Bin Laden (New stories and black helos)

[rushmc 23]

It is getting ugly out there. The doubters and what not. It will be interesting to hear what others are reading and seeing.

But this one I think is stupid
They are doubting we got him.
So, if that is true, why would the Obama admid do this over a year and a half out from the election as opposed to doing it say three months before when it would do him some real good?

This one I dont buy cause even Biden is smarter than that, barely.

And now a story out this morning that says BL was not armed

This is going to get nutty

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[shropshire 0]

How about ... we got him and we're keeping him alive.... with a pocket full of nano-thermite.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Gravitymaster 0]

This story reports that White House official are claiming not only did bin Laden not use a woman as a shield, but that he wasn't even armed.


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/54162.html

Oh and before the PA's start, Politico is used as a source quite often on this site.

[DanG 1]

Actually, this is what the story reports:

Quote

However, during a background, off-camera briefing for television reporters later Monday, a senior White House official said bin Laden was not armed when he was killed, apparently by the U.S. raid team.

Another White House official familiar with the TV briefing confirmed the change to POLITICO, adding, “I’m not aware of him having a weapon.”

“The bottom line is the team that entered that room was met with resistance and took appropriate action,” said a third American official.

It seems like the events are still unclear, at least to the unnamed officials doing the "background" briefings.

- Dan G

[Gravitymaster 0]

But yet you and others immediately bought the "killed in a fire-fight" story without question.

[pchapman 280]

Quote

But yet you and others immediately bought the "killed in a fire-fight" story without question.

B.S.

I bet a lot of people realize that news reports are preliminary, and it takes time for nuanced details to make their way accurately over to us.

One could be "killed in a firefight" and "used as a shield" if one were totally unarmed and just happened to run infront of someone armed while going for cover.

You'd still be in a firefight in the broader sense of the idea, even if not actively firing a weapon.

[matthewcline 0]

Quote

But yet you and others immediately bought the "killed in a fire-fight" story without question.

Well, he was.

When you enter the a room and bullets fly at you, you eliminate the threats, a man reaching for a gun, is a threat, a man posturing, is a threat. A man with a record of killing with out remorse, is a threat and if he makes a move, eliminate the threat.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

But yet you and others immediately bought the "killed in a fire-fight" story without question.

Well, he was.

When you enter the a room and bullets fly at you, you eliminate the threats, a man reaching for a gun, is a threat, a man posturing, is a threat. A man with a record of killing with out remorse, is a threat and if he makes a move, eliminate the threat.

Matt

Is a man lying in bed with his wife next to him also a threat. I guess so when your orders are "shoot to kill".

[DanG 1]

Are you just arguing in order to argue, or do you have a point?

None of us were there. You accuse us of grabbing on to the "killed in a firefight" story, but don't you see that you're just as guilty of grabbing on to the "assassinated in his sleep" story?

- Dan G

[wmw999 2,589]

I think he's just kind of trying to feel out what the moral line looks like between torture, execution, and right. It's kind of a wavy line, and worth thinking about.

Just maybe not in the heat of right after a pretty seriously evil man being taken out of commission.

There are plenty of people out there who wouldn't be real bothered if bin Laden was still alive when buried at sea

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Gravitymaster 0]

Thanks for being the only one to understand my point.

I'm glad bin Laden is gone too. I give Obama credit for making the call to pull the trigger. Something Clinton by proxy couldn't or wouldn't do.

[david3 0]

Quote

Thanks for being the only one to understand my point.

I'm glad bin Laden is gone too. I give Obama credit for making the call to pull the trigger. Something Clinton by proxy couldn't or wouldn't do.

Do you really believe he was lying in bed with his wife with Blackhawks in the yard and gunfire around the compound?
I understand that your real axe to grind is about people on this site decrying water boarding and the same people applauding the death of Bin Laden but do you really believe Bin Laden was shot in his sleep?

.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Thanks for being the only one to understand my point.

I'm glad bin Laden is gone too. I give Obama credit for making the call to pull the trigger. Something Clinton by proxy couldn't or wouldn't do.

Do you really believe he was lying in bed with his wife with Blackhawks in the yard and gunfire around the compound?
I understand that your real axe to grind is about people on this site decrying water boarding and the same people applauding the death of Bin Laden but do you really believe Bin Laden was shot in his sleep?

.

I have no idea of what he was doing at the time and neither does anyone posting on this site. For all you and I know he was high on opium and passed out. My point is that when your orders are "shoot to kill, then it makes no difference whether someone was a threat or not.

The hypocrisy that I see is that many who support U.S. Civil rights for terrorists and treating them as criminals i.e. having their right read to them on the battlefield and tried in a Criminal Court are the same ones that have no problem with shoot to kill orders. I simply wanted to know how they square 2 diametrically opposed positions. It's very obvious they can't so they launch personal attacks and try and belittle somehow with the notion that an emotional outburst is approprite. I wonder how many ran out of their homes and danced in the streets upon hearing the news OBL was dead?

[david3 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Thanks for being the only one to understand my point.

I'm glad bin Laden is gone too. I give Obama credit for making the call to pull the trigger. Something Clinton by proxy couldn't or wouldn't do.

Do you really believe he was lying in bed with his wife with Blackhawks in the yard and gunfire around the compound?
I understand that your real axe to grind is about people on this site decrying water boarding and the same people applauding the death of Bin Laden but do you really believe Bin Laden was shot in his sleep?

.

I have no idea of what he was doing at the time and neither does anyone posting on this site. For all you and I know he was high on opium and passed out. My point is that when your orders are "shoot to kill, then it makes no difference whether someone was a threat or not.

The hypocrisy that I see is that many who support U.S. Civil rights for terrorists and treating them as criminals i.e. having their right read to them on the battlefield and tried in a Criminal Court are the same ones that have no problem with shoot to kill orders. I simply wanted to know how they square 2 diametrically opposed positions. It's very obvious they can't so they launch personal attacks and try and belittle somehow with the notion that an emotional outburst is approprite. I wonder how many ran out of their homes and danced in the streets upon hearing the news OBL was dead?

Do you think water-boarding a suspected terrorist is wrong?
Do you think that giving a shoot to kill order (if that is true) is/was wrong?

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

The hypocrisy that I see is that many who support U.S. Civil rights for terrorists and treating them as criminals i.e. having their right read to them on the battlefield and tried in a Criminal Court are the same ones that have no problem with shoot to kill orders. I simply wanted to know how they square 2 diametrically opposed positions. It's very obvious they can't so they launch personal attacks and try and belittle somehow with the notion that an emotional outburst is approprite. I wonder how many ran out of their homes and danced in the streets upon hearing the news OBL was dead?

It is a hypocrasy in your own mind though. It appears you have made up your mind that such "shoot to kill" orders were given and have deemed all to agree with such. This is simply not the case.

Probably also not the right time to have this discussion if you want it had with level heads. Too many emotions in play right now.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

The hypocrisy that I see is that many who support U.S. Civil rights for terrorists and treating them as criminals i.e. having their right read to them on the battlefield and tried in a Criminal Court are the same ones that have no problem with shoot to kill orders. I simply wanted to know how they square 2 diametrically opposed positions. It's very obvious they can't so they launch personal attacks and try and belittle somehow with the notion that an emotional outburst is approprite. I wonder how many ran out of their homes and danced in the streets upon hearing the news OBL was dead?

It's not that difficult and no personal attacks are necessary.
I support trials for alleged terrorists who were captured and detained. It's possible that those detained are not terrorists. Just because someone dropped dime on you and you were picked up in Afghanistan doesn't mean you're a terrorist. Bin Laden financed, organized and took credit for a successful attack on the US. I believe he also declared war on us. So I have no problem with killing him. I would also have had no problem with capturing him and keeping him locked up here in the US for the rest of his life. Unfortunately that option wouldn't work because he inevitably would end up being used as a prop in partisan political battles.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Thanks for being the only one to understand my point.

I'm glad bin Laden is gone too. I give Obama credit for making the call to pull the trigger. Something Clinton by proxy couldn't or wouldn't do.

Do you really believe he was lying in bed with his wife with Blackhawks in the yard and gunfire around the compound?
I understand that your real axe to grind is about people on this site decrying water boarding and the same people applauding the death of Bin Laden but do you really believe Bin Laden was shot in his sleep?

.

I have no idea of what he was doing at the time and neither does anyone posting on this site. For all you and I know he was high on opium and passed out. My point is that when your orders are "shoot to kill, then it makes no difference whether someone was a threat or not.

The hypocrisy that I see is that many who support U.S. Civil rights for terrorists and treating them as criminals i.e. having their right read to them on the battlefield and tried in a Criminal Court are the same ones that have no problem with shoot to kill orders. I simply wanted to know how they square 2 diametrically opposed positions. It's very obvious they can't so they launch personal attacks and try and belittle somehow with the notion that an emotional outburst is approprite. I wonder how many ran out of their homes and danced in the streets upon hearing the news OBL was dead?

Do you think water-boarding a suspected terrorist is wrong?
Do you think that giving a shoot to kill order (if that is true) is/was wrong?

I do admit I'm unsure there's no value in waterboarding. There are reports that some of the intel that helped locate OBL came from KSM. There are other interogation techniques that are apparently more effective. I say we should use whatever means necessary if the result is that we prevent another terror attack. What I do know is that opportunuty was removed when that bullet smashed into his brain. I also do not believe there was ever any option given to the Seals for taking him alive.

[steve1 5]

That Bin Laden was unarmed may well be B.S. But it is a new twist to the story. It is something that will sell more newspapers, and many people are hungry to read it, (B.S. or not).

I wonder why they were so quick to dispose of his body? You'd think they'd keep it around (for a while) to prove that they really did get him....

[tkhayes 348]

why is it so believable that Bin Laden was not killed or whatever? 50% or so of people seem to think that Obama was not born in the USA and some believe that the moon landing was faked.

I try to ignore them and hoep thy go away. When that does nto work - kick them in the nuts and then run away. Doesn't change anything, but at least i feel better....

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

The hypocrisy that I see is that many who support U.S. Civil rights for terrorists and treating them as criminals i.e. having their right read to them on the battlefield and tried in a Criminal Court are the same ones that have no problem with shoot to kill orders. I simply wanted to know how they square 2 diametrically opposed positions. It's very obvious they can't so they launch personal attacks and try and belittle somehow with the notion that an emotional outburst is approprite. I wonder how many ran out of their homes and danced in the streets upon hearing the news OBL was dead?

It's not that difficult and no personal attacks are necessary.
I support trials for alleged terrorists who were captured and detained. It's possible that those detained are not terrorists. Just because someone dropped dime on you and you were picked up in Afghanistan doesn't mean you're a terrorist. Bin Laden financed, organized and took credit for a successful attack on the US. I believe he also declared war on us. So I have no problem with killing him. I would also have had no problem with capturing him and keeping him locked up here in the US for the rest of his life. Unfortunately that option wouldn't work because he inevitably would end up being used as a prop in partisan political battles.

Thanks for your level headed response without the Bravado. I believe that killing OBL was mostly for symbolism. I also believe there are many who stood to lose greatly if OBL started talking and I think he would have had a lot to say. Too much to say. I think the Pakistani's knew he was there and in fact I think they were complicit in hiding him. The International political impact of some of bin Ladens knowledge may have been seen by some as a threat. I will be watching the news reports in the next few days and weeks to see if i learn anything else that could shed some light on the reasons bin laden needed to be silenced and why the sudden change in how we treat terrorists.

[catfishhunter 2]

in no particular order.
First "news" was he was killed by an airstrike.oops guess trying to be first was WRONG
Next he was killed a week ago and we had his body waiting for DNA results..oops wrong again...
He was in islamabod (however you spell that) oops wrong f'n city dang...

Every single "news" agency is trying to be first with something so they are "guessing" hoping to be right. it is easy to "lie" if you qoute an unamed source

MAKE EVERY DAY COUNT
Life is Short and we never know how long we are going to have. We must live life to the fullest EVERY DAY. Everything we do should have a greater purpose.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Quote

Quote

Quote

But yet you and others immediately bought the "killed in a fire-fight" story without question.

Well, he was.

When you enter the a room and bullets fly at you, you eliminate the threats, a man reaching for a gun, is a threat, a man posturing, is a threat. A man with a record of killing with out remorse, is a threat and if he makes a move, eliminate the threat.

Matt

Is a man lying in bed with his wife next to him also a threat. I guess so when your orders are "shoot to kill".

Yes a man "lying in bed" can be a threat. I know I certainly can be. I have several different (and different types) of weapons available to me in bed. If someone accosts me in bed and is foolish enough to think that "lying in bed" means I'm not a threat, then he is in trouble.

OBL had serious combat experience in Afghanistan during the Soviet war. I find it perfectly reasonable for the SEALs to assume that he had weapons close at hand while in bed. If I was in that situation, anything other than immediate and complete compliance ("Show me your hands and don't move at all") would be met with immediate application of deadly force.

And I find it hard to believe that:

The SEALs were given "Shoot to kill" orders. Taking him alive would have been better for a number of reasons. Those orders would also most likely have been illegal. The SEALs do a bunch of stuff that is on both sides of the legal line, but to put the order out in a direct fashion is pretty unlikely.

That the SEALs "stood up and cheered" when given the order. The ones I have met (I have met a handful of Spec-Ops types) would not have done that. They would have stood quietly and smiled that smile that they have. The one they use when they get turned completely loose. The really scary one.

The news reports are still very confused and conflicting right now. I've heard on NPR that the helo that crashed was supposed to be used to take out the residents of the compound that were left behind, while the source you posted said that there were 2 primary and 2 backup helos. I;m more inclined to believe the "backup" idea than the "take prisoners out" idea for now, but there really isn't any way to know what's right and what's wrong yet.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Quote

But yet you and others immediately bought the "killed in a fire-fight" story without question.

B.S.

B.S.
A lot of people bought the "killed in a fire-fight" story without question. I have no clue on the "you" part speaking to GanG, though.

Who knows? It may even be true.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[Gravitymaster 0]

reminds me of the Amadou Diallo shooting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadou_Diallo_shooting

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

I wonder why they were so quick to dispose of his body? You'd think they'd keep it around (for a while) to prove that they really did get him....

Yes, me too. This is the part that I don't understand at all.

Now, OTOH, the idea that it was all faked will not hold water unless, whoever has him, keeps him under wraps for all eternity. That's gonna be tough.
Can you imagine the hoopla if it comes out that he is indeed alive and well, in captivity or not?

Personally, I'd have like to have seen his body handed over to P.T. Barnum.

j/k

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239