November 13, 2024, 11:10:24 PM

1,531,348 Posts in 46,734 Topics by 1,523 Members
› View the most recent posts on the forum.


Osama Bin Laden - DEAD

Started by Dullahan, May 01, 2011, 08:09:22 PM

previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Go Down

Cookie

Quote from: YPR on May 03, 2011, 06:54:32 PM
It's like a real life debate about whether Han shot first n_u

Han did shoot first. Fact

Nyerp

next target: oBama Sin laden

musica.cards

Quote from: wawi the dogracer extraordinaire on May 03, 2011, 06:56:56 PM
Not according to rules of engagement.

So let's say I have a gun and you only have your fists. Assuming I'm out of point blank range, would you really want to resist me, when I could end your life in less than a minute?

Quote from: wawi the dogracer extraordinaire on May 03, 2011, 06:56:56 PM
They found a goldmine of information at the hideout. Having Osama alive would have created a huge mess.

The media's mess is the government's treasure. Even if they already had sufficient information, keeping Osama has a hostage should limit Al Qaeda's future actions.

Quote from: wawi the dogracer extraordinaire on May 03, 2011, 06:56:56 PM
If you think that's the reason why he was killed then that's ridiculous.

I don't, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was. Had Obama chose to order Osama's capture, the death would have been regarded as negligence. And what would happen to military funding then?

Quote from: wawi the dogracer extraordinaire on May 03, 2011, 06:56:56 PM
The president doesn't come up with their protocols.

But the president issues the orders. Why did it take so long for the president to issue an order one way or another?

Quote from: wawi the dogracer extraordinaire on May 03, 2011, 06:56:56 PM
No. I never said that.

You might as well have. The only reason why Al Qaeda doesn't have that title is because it's a group of people, not a person. And yet, you eliminate the guy who has the greatest association with the group, but maintain those would literally committed criminal acts.

Quote from: Travis on May 03, 2011, 06:57:18 PM
it obviously should if it's a mission to take out the united states' most wanted target

The target in question isn't the foundation of Al Qaeda. It's already been mentioned that Al Qaeda may have already considered that Osama would have been killed at some point, and thus have established a plan to deal with such fate.
[move]gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby [/move]

[REDACTED]

The White House will not release photos of Osama bin Laden's corpse, which will only anger those so-called "deathers."
I do not have HIV/AIDS.

wawi

Quote from: _you_ on May 03, 2011, 09:43:26 PM
So let's say I have a gun and you only have your fists. Assuming I'm out of point blank range, would you really want to resist me, when I could end your life in less than a minute?

Because you have nothing to live for and would rather die a martyr.
QuoteThe media's mess is the government's treasure. Even if they already had sufficient information, keeping Osama has a hostage should limit Al Qaeda's future actions.

No, not a mess of the media. Diplomatic mess. Domestic pressures would call for Osama's execution. International pressures would call for imprisonment. We could not take him anywhere secret because everyone would demand he be given "rights". If he was executed, he was executed, he would be thought of as an even bigger martyr and diplomatic tensions would increase.
QuoteI don't, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was. Had Obama chose to order Osama's capture, the death would have been regarded as negligence. And what would happen to military funding then?

They didn't want the hassle of having Osama alive. He is better off dead.
QuoteBut the president issues the orders. Why did it take so long for the president to issue an order one way or another?

Military protocols are not orders doodhuh; The president may have took so long to issue an order because there can't be room for mistakes. It's not simple decisions they're making.
QuoteYou might as well have. The only reason why Al Qaeda doesn't have that title is because it's a group of people, not a person. And yet, you eliminate the guy who has the greatest association with the group, but maintain those would literally committed criminal acts.

This makes no sense. Can you try rewording it.
QuoteThe target in question isn't the foundation of Al Qaeda. It's already been mentioned that Al Qaeda may have already considered that Osama would have been killed at some point, and thus have established a plan to deal with such fate.

He was the figurehead of Al Qaeda. Of course they have plans to deal with his death. However, Ayman al-Zawahri, who will likely lead Al Qaeda, is not respected and revered as much as Osama Bin Laden. Captured terrorists say that they do not agree with him, he's not a good leader, and he is not as charismatic as Osama. Killing Osama, if anything, was a moral defeat to Al Qaeda.

YPrrrr

There was still a firefight, it's not like they caught him pants down in the restroom

musica.cards

Quote from: wawi the dogracer extraordinaire on May 04, 2011, 01:42:59 PM
Because you have nothing to live for and would rather die a martyr.

Then I wouldn't be threatening your life, but eliminating mine goonish

Quote from: wawi the dogracer extraordinaire on May 04, 2011, 01:42:59 PM
No, not a mess of the media. Diplomatic mess. Domestic pressures would call for Osama's execution. International pressures would call for imprisonment. We could not take him anywhere secret because everyone would demand he be given "rights". If he was executed, he was executed, he would be thought of as an even bigger martyr and diplomatic tensions would increase.

Are you serious? Given what many people have been saying about Osama's death, they wouldn't care one way or another what happens to Osama once in captivity. Besides, we're the friggin' USA; if we had to mind to, we could flatten out the Middle East in a full-on offensive. Not necessarily good for national security, and people would hate us, but who exactly has the might to stop us? If we can win battles like the Battle of New Orleans, then we could even win battles against China (and as I understand it, the ratio between British and American troops in the Battle of New Orleans is bigger than the ratio between the number of troops in the Chinese military and the American military, so numbers aren't always of importance).

Quote from: wawi the dogracer extraordinaire on May 04, 2011, 01:42:59 PM
They didn't want the hassle of having Osama alive. He is better off dead.

If Bush was smart enough to simply capture Saddam, then Obama was dumb enough to have Osama killed immediately. Between the two of them, Saddam should have been executed on the spot, as his regime was not based on a foundation as (likey) flexible as Al Qaeda's. And again, if Osama were captured and held as a hostage of sorts, Al Qaeda would have to think twice (or more) about the plans they'd carry out.

Quote from: wawi the dogracer extraordinaire on May 04, 2011, 01:42:59 PM
Military protocols are not orders doodhuh;

Thank you Captain Obvious, but had the president ordered a simple capture, how likely would Osama be dead? Where does murder fit into a capture protocol? All that matters to them is obeying orders and staying funded baddood;

Quote from: wawi the dogracer extraordinaire on May 04, 2011, 01:42:59 PM
The president may have took so long to issue an order because there can't be room for mistakes. It's not simple decisions they're making.

Obviously, but why did he take so long? Ordering a capture and having Osama in custody not only gives us leverage against Al Qaeda, but also gives time for the president to think. Because for all we know, Osama may has escaped again under the radar by the time the team got to the compound. Having Osama already in custody eliminates that possibility, and even if we were to escape, he'd still be in US territory, and it wouldn't take us long to recapture him.

Quote from: wawi the dogracer extraordinaire on May 04, 2011, 01:42:59 PM
This makes no sense. Can you try rewording it.

Take the block from the top of the tower, and the tower is still there baddood;

Quote from: wawi the dogracer extraordinaire on May 04, 2011, 01:42:59 PM
He was the figurehead of Al Qaeda. Of course they have plans to deal with his death. However, Ayman al-Zawahri, who will likely lead Al Qaeda, is not respected and revered as much as Osama Bin Laden.

All the better for Al Qaeda to kiss our asses should we have Osama in our custody.

Quote from: wawi the dogracer extraordinaire on May 04, 2011, 01:42:59 PM
Captured terrorists say that they do not agree with him, he's not a good leader, and he is not as charismatic as Osama. Killing Osama, if anything, was a moral defeat to Al Qaeda.

Which is why they'd want to keep Osama alive by obeying the wishes of the United States. I don't want to give any ideas, but we could generate circumstances that could lead to the annihilation of Al Qaeda. At that point, we could kill Osama, for would we want to risk him trying to rebuild Al Qaeda? If he could rebuild Al Qaeda even close to its original might, then the title of Most Wanted Terrorist would be deserving, as it'd likely be terrorism that'd get him his followers and men.

Plus he'd probably have to demonstrate though combat himself, so if he could stand up to a whole army, some people may consider that admirable (assuming that such people have the same general philosophy or otherwise agree with Osama).
[move]gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby baby gee gee gee baby [/move]

Insani

Just saying, but didn't they say he was dead last year?

And a few years before that too?
doodhuh;

[REDACTED]

Quote from: Insani on May 04, 2011, 06:51:48 PM
Just saying, but didn't they say he was dead last year?

And a few years before that too?
doodhuh;

there was never an official us government confirmation on his death until this week
i find benazir bhutto's claim that bin laden was murdered by the same guy that killed daniel pearl four years ago strange
I do not have HIV/AIDS.

Go Up