I preferred the idea that he was inside an America prison, making simple electrics or something. Meaningless existence with some use would be a much better way to make an example of someone so influential and powerful to a certain set of people, yet show how powerless and weak he is to another.
Probably not a stance most people think I would take, although death should be served only to those that would not suffer from such a meaningless life. That extends to very few people.
X_StickmanNot good enough for a custom title.Join Date: 2003-04-15Member: 15533Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1843813:date=May 3 2011, 07:54 PM:name=Align)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Align @ May 3 2011, 07:54 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843813"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I heard they got USBs and harddrives from the raid on the mansion?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href="http://gizmodo.com/#!5798016/the-navy-seals-booty-was-yesterdays-biggest-victory" target="_blank">Makes sense.</a> Osama was only one guy, after all, and other than a PR boost his death doesn't really mean much any more. Any data on any of his computers would be useful, though.
Hell, even just his browsing history (if he has one) would be a useful thing to have. Releasing Osama's porn preferences would be a nice coup for psyops.
<!--quoteo(post=1843815:date=May 3 2011, 07:00 PM:name=Thaldarin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thaldarin @ May 3 2011, 07:00 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843815"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I preferred the idea that he was inside an America prison, making simple electrics or something. Meaningless existence with some use would be a much better way to make an example of someone so influential and powerful to a certain set of people, yet show how powerless and weak he is to another.
Probably not a stance most people think I would take, although death should be served only to those that would not suffer from such a meaningless life. That extends to very few people.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree that its a good political strategy. Killing someone can make them a martyr, and if not, only makes the opposing faction angry, further escalating things. If this strike team however had simply gone in, retrieved him, and gotten out, with no losses, and then treated him like any other criminal (probably even protecting him so the others dont kill him), preferably also "accidently" leaking security tapes of him 24/7, would make the people idolizing him have to see him as a weak man, and hopefully make them lose their faith in him.
Then again, the whole 10 year hide and seek would make that tactic less usefull, seeing as he played with america for so long. And anyone who lost his freedom can be treated any way the captor wants, but if the captor took that long to get him, it, its obvious they had torubles with the man in the first place.
+1 for stickmans idea, such things ought to make it harder to hold him as a saint who died for their cause.
<!--quoteo(post=1843814:date=May 3 2011, 08:56 PM:name=Obraxis)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Obraxis @ May 3 2011, 08:56 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843814"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->While I would have prefferd Bin Ladin to be locked in a room with flesh eating bacteria for the rest of his days, I'll settle for his death. I dont like anyone dying at the hands of another human being, but considering his crimes I'll let this go this once.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> So you "don't like anyone dying at the hands of another human being," but torture's fine? O_o
<!--quoteo(post=1843813:date=May 3 2011, 11:54 AM:name=Align)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Align @ May 3 2011, 11:54 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843813"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I heard they got USBs and harddrives from the raid on the mansion?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1843829:date=May 3 2011, 03:05 PM:name=Aldaris)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Aldaris @ May 3 2011, 03:05 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843829"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Thaldarin, while I would have prefered that myself, could you imagine actually trying to bring him to trial? And it succeeding?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Considering he denied taking credit for 9/11 in the beginning, maybe he would plead innocent?
<!--quoteo(post=1843829:date=May 3 2011, 08:05 PM:name=Aldaris)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Aldaris @ May 3 2011, 08:05 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843829"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Thaldarin, while I would have prefered that myself, could you imagine actually trying to bring him to trial? And it succeeding?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You have a vast many Western countries to choose from in taking him to court with if you so wished, of which France is actually the best option for a successful trial in all honesty.
Although I'd never see him brought to trial, I'd expect to see America "guantanamo" it.
ThansalThe New ScumJoin Date: 2002-08-22Member: 1215Members, Constellation
The idealist in me wishes he had been taken alive, given a proper trial, found guilty, and sentenced to death.
The realist in me says "Meh, this is probably for the best, get it over and done with". The amount of controversy around extraditing him, storing him, making sure the trial was 'fair' (really, who could be a fair and impartial jury for him?), etc.
The news of recovering intel from his base is a good one to me. Really, it's the best news to me. Sure, his death has made some people happy, and possibly brought some level of closure to some people, but ultimately it has done nothing, as Thaldy has pointed out.
All the reactions of "America ###### YAH!" and "Stupid Americans" are both ignorant in my mind. However, I react a bit more to the "Stupid Americans" comments (I am American, and don't exactly like being called an idiot). I view the "America ###### Yah!" comments mainly as a cathartic release to people that have dealt with some fairly stressful events and then only had one face really linked to said events. I mean, on top of being and American, I'm also a NYer. I was away at college when 9/11 happened, so I'm a bit separated from the events directly. I wasn't there, I didn't get trapped in the subway, no one I knew directly died, it's had no real lasting impact on me. However, thinking back to the day it happened, it was fairly horrible. I was a number of states away from most of my friends and family. Both my parents periodically would be at the WTC for work. I couldn't call. I didn't know if my friends had been in a subway near there. We were lucky that we could reach our friend's BF who was about 15 mins from where the 4 plane crashed. The college I went to had a fairly high representation from NY. I remember people wandering around in shock. People frightened because they still couldn't get in contact with loved ones (I got lucky and checked my email shortly after the event and found letters from both my parents). People who KNEW their friends/relatives would be in the towers. Remember, there is a LOT of emotion tied up in the attacks, and Bin Laden is the only face we really have to tie to it. No, he didn't carry out the acts, yes he was linked to them as the head/face of Al Queda, etc etc.
I find belittling people that are happy/relieved about Bin Laden's death to be immature and puerile. Hell, people feeling better because of his death is actually a victory. The weapon of terrorism is terror. Making people feel better is counter to that. So there his death isn't completely meaningless. No, it will not end terror. Yes it will spark some attacks. However I do view it as something that had to happen. I'm not glad that he is dead. However I see no better solution that is realistic.
I've read and heard several things over the course of today and wonder them to be true or false, such as;
- US officials cite a courier as information source since 2007 - Only few people ever entered the compound, one small child who lived in a nearby house, a red van and the man who did all the shopping - He was unarmed all the time - He used multiple human shields - His killing is technically assassination, which is technically illegal outside of a warzone, although there may be "lee way".. ala Iraq invasion once again, America gets round the legality of things - It was a "seek and kill" not "capture" mission
Just wondering what other people have heard/seen, or believe to be true. Some of those close knit things to me, such as him being unarmed and shot, is grossly awful. I realise the bloke is hideously awful, so hideously awful I wouldn't want to be near him for multiple reasons. Although killing an unarmed man in my book? Wrong.
EDIT:
- Bin Laden has lived there since 2005, for a large proportion of his time. - America "knew" he was there since 2007
ThansalThe New ScumJoin Date: 2002-08-22Member: 1215Members, Constellation
An addendum as I have thought a bit more:
What I was trying to say is I find the celebration of his death distasteful. I can understand it however I can not condone it. The puerile mocking I find just as bad and am insulted by the sweaping generalizations.
As for the things thaldy brought up, well just repeat them for me.
Kouji_SanSr. Hινε UÏкεεÏεг - EUPT DeputyThe NetherlandsJoin Date: 2003-05-13Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
<!--quoteo(post=1843848:date=May 3 2011, 10:49 PM:name=Thaldarin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thaldarin @ May 3 2011, 10:49 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843848"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You have a vast many Western countries to choose from in taking him to court with if you so wished, of which France is actually the best option for a successful trial in all honesty.
Although I'd never see him brought to trial, I'd expect to see America "guantanamo" it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The Hague's international court wants to have a word with these French peeps ;)
I don't even know if I believe the "it'll spark some attacks" line. What, we're supposed to believe this will sour the otherwise ROSY relations between terrorist extremists and the U.S.? Yeah man, al Qaeda just LOVED the U.S. and its allies before this betrayal of staggering proportions. In fact, I hear ol' Osama was composing a poem about the greatness of western civilization when he was so rudely interrupted by people busting down his door and shooting him.
That_Annoying_KidSire of TitlesJoin Date: 2003-03-01Member: 14175Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1843853:date=May 3 2011, 04:01 PM:name=Thaldarin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thaldarin @ May 3 2011, 04:01 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843853"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I've read and heard several things over the course of today and wonder them to be true or false, such as;
- US officials cite a courier as information source since 2007 - Only few people ever entered the compound, one small child who lived in a nearby house, a red van and the man who did all the shopping - He was unarmed all the time - He used multiple human shields - His killing is technically assassination, which is technically illegal outside of a warzone, although there may be "lee way".. ala Iraq invasion once again, America gets round the legality of things - It was a "seek and kill" not "capture" mission<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
From my understanding
Courier awareness came from Guantanamo, they followed him early 07. Wasn't a source compound was high security, with the burning trash and 10 foot walls min Wasn't unarmed used one of his wife's as human shields, unknown if forced to be or voluntary from what I heard it was voluntary (still you are a combatant in the eyes of seals trained not to care) He was told to surrender twice (which is MASSIVE leeway) and then went for a gun Not assassination when the president signs a kill order Was capture but we don't care if you shoot him mission Didn't tell Pakistan until after the fact
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden was unarmed when he was killed by US troops on Sunday after resisting capture, the White House has said.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->"We expected a great deal of resistance and were met with a great deal of resistance. There were many other people who were armed in the compound," Mr Carney said.
Bin Laden himself then resisted the troops and was shot dead, but was not armed, he added.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And...this article is spot on the whole way with the following exert,
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->"If he wasn't shooting at the soldiers, the killing should be investigated," Brad Adams, Human Rights Watch Asia director, said in Bangkok at the launch of a report on Thailand.
"People are saying that justice has been done, but justice has not been done. Justice is when you arrest someone and put them on trial."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And then this is when you have to ask what really went on, because I don't see how an unarmed man could pose a serious threat to Navy seals with guns, <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Carney stated that "resistance does not require a firearm" after a reporter pressed him on how bin Laden could have posed a threat.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Several sources state he was unarmed including the following,
The CNN article has a video, where there is "capture or kill" phrase used with the ambigious phrase I quoted above, killing someone posing no weaponable threat is just wrong. And just search google, you get a crap load more.
It just seems like America did the world as great an injustice as they did a justice, and for me it seems like they've only re-affirmed themselves with the stereotypical "we got guns, we shall kill" attitude you can find in the UK. They shot a woman (believed to be his wife) in the leg, they could have done the same to him and captured him.
From my sources in the U.S. military, there has been a dramatic increase in mental illness in recent years among combat veterans and non-combat forces alike, across all branches, and there have been lots of meetings and planning on how to address this problem.
Maybe Osama's been weighing on their minds. Maybe the reporting of his death will allow them to function and keep on fighting more wars with less depression and fewer suicides.
Of course my personal solution would just be to not fight a 5+front war. (Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya...Syria? Iran?) The last country to fight a 2-front war didn't come out on top.
X_StickmanNot good enough for a custom title.Join Date: 2003-04-15Member: 15533Members, Constellation
Gotta say I feel there are some dodgy issues surrounding him being killed. He was unarmed, which has been admitted. If he was going for a gun, they would've included that and/or otherwise mentioned it, which the most recent sources don't.
Like Thaldarin, I find it pretty hard to believe that an unarmed 54 year old man can provide enough resistance to make a team of "20-25" navy seals have no other choice but to kill him. They were carrying those zip-tie handcuff things which, again, for a team of navy seals, are going on a person whether they want it or not.
They were raiding the place for hard drives, USB sticks, DVDs and such too, so it's not like they couldn't spend an extra minute or so securing the main objective of the guy.
The cynic in me wants to say they executed him (a shot above the left eye sounds somewhat execution-y) and/or otherwise brutalised him in a way that made them not want the body on some kind of public display, hence the quick and so far very private disposal. But at the same time I don't want to be the kind of ###### who immediately disagrees with the official explanations.
That_Annoying_KidSire of TitlesJoin Date: 2003-03-01Member: 14175Members, Constellation
edited May 2011
Thaladin, lolfighter what are you guys getting at?
honestly who cares what the league of nations says, paper tiger and all Anyone who for a second wants to question the legality of said raid/shooting can sod off
Africa embassies 92 wtc Yemen etc
dude doesn't deserve your sympathy and when you are in a fire fight, you aren't taking the time to give your opponents the benefit of the doubt... Female human shields or not
silly soft Euros
USA, we will free the **** out of you
Seals aren't police, they are special forces who train with live ammunition shooting at each other in tiny house replicas. The average seal shoots 6,000 live rounds training. They can't be expected to act like police, and they shouldn't cause it gets them killed, plastic wire reinforced zip ties or not
[edit] why don't you guys do something productive? Like help me figure out what is wrong with my ns <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=112926" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index....howtopic=112926</a> [/edit]
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1843879:date=May 3 2011, 08:31 PM:name=That_Annoying_Kid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (That_Annoying_Kid @ May 3 2011, 08:31 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843879"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Courier awareness came from Guantanamo, they followed him early 07. Wasn't a source<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The Democratic senate leaders have stated none of the leads came from Gitmo nor "enhanced interrogation techniques" AKA torture.
WHO* initially stated that bin Laden was armed. Then they claimed that was a mistake, he was actually unarmed. So that's where the confusion comes from.
<!--quoteo(post=1843891:date=May 4 2011, 03:59 AM:name=That_Annoying_Kid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (That_Annoying_Kid @ May 4 2011, 03:59 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843891"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Thaladin, lolfighter what are you guys getting at?
honestly who cares what the league of nations says, paper tiger and all Anyone who for a second wants to question the legality of said raid/shooting can sod off<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Maybe because we're not American, we don't automatically think guns and killing are the complete and resolute answer. There. I conformed the stereotypical view on you because you portrayed it.
That_Annoying_KidSire of TitlesJoin Date: 2003-03-01Member: 14175Members, Constellation
edited May 2011
portrayed what?
London 07 Islamic extremists attack buses in London
I guess since the UK doesn't have guns we should shiv terrorists instead of shooting them?
It's just irksome that you call into question the USA killing this guy, if you don't think he had it coming what gives?
What do you suggest we do? Make a mockery of the Hague with a show trial? You expect special forces to act like police and read this guy his rights before taking action against him? He's had a hand in the killing of hundreds of citizens of my country, some more innocent than others... Sure play it safe make sure no toes get stepped on make sure T's are crossed and i's and j's get dotted but at the end of the day I'm not loosing sleep over this.
and yeah I capped on the UN for being vaginas and complaining about the legitimacy of shooting Bin Laden in the face when they ignore Sudan and Darfur and Libya and other parts of the world where real atrocities are being perpetrated upon populations usually by internal forces... Where is the white armored truck of the UN in these instances?
I'm a effing hippie and I was for gun control, but I realize it's an integral part of this nation and I've seen my own government attempt to perpetrate shady s*** upon it's own civilians and I changed my tune but that is neither here nor there.
not all Muricans are guns and F**** yeah
I never said shooting him in the face was the definitive correct answer, that is you putting words in my mouth. I'm just saying I have zero problem with what went down, and how it went down.
and so should you
unless yer a terrorist
are you?
[edit] filter got me, noes and I still need help troubleshooting my ns <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=112926" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index....howtopic=112926</a> [/edit]
<!--quoteo(post=1843933:date=May 4 2011, 05:50 PM:name=juice)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (juice @ May 4 2011, 05:50 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843933"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->WHO* initially stated that bin Laden was armed. Then they claimed that was a mistake, he was actually unarmed. So that's where the confusion comes from.
*White House Officials<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Did they know for sure he was unarmed before he was shot though?
<!--quoteo(post=1843943:date=May 4 2011, 08:19 PM:name=That_Annoying_Kid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (That_Annoying_Kid @ May 4 2011, 08:19 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843943"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->and I still need help troubleshooting my ns<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think "special forces" should be able to use their eyes and their brains. They're supposed to be your most intelligent, best thinkers aswell as best shooters. They're not mindless killing machines, atleast not in the UK, maybe the US is different.
The 7/11 Bus/Tube station attacks have nothing to do with this. You're taking this off the tangent of being morally right to kill an unarmed man, whomever it may be to making it all about the "war on terror". Again though, when this is what your politicians make you do, stray off to, defer from the subjectiveness of what is right and ultimately what is wrong and then twist it, I can't say I'm surprised you'd do that.
If Navy Seals aren't trained well enough to capture someone unarmed or shoot a capture target in non-fatal way to subdue them, well, they've got to be the worst special forces task force in the world, with some bad training. It seems to me, these guys wanted to kill him and day by day, it's becoming blindingly obvious keeping the loss of human life to a minimum was never considered.
Zero problem with what happened? I'm sorry but having him more readily available to question is a much better way to fight your "war on terror". What has killing him achieved, ultimately? Nothing. The same operations still go on. Sure we may have some information from USB sticks, hard drives. Although ultimately, capturing and questioning is the best way to get the most accurate information on what has gone on with the guy in the last 10 years and further more, fight Al-Qaeda by using what information you can extrapolate from the man. Killing Bin Laden hasn't furthered the end goal what so ever, it's just made people feel good about themselves.
<!--quoteo(post=1843966:date=May 4 2011, 02:43 PM:name=Thaldarin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thaldarin @ May 4 2011, 02:43 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843966"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->[...] Zero problem with what happened? I'm sorry but having him more readily available to question is a much better way to fight your "war on terror". What has killing him achieved, ultimately? Nothing. The same operations still go on. Sure we may have some information from USB sticks, hard drives. Although ultimately, capturing and questioning is the best way to get the most accurate information on what has gone on with the guy in the last 10 years and further more, fight Al-Qaeda by using what information you can extrapolate from the man. Killing Bin Laden hasn't furthered the end goal what so ever, it's just made people feel good about themselves.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do you think he would have kindly answered to questions, or should "special questioning techniques" have been applied?
Personally I don't mind the fact he's been killed (if it was done correctly, without abuse and such), even though I would have probably preferred to see him captured, put on trial (swiftly) and then executed publicly.
<!--quoteo(post=1843891:date=May 4 2011, 05:59 AM:name=That_Annoying_Kid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (That_Annoying_Kid @ May 4 2011, 05:59 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843891"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Thaladin, lolfighter what are you guys getting at?[...]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I dunno, I've made several posts in here. Which one would you like me to elaborate on?
<!--quoteo(post=1843943:date=May 4 2011, 12:19 PM:name=That_Annoying_Kid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (That_Annoying_Kid @ May 4 2011, 12:19 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843943"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's just irksome that you call into question the USA killing this guy, if you don't think he had it coming what gives?
What do you suggest we do? Make a mockery of the Hague with a show trial? You expect special forces to act like police and read this guy his rights before taking action against him? He's had a hand in the killing of hundreds of citizens of my country, some more innocent than others... Sure play it safe make sure no toes get stepped on make sure T's are crossed and i's and j's get dotted but at the end of the day I'm not loosing sleep over this.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Detainment and trial sounds like a marvelous idea actually. That's what they did with Hussein. So it wasn't feasible with bin Laden? What gives?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->not all Muricans are guns<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> If guns were people (just like corporations), more than half of all muricans would be guns. But no, not all of them. Maaaaan, think about it: If guns were people, whites would be a minority!
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I never said shooting him in the face was the definitive correct answer, that is you putting words in my mouth. I'm just saying I have zero problem with what went down, and how it went down.
and so should you
unless yer a terrorist
are you?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Only a terrorist would use such a flimsy ad hominem attack to shut someone up. Are you a terrorist?
X_StickmanNot good enough for a custom title.Join Date: 2003-04-15Member: 15533Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1843975:date=May 4 2011, 03:28 PM:name=lazy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (lazy @ May 4 2011, 03:28 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843975"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Do you think he would have kindly answered to questions, or should "special questioning techniques" have been applied?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Since they <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/04/us/politics/04torture.html" target="_blank">don't work</a>, I don't think torture techniques (don't hide it with fancy terminology) would be useful at all.
Lolfighter, hes obviously trolling you. He is not even doing it very well, atleast when I troll, I come up with good arguments to make it not to obvious :P
Comments
Probably not a stance most people think I would take, although death should be served only to those that would not suffer from such a meaningless life. That extends to very few people.
<a href="http://gizmodo.com/#!5798016/the-navy-seals-booty-was-yesterdays-biggest-victory" target="_blank">Makes sense.</a> Osama was only one guy, after all, and other than a PR boost his death doesn't really mean much any more. Any data on any of his computers would be useful, though.
Hell, even just his browsing history (if he has one) would be a useful thing to have. Releasing Osama's porn preferences would be a nice coup for psyops.
Probably not a stance most people think I would take, although death should be served only to those that would not suffer from such a meaningless life. That extends to very few people.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree that its a good political strategy. Killing someone can make them a martyr, and if not, only makes the opposing faction angry, further escalating things.
If this strike team however had simply gone in, retrieved him, and gotten out, with no losses, and then treated him like any other criminal (probably even protecting him so the others dont kill him), preferably also "accidently" leaking security tapes of him 24/7, would make the people idolizing him have to see him as a weak man, and hopefully make them lose their faith in him.
Then again, the whole 10 year hide and seek would make that tactic less usefull, seeing as he played with america for so long.
And anyone who lost his freedom can be treated any way the captor wants, but if the captor took that long to get him, it, its obvious they had torubles with the man in the first place.
+1 for stickmans idea, such things ought to make it harder to hold him as a saint who died for their cause.
So you "don't like anyone dying at the hands of another human being," but torture's fine? O_o
Yup. Hopefully it becomes a data gold mine.
Considering he denied taking credit for 9/11 in the beginning, maybe he would plead innocent?
You have a vast many Western countries to choose from in taking him to court with if you so wished, of which France is actually the best option for a successful trial in all honesty.
Although I'd never see him brought to trial, I'd expect to see America "guantanamo" it.
The realist in me says "Meh, this is probably for the best, get it over and done with". The amount of controversy around extraditing him, storing him, making sure the trial was 'fair' (really, who could be a fair and impartial jury for him?), etc.
The news of recovering intel from his base is a good one to me. Really, it's the best news to me. Sure, his death has made some people happy, and possibly brought some level of closure to some people, but ultimately it has done nothing, as Thaldy has pointed out.
All the reactions of "America ###### YAH!" and "Stupid Americans" are both ignorant in my mind. However, I react a bit more to the "Stupid Americans" comments (I am American, and don't exactly like being called an idiot). I view the "America ###### Yah!" comments mainly as a cathartic release to people that have dealt with some fairly stressful events and then only had one face really linked to said events. I mean, on top of being and American, I'm also a NYer. I was away at college when 9/11 happened, so I'm a bit separated from the events directly. I wasn't there, I didn't get trapped in the subway, no one I knew directly died, it's had no real lasting impact on me. However, thinking back to the day it happened, it was fairly horrible. I was a number of states away from most of my friends and family. Both my parents periodically would be at the WTC for work. I couldn't call. I didn't know if my friends had been in a subway near there. We were lucky that we could reach our friend's BF who was about 15 mins from where the 4 plane crashed. The college I went to had a fairly high representation from NY. I remember people wandering around in shock. People frightened because they still couldn't get in contact with loved ones (I got lucky and checked my email shortly after the event and found letters from both my parents). People who KNEW their friends/relatives would be in the towers. Remember, there is a LOT of emotion tied up in the attacks, and Bin Laden is the only face we really have to tie to it. No, he didn't carry out the acts, yes he was linked to them as the head/face of Al Queda, etc etc.
I find belittling people that are happy/relieved about Bin Laden's death to be immature and puerile. Hell, people feeling better because of his death is actually a victory. The weapon of terrorism is terror. Making people feel better is counter to that. So there his death isn't completely meaningless. No, it will not end terror. Yes it will spark some attacks. However I do view it as something that had to happen. I'm not glad that he is dead. However I see no better solution that is realistic.
Mkay
</ramble>
- US officials cite a courier as information source since 2007
- Only few people ever entered the compound, one small child who lived in a nearby house, a red van and the man who did all the shopping
- He was unarmed all the time
- He used multiple human shields
- His killing is technically assassination, which is technically illegal outside of a warzone, although there may be "lee way".. ala Iraq invasion once again, America gets round the legality of things
- It was a "seek and kill" not "capture" mission
Just wondering what other people have heard/seen, or believe to be true. Some of those close knit things to me, such as him being unarmed and shot, is grossly awful. I realise the bloke is hideously awful, so hideously awful I wouldn't want to be near him for multiple reasons. Although killing an unarmed man in my book? Wrong.
EDIT:
- Bin Laden has lived there since 2005, for a large proportion of his time.
- America "knew" he was there since 2007
What I was trying to say is I find the celebration of his death distasteful. I can understand it however I can not condone it. The puerile mocking I find just as bad and am insulted by the sweaping generalizations.
As for the things thaldy brought up, well just repeat them for me.
Although I'd never see him brought to trial, I'd expect to see America "guantanamo" it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The Hague's international court wants to have a word with these French peeps ;)
- US officials cite a courier as information source since 2007
- Only few people ever entered the compound, one small child who lived in a nearby house, a red van and the man who did all the shopping
- He was unarmed all the time
- He used multiple human shields
- His killing is technically assassination, which is technically illegal outside of a warzone, although there may be "lee way".. ala Iraq invasion once again, America gets round the legality of things
- It was a "seek and kill" not "capture" mission<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
From my understanding
Courier awareness came from Guantanamo, they followed him early 07. Wasn't a source
compound was high security, with the burning trash and 10 foot walls min
Wasn't unarmed
used one of his wife's as human shields, unknown if forced to be or voluntary from what I heard it was voluntary (still you are a combatant in the eyes of seals trained not to care)
He was told to surrender twice (which is MASSIVE leeway) and then went for a gun
Not assassination when the president signs a kill order
Was capture but we don't care if you shoot him mission
Didn't tell Pakistan until after the fact
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden was unarmed when he was killed by US troops on Sunday after resisting capture, the White House has said.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->"We expected a great deal of resistance and were met with a great deal of resistance. There were many other people who were armed in the compound," Mr Carney said.
Bin Laden himself then resisted the troops and was shot dead, but was not armed, he added.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And...this article is spot on the whole way with the following exert,
<a href="http://www.vancouversun.com/news/thewest/human+rights+boss+questions+legality+Laden+killing/4721045/story.html" target="_blank">http://www.vancouversun.com/news/thewest/h...1045/story.html</a>
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->"If he wasn't shooting at the soldiers, the killing should be investigated," Brad Adams, Human Rights Watch Asia director, said in Bangkok at the launch of a report on Thailand.
"People are saying that justice has been done, but justice has not been done. Justice is when you arrest someone and put them on trial."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And then this is when you have to ask what really went on, because I don't see how an unarmed man could pose a serious threat to Navy seals with guns,
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Carney stated that "resistance does not require a firearm" after a reporter pressed him on how bin Laden could have posed a threat.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Several sources state he was unarmed including the following,
<a href="http://www.vancouversun.com/news/thewest/human+rights+boss+questions+legality+Laden+killing/4721045/story.html" target="_blank">http://www.vancouversun.com/news/thewest/h...1045/story.html</a>
<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110503/ap_on_re_us/us_bin_laden" target="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110503/ap_on_re_us/us_bin_laden</a>
<a href="http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/05/03/osama-bin-laden-was-unarmed-when-shot-by-us-forces-115875-23105429/" target="_blank">http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2...15875-23105429/</a>
<a href="http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2011/05/20115319011610215.html" target="_blank">http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas...9011610215.html</a>
<a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/05/03/bin.laden.dead/index.html" target="_blank">http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/...dead/index.html</a>
The CNN article has a video, where there is "capture or kill" phrase used with the ambigious phrase I quoted above, killing someone posing no weaponable threat is just wrong.
And just search google, you get a crap load more.
It just seems like America did the world as great an injustice as they did a justice, and for me it seems like they've only re-affirmed themselves with the stereotypical "we got guns, we shall kill" attitude you can find in the UK. They shot a woman (believed to be his wife) in the leg, they could have done the same to him and captured him.
Maybe Osama's been weighing on their minds. Maybe the reporting of his death will allow them to function and keep on fighting more wars with less depression and fewer suicides.
Of course my personal solution would just be to not fight a 5+front war. (Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya...Syria? Iran?) The last country to fight a 2-front war didn't come out on top.
Like Thaldarin, I find it pretty hard to believe that an unarmed 54 year old man can provide enough resistance to make a team of "20-25" navy seals have no other choice but to kill him. They were carrying those zip-tie handcuff things which, again, for a team of navy seals, are going on a person whether they want it or not.
They were raiding the place for hard drives, USB sticks, DVDs and such too, so it's not like they couldn't spend an extra minute or so securing the main objective of the guy.
The cynic in me wants to say they executed him (a shot above the left eye sounds somewhat execution-y) and/or otherwise brutalised him in a way that made them not want the body on some kind of public display, hence the quick and so far very private disposal. But at the same time I don't want to be the kind of ###### who immediately disagrees with the official explanations.
honestly who cares what the league of nations says, paper tiger and all
Anyone who for a second wants to question the legality of said raid/shooting can sod off
Africa embassies
92 wtc
Yemen
etc
dude doesn't deserve your sympathy
and when you are in a fire fight, you aren't taking the time to give your opponents the benefit of the doubt... Female human shields or not
silly soft Euros
USA, we will free the **** out of you
Seals aren't police, they are special forces who train with live ammunition shooting at each other in tiny house replicas. The average seal shoots 6,000 live rounds training. They can't be expected to act like police, and they shouldn't cause it gets them killed, plastic wire reinforced zip ties or not
[edit]
why don't you guys do something productive? Like help me figure out what is wrong with my ns
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=112926" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index....howtopic=112926</a>
[/edit]
The Democratic senate leaders have stated none of the leads came from Gitmo nor "enhanced interrogation techniques" AKA torture.
not torture but a detainee making them aware of "high level trusted courier"
*White House Officials
honestly who cares what the league of nations says, paper tiger and all
Anyone who for a second wants to question the legality of said raid/shooting can sod off<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Maybe because we're not American, we don't automatically think guns and killing are the complete and resolute answer. There. I conformed the stereotypical view on you because you portrayed it.
London 07 Islamic extremists attack buses in London
I guess since the UK doesn't have guns we should shiv terrorists instead of shooting them?
It's just irksome that you call into question the USA killing this guy, if you don't think he had it coming what gives?
What do you suggest we do? Make a mockery of the Hague with a show trial? You expect special forces to act like police and read this guy his rights before taking action against him? He's had a hand in the killing of hundreds of citizens of my country, some more innocent than others... Sure play it safe make sure no toes get stepped on make sure T's are crossed and i's and j's get dotted but at the end of the day I'm not loosing sleep over this.
and yeah I capped on the UN for being vaginas and complaining about the legitimacy of shooting Bin Laden in the face when they ignore Sudan and Darfur and Libya and other parts of the world where real atrocities are being perpetrated upon populations usually by internal forces... Where is the white armored truck of the UN in these instances?
I'm a effing hippie and I was for gun control, but I realize it's an integral part of this nation and I've seen my own government attempt to perpetrate shady s*** upon it's own civilians and I changed my tune but that is neither here nor there.
not all Muricans are guns and F**** yeah
I never said shooting him in the face was the definitive correct answer, that is you putting words in my mouth. I'm just saying I have zero problem with what went down, and how it went down.
and so should you
unless yer a terrorist
are you?
[edit]
filter got me, noes
and I still need help troubleshooting my ns
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=112926" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index....howtopic=112926</a>
[/edit]
*White House Officials<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Did they know for sure he was unarmed before he was shot though?
<!--quoteo(post=1843943:date=May 4 2011, 08:19 PM:name=That_Annoying_Kid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (That_Annoying_Kid @ May 4 2011, 08:19 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843943"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->and I still need help troubleshooting my ns<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns/forums/index.php?showtopic=112926&st=0&p=1843772&#entry1843772" target="_blank">http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns/forums/ind...p;#entry1843772</a>
The 7/11 Bus/Tube station attacks have nothing to do with this. You're taking this off the tangent of being morally right to kill an unarmed man, whomever it may be to making it all about the "war on terror". Again though, when this is what your politicians make you do, stray off to, defer from the subjectiveness of what is right and ultimately what is wrong and then twist it, I can't say I'm surprised you'd do that.
If Navy Seals aren't trained well enough to capture someone unarmed or shoot a capture target in non-fatal way to subdue them, well, they've got to be the worst special forces task force in the world, with some bad training. It seems to me, these guys wanted to kill him and day by day, it's becoming blindingly obvious keeping the loss of human life to a minimum was never considered.
Zero problem with what happened? I'm sorry but having him more readily available to question is a much better way to fight your "war on terror". What has killing him achieved, ultimately? Nothing. The same operations still go on. Sure we may have some information from USB sticks, hard drives. Although ultimately, capturing and questioning is the best way to get the most accurate information on what has gone on with the guy in the last 10 years and further more, fight Al-Qaeda by using what information you can extrapolate from the man. Killing Bin Laden hasn't furthered the end goal what so ever, it's just made people feel good about themselves.
Zero problem with what happened? I'm sorry but having him more readily available to question is a much better way to fight your "war on terror". What has killing him achieved, ultimately? Nothing. The same operations still go on. Sure we may have some information from USB sticks, hard drives. Although ultimately, capturing and questioning is the best way to get the most accurate information on what has gone on with the guy in the last 10 years and further more, fight Al-Qaeda by using what information you can extrapolate from the man. Killing Bin Laden hasn't furthered the end goal what so ever, it's just made people feel good about themselves.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do you think he would have kindly answered to questions, or should "special questioning techniques" have been applied?
Personally I don't mind the fact he's been killed (if it was done correctly, without abuse and such), even though I would have probably preferred to see him captured, put on trial (swiftly) and then executed publicly.
I dunno, I've made several posts in here. Which one would you like me to elaborate on?
<!--quoteo(post=1843943:date=May 4 2011, 12:19 PM:name=That_Annoying_Kid)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (That_Annoying_Kid @ May 4 2011, 12:19 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843943"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's just irksome that you call into question the USA killing this guy, if you don't think he had it coming what gives?
What do you suggest we do? Make a mockery of the Hague with a show trial? You expect special forces to act like police and read this guy his rights before taking action against him? He's had a hand in the killing of hundreds of citizens of my country, some more innocent than others... Sure play it safe make sure no toes get stepped on make sure T's are crossed and i's and j's get dotted but at the end of the day I'm not loosing sleep over this.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Detainment and trial sounds like a marvelous idea actually. That's what they did with Hussein. So it wasn't feasible with bin Laden? What gives?
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->not all Muricans are guns<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If guns were people (just like corporations), more than half of all muricans would be guns. But no, not all of them. Maaaaan, think about it: If guns were people, whites would be a minority!
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I never said shooting him in the face was the definitive correct answer, that is you putting words in my mouth. I'm just saying I have zero problem with what went down, and how it went down.
and so should you
unless yer a terrorist
are you?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Only a terrorist would use such a flimsy ad hominem attack to shut someone up. Are you a terrorist?
Since they <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/04/us/politics/04torture.html" target="_blank">don't work</a>, I don't think torture techniques (don't hide it with fancy terminology) would be useful at all.