

Honest question.  Do you think that if those things weren't done, that the terrorists would be more peaceful/not decapitate REPORTERS (non combatants), take hostages, bomb embassies, etc.?

Sounds like a rhetorical question to me - of course not.  

Antagonistic question:  Do you think we should throw out human rights and international conventions every time someone commits an atrocity?

EDIT:  Sorry about that "antagonistic question" bit.  Obviously, I think the answer is "no"; the end does not justify the means and if we don't raise the bar no one will.

In that case everyone needs to get rid of the dead or alive warrants.  I don't see  that ever happeneing. IMO there was  PROBABLY no way he was going to get "taken alive" anyways (which in many cases is WHY they are listed dead or alive).  The danger to the troops going into "Outer Heaven" (as BT stated) was extremely high.  IF the plan was to simply take him out I would have opted for a HEAVILY armed Predator...the worst that could happen would be carpal tunnel for the "pilot."

OMG!!!!!!!!!!

BRUCE LEE IS DEAD!
AND SO IS HIS SON!

1111323123!~2@(*U!@EQHADOQ@I!

[OldRover]

The plan wasn't simply to take out ObL, they also had to account for his death after the fact. That's why it was required to recover the body... to send a message to the "enemy" that we wiped out their figurehead, and to assure the American people that "the enemy was defeated". If the objective was to simply eradicate his ass, they could have just dropped a bomb on his head like they did with Ghadafi's son. But this was more about "war trophies" than anything else.

[Joe Redifer]

I understand what you are saying about human rights, Vestcunt.  But keeping everyone prisoner costs money.  There would have been a huge security detail guarding Osama for the rest of his life if we kept him alive in a maximum security prison.  That's money we don't really have to spend.  And before you say something like "human life is more important than money", stop.  Money is far more important than any human life.  Just look at how the world is.  Money talks much louder.  I'm not saying it's right, of course, but I'm saying that's the way it is.

[VestCunt]

Staying off the issue of money, the other problem with playing judge, jury, and executioner is that there's never any way to be 100% certain we have the right guy.  In 2002 the FBI wasn't certain of anything.  After that some really crappy video footage of a confession conveniently appeared.  It would have been a logistical nightmare, but he should have had a trial.

[Arkhan Asylum]

if we kept him prisoner, HELLO ATTEMPTED RESCUE MISSIONS.

more suicide bombers and idiots being idiots to save Captain Osamabamalama.