• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Osama bin Laden dead,

applecorped said:
So, you're answer is ...? You're assuming we could have extracted anything from him.
Click to expand...

What makes you assume "we" couldn't?

What/who has made you believe that waterboarding is the only method capable of extracting intelligence from living people?



shuize said:
As Ziggurat noted above, the killing of Osama while in hiding was a double blow to Al Queda both in terms of operations and image.
Click to expand...

Evidence? The US government is telling us otherwise, talking up the threat of more attacks and is busy looking for the "next bin Laden" in Yemen.

But, just out of curiosity, how do you feel about the targeted killing of Admiral Yamamoto in World War II?
Click to expand...

Along with most of the civilized world, I don't support capital punishment, especially when it is done without due legal process.

How would you feel about the targeted assassination of George W Bush or Barack Obama, both of whom are responsible for the deaths of thousands of civilians?

Would you prefer their weighted bodies be dumped into the Atlantic or the Pacific Ocean or maybe Hudson Bay?

Concrete boots and bricks?

Marcus said:
Yes, Osama went out like a coward, instead of in a blaze of glory, when he declined to pick up his weapons. This may not look important to us with our western mindset, but these are not the actions of a Muslim hero.
Click to expand...

How do you know what the actions of a "Muslim hero" are? Your "blaze of glory" phrase suggests that you are confusing reality with a Cowboys and Indians movie. Geronimo?

How do you know he had any opportunity to pick up a weapon?

What's courageous about picking up a weapon?

"Naturally the common people don't want war... Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders... All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism."

~ Herman Goering
 
Last edited:
Toke said:
Invading a foreing country to assasinate a suspect in a criminal case is illegal, for some reason or other I cannot bring myself to care. :)
I also find it practical to kill him instead of giving him the pulprit of a trial.

Does that hurt my credential as pinko liberal?
Click to expand...
Many of the same countries that are giving us heat for "illegally assassinating" OBL are the same ones that we are helping to also "illegally assassinate" Kaddaffi.
 
I'm going to go out of my way to say that I don't consider waterboarding an effective means of interrogation. Or any other form of torture. Coercion, yes. Torture, no.
 
Toke said:
Invading a foreing country to assasinate a suspect in a criminal case is illegal, for some reason or other I cannot bring myself to care. :)
I also find it practical to kill him instead of giving him the pulprit of a trial.

Does that hurt my credential as pinko liberal?
Click to expand...

No, pinko liberals often overlook the law in favor of debased political expediency.

CACTUSJACKmankin said:
Many of the same countries that are giving us heat for "illegally assassinating" OBL are the same ones that we are helping to also "illegally assassinate" Kaddaffi.
Click to expand...


Which countries do you have in mind?
 
Last edited:
JihadJane said:
What makes you assume "we" couldn't?

What/who has made you believe that waterboarding is the only method capable of extracting intelligence from living people?
Click to expand...
No such claim was made.

Along with most of the civilized world, I don't support capital punishment, especially when it is done without due legal process.
Click to expand...
This wasn't a police action or an execution, but a counter-terrorist action. It's war. Just like killing Yamamoto was.

How would you feel about the targeted assassination of George W Bush or Barack Obama, both of whom are responsible for the deaths of thousands of civilians?
Click to expand...
Straw Man. Being the President of a country with that whole "democracy" thing who orders people into a war is different from being a terrorist with a hate-on for America deliberately ordering a few people to murder in hot-blood a few dozen people, if the Towers hadn't collapsed.

How do you know what the actions of a "Muslim hero" are? Your "blaze of glory" phrase suggests that you are confusing reality with a Cowboys and Indians movie. Geronimo?
Click to expand...
No, it was sardonic, possibly sarcasm. He was being mocking.

"Naturally the common people don't want war... Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders... All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism."

~ Herman Goering
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
 
JihadJane said:
How would you feel about the targeted assassination of George W Bush or Barack Obama, both of whom are responsible for the deaths of thousands of civilians?
Click to expand...

Just a few points:

1. I'm sure there are thousands of radical Muslims that would love to assassinate either of these men, but terrorists only go after "soft" targets...meaning defenseless civilians.

2. Neither Bush nor Obama has killed civilians as a result of going after "soft" targets. Civilian deaths have been regrettable collatoral damage while going after "hard" targets.

(Except for those civilians who have taken it upon themselves to take up arms and try to kill American troops....those civilians cannot really be considered "innocent", no matter how justified they believe their actions to be.)

In fact, it would be foolish to go after civilians in either Iraq or Afganistan, not only because of the media backlash back home, but because we are trying to win over the populace in both countries, and indiscriminate killing doesn't really serve that purpose.
 
Last edited:
JihadJane said:
How do you know what the actions of a "Muslim hero" are? Your "blaze of glory" phrase suggests that you are confusing reality with a Cowboys and Indians movie. Geronimo?
Click to expand...
Bin Laden often said in his speeches that he would go down in a hail of gunfire rather than surrender. This is consistent with the Islamic idea of an honorable death for a warrior, which would be with guns blazing rather than hiding behind women. No cowboys and indians involved, sorry to disappoint you.
How do you know he had any opportunity to pick up a weapon?

What's courageous about picking up a weapon?
Click to expand...
Although we haven't been given details of the operation, judging from the photos we have seen and what we do know about the location and positions of the participants, it is unlikely he didn't hear the commotion. He was prepared to flee at any time, judging from the money sewn into his jacket, and it's unlikely he wouldn't have his personal weapons in his bedroom. No, it isn't proof, given our lack of information, but from what we do know it looks like he didn't want to be a martyr after all, and even went so far as to put a woman between him and the approaching troops, a cowardly act, especially by Muslim standards.

Picking up his weapon would have been a courageous act because he would have known it would have resulted in his death.
 
Last edited:
JihadJane said:
Evidence? The US government is telling us otherwise, talking up the threat of more attacks ...
Click to expand...


I stated that killing bin Laden constituted a blow to Al Queda's operation and image.

While one might argue that taking him alive would constitute a greater blow (incorrectly, I believe), you can't seriously believe that killing him did not constitute a significant blow such that you need to demand evidence of the fact.

That the government is warning of potential attacks does not mean the loss of their leader did not deal a significant blow.


Along with most of the civilized world, I don't support capital punishment, especially when it is done without due legal process.
Click to expand...


Military action aimed at killing the enemy's command and control organization during wartime does not warrant due process.

Moreover, I seriously doubt you've ever given the Yamamoto mission any thought before now and your attempt to characterize that action as "capital punishment without due process" has nothing to do with the legality of that mission and everything to do with avoiding having the analogy extended against Osama bin Laden.
 
Last edited:
triforcharity said:
Do you not understand what got Osama started on this rampage temper tantrum?

Here, let me break it down for you.

Saudia Arabia is invaded by Iraq.

Saudia Arabia is offered assistance by bin Laden and the USA.

The USA is chosen to help defend them against Hussein.

bin Laden feels jaded that Americans were chosen over him to defend S.A.

And as opposed to going over to his corner and crying, then building a bridge and getting the **** over it, he gets his panties in a twist and goes on a rampage.



Now, what part of that do you support?

Where does corporate America come into play?
Click to expand...

The bin Ladens kept getting invited over for tea!
 
shuize said:
Military action aimed at killing the enemy's command and control organization during wartime does not warrant due process.

Moreover, I seriously doubt you've ever given the Yamamoto mission any thought before now and your attempt to characterize that action as "capital punishment without due process" has nothing to do with the legality of that mission and everything to do with avoiding having the analogy extended against Osama bin Laden.
Click to expand...

Our rule of thumb, innocent until proven guilty, is to be replaced by shoot first and lie about it as long as you can get away with it?

So now you ignore the reason we have thumbs in the first place?
 
Clayton Moore said:
Our rule of thumb, innocent until proven guilty, is to be replaced by shoot first and lie about it as long as you can get away with it?

So now you ignore the reason we have thumbs in the first place?
Click to expand...

We don't generally read miranda rights to enemy soldiers on the battle field.

Osama was the head of an international organization that he declared, himself, too be at war with the USA.
 
The idea that bin laden was killed just the other day is laughable. If some kid said it and showed everyone those images of him supposedly watching tv and holding the remote with his right hand (even though he's left handed) and with ears and a nose which aren'e his, it would be seen as ridiculous, but because the hypnotist known as the mainstream media shows it, people believe it. He died years ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom