Killing ben laden isn't THAT big a deal

Rick

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
1,844
Although it's worth something because ben laden was an intelligent mastermind, the bigger deal was the infrastructure and capabilities of his organization. These had been relentlessly whittled away during the Bush administration. Also, al qaeda had begun to lose support among muslims because of its killing of muslims in iraq and elsewhere. The loss of ben laden doesn't mean nothing to his organization, but now of course another islamofascist will take over. Notice that terror attacks in the US disappeared after 9-11, during the Bush era, but have come roaring back with the accession of appeaser obozo and his appearance of weakness: the attempted detroit airport bombing, the Fort Hood killings (a mass murder where the lib media neither used the word "terrorist" or mentioned that the killings were by a muslim) and the attempted times square bombing.
 
Werbung:
in other words since Obama was in charge when it happened its not a big deal...had a republican been in charge you would whoop it up.

And way to show ignorance of just about evrything in the area of terrorism....Just ignore the fact that the BIGGEST attack happened under Bush...but yet pretend that one does not count...and ignore other attempts that failed, the Shoe Bomber, for example must not count as well? Also there was that little anthrax attack ...or does terrorism not count if not done but Muslims?

And the Fort Hood Shooting....a event that happened do to a loan wolf under no orders by al Qaeda, and by a US Officer....becuse it was logical for Obama to just at random have all of our troops double checked for no reason and found out.

Just say Bin Laden is Dead, its a good thing, and Obama played a role in it. And even though you don't like Obama, he did something good here that we have failed to do for almost 10 years now.
 
You are both right...

Killing Bin Laden is not going to suddenly mean terrorism no longer exists. Many recent attack attempts have come from a branch in Yemen that really has nothing to do with Bin Laden.

But, killing Bin Laden is also a major victory for the United States, and should be celebrated...regardless of who is in office.
 
in other words since Obama was in charge when it happened its not a big deal...had a republican been in charge you would whoop it up.

So you raise the white flag, unwilling to debate the facts? Not surprised. :rolleyes:

And way to show ignorance of just about evrything in the area of terrorism....Just ignore the fact that the BIGGEST attack happened under Bush...but yet pretend that one does not count...and ignore other attempts that failed, the Shoe Bomber, for example must not count as well? Also there was that little anthrax attack ...or does terrorism not count if not done but Muslims?

The stuff you mention happened early in Bush's tenure - when he still was saddled with the legacy of Clinton's dismantling of CIA capabilities and encouragement of world-wide islamofascism with his hands-off approach, and creating the wall of separation between the FBI and intelligence organizations. After 9-11, Bush had the political clout to reverse all this leftwing crap and get the patriot act passed, etc.

And the Fort Hood Shooting....a event that happened do to a loan wolf under no orders by al Qaeda, and by a US Officer....becuse it was logical for Obama to just at random have all of our troops double checked for no reason and found out.

That he didn't take orders from al qaeda is neither here nor there - there are many islamofascist actors and organizations. Also, your "checked for no reason" just reveals your stupidity and ignorance of events - the IF officer gave MANY indications that he was losing it and hated the US, but in the hyper-Pee See world of the obozo era, everyone around him knew they shouldn't say anything about it or be called a "racist", etc. In fact, everyone knew even AFTER he killed everyone they shouldn't mention the muslim connection.

Just say Bin Laden is Dead, its a good thing, and Obama played a role in it. And even though you don't like Obama, he did something good here that we have failed to do for almost 10 years now.

That osama is dead is not without consequence, but the credit goes to the military and intelligence men whose biggest achievement was probably to patiently tutor obozo into reality and get him to sign an OK.
 
You are both right...

Killing Bin Laden is not going to suddenly mean terrorism no longer exists. Many recent attack attempts have come from a branch in Yemen that really has nothing to do with Bin Laden.

But, killing Bin Laden is also a major victory for the United States, and should be celebrated...regardless of who is in office.

How is it a major victory? I've seen middle east expert commentators who say for about the last five years, osama had become largely a figurehead, and wasn't involved in planning operations. In going after osama, obozo was fighting the last war - it was something that would have had a REAL effect if Clinton had done it back in the 1990s, instead of firing cruise missiles at african aspirin factories. It's basically a media even to show a "tough" obozo in the runup to the 2012 election, to cancel out people's memories of him running around the world bowing, scraping, and apologizing.
 
Killing Osama is a psychological victory, much more than a military one.

One more dead terrorist is always a good thing, and Osama has a very long history of masterminding many horrific terrorist attacks.

Obama deserves credit for allowing the military to do it's job, unlike Clinton when Slick Willie had four different opportunities to capture or kill Osama back in the 90s.

The whole "burial at sea" thing is really strange. I want to see pictures of Osama's bullet-riddled body!

Playing politics with this great news is ridiculous. Doesn't ANYTHING rise above partisan politics anymore?
 
Killing Osama is a psychological victory, much more than a military one.

One more dead terrorist is always a good thing, and Osama has a very long history of masterminding many horrific terrorist attacks.

Obama deserves credit for allowing the military to do it's job, unlike Clinton when Slick Willie had four different opportunities to capture or kill Osama back in the 90s.

The whole "burial at sea" thing is really strange. I want to see pictures of Osama's bullet-riddled body!

Playing politics with this great news is ridiculous. Doesn't ANYTHING rise above partisan politics anymore?

I am sure in a few weeks or less you will get to see the pics of the body...they are making sure they don't give any intel away or something first.

and 2nd...the whole bill clinton just let him get away thing is a load...But at least one attempt we learned something from...Bin Laden was expected to be at that training camp we light up with cruis missles...but we told Pakistan about the attack to make sure they did not think it was a attack on them by India...all the sudden Bin Laden is missed by a hour...many in the intel community don't think it was just chance that we missed him....The whole Sudan had him and was going to turn him over is a lie...check the 911 commison for more on that.." Former Sudanese officials claim that Sudan offered to expel Bin Ladin to the United States. Clinton administration officials deny ever receiving such an offer. We have not found any reliable evidence to support the Sudanese claim.

Sudan did offer to expel Bin Ladin to Saudi Arabia and asked the Saudis to pardon him. U.S. officials became aware of these secret discussions, certainly by March 1996. The evidence suggests that the Saudi government wanted Bin Ladin expelled from Sudan, but would not agree to pardon him. The Saudis did not want Bin Ladin back in their country at all.


there was one other time I know where we where about to strike...but declined after it was found out that it was going to endanger EAU Royalty...its one thing if you kill a civilan on accident...its a different when they happen to be a prince.....

But yes its more of a psychological victory...but thats actuly in some cases more important when your dealing with terrorism, or COIN.
 
I am sure in a few weeks or less you will get to see the pics of the body...they are making sure they don't give any intel away or something first.

and 2nd...the whole bill clinton just let him get away thing is a load...But at least one attempt we learned something from...Bin Laden was expected to be at that training camp we light up with cruis missles...but we told Pakistan about the attack to make sure they did not think it was a attack on them by India...all the sudden Bin Laden is missed by a hour...many in the intel community don't think it was just chance that we missed him....The whole Sudan had him and was going to turn him over is a lie...check the 911 commison for more on that.." Former Sudanese officials claim that Sudan offered to expel Bin Ladin to the United States. Clinton administration officials deny ever receiving such an offer. We have not found any reliable evidence to support the Sudanese claim.

Sudan did offer to expel Bin Ladin to Saudi Arabia and asked the Saudis to pardon him. U.S. officials became aware of these secret discussions, certainly by March 1996. The evidence suggests that the Saudi government wanted Bin Ladin expelled from Sudan, but would not agree to pardon him. The Saudis did not want Bin Ladin back in their country at all.


there was one other time I know where we where about to strike...but declined after it was found out that it was going to endanger EAU Royalty...its one thing if you kill a civilan on accident...its a different when they happen to be a prince.....

But yes its more of a psychological victory...but thats actuly in some cases more important when your dealing with terrorism, or COIN.

So do you have some kind of "Master Book Of Yeah Buts and So Whats" that you consult when somebody criticizes one of your hero liberal politicians?

It must be a really thick book. There's so many liberals to defend, not only for their political blunders but for their private blunders.
 
So do you have some kind of "Master Book Of Yeah Buts and So Whats" that you consult when somebody criticizes one of your hero liberal politicians?

It must be a really thick book. There's so many liberals to defend, not only for their political blunders but for their private blunders.

yes its called the know the facts , its located in about 8 boxes of books in the other room I have.

when one side has so many stories it likes to spin and pretend are true, it helps to know them. I did not like Clinton, I still am not a fan of him...but facts are facts. The Republican myth Clinton just did nothing to get bin Laden is False...The Idea that somehow Bush has no responsiblity for 911 becuse of Clinton...is False...and that Clinton did do enough ( not the same as nothing) is true...But the political reality is , Clinton was focused on it, and that most of the US was not. And Bush fell into that trap when he took office...not doing enough to stop him...untill 3000 dead Americans woke him up.
 
As most people here know, pfs has his own "facts", the ones that have currency in the Lib Parallel Uniiverse. :D Bill Clinton's decimation of the CIA, his destruction of its personnel, operations, and capabilities is well known by just about everyone else. It is this wreckage and degradation of the main US weapon against islamofascists that Bush inherited in his first year on the job - 2001. When you destroy such a key government agency, you can't wave a magic wand, say "Shazaam!", and recreate it in a second. Below is an account of Bubba and the CIA by a pulitzer prize winning author. The other incidents that are emblematic of Clinton's weakening of US intelligence capability, like bombing the african aspirin factory, or bouncing around the rubble in a long-abandoned al qaeda camp with million dollar a copy cruise missiles, is not denied my any serious writer or official.

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/4/20/11545.shtml

Author James Risen won the Pulitzer Prize on Tuesday for his much ballyhooed New York Times report last December that revealed President Bush's previously secret terrorist surveillance program - a revelation he uncovered while researching his book "State of War."

In the same book, however, Risen makes an equally explosive claim about President Clinton's relationship with the CIA - which his editors at the Times have so far declined to cover.

Upon taking power in 1993, Risen reports, the Clinton administration "began slashing the intelligence budget in search of a peace dividend, and Bill Clinton showed almost no interest in intelligence matters."

The agency cutbacks combined with presidential disinterest took their toll almost immediately.

"Over a three-or-four-year period in the early-to-mid 1990s," reports Risen, "virtually an entire generation of CIA officers - the people who had won the Cold War - quit or retired. One CIA veteran compared the agency to an airline that had lost all of is senior pilots . . . "

After Clinton CIA Director John Deutch cashiered several senior officers over a scandal in Guatamala, the situation got even worse.

"Morale [at the CIA] plunged to new lows, and the agency became paralyzed by an aversion to high-risk espionage operations for fear they would lead to political flaps. Less willing to take big risks, the CIA was less able to recruit spies in dangerous places such as Iraq."

The Clinton era of risk aversion also hobbled CIA efforts to get Osama bin Laden. In early 1998, Risen says, the agency was prepared to launch a special operation to kidnap the al Qaeda chief in Afghanistan.

"To be sure the operation was high risk, and there was a strong possibility that it would be so messy that bin Laden would be killed rather than captured. [CIA Director George] Tenet and the CIA's lawyers worried deeply about that issue; they believed the covert action finding on al Qaeda that President Clinton had signed authorized only bin Laden's capture, not his death."

Frustrated by restrictions that made dealing with the big challenges too difficult, the agency turned its energy to lesser problems.

Reports Risen: "Thanks to Vice President Al Gore, for example, the CIA briefly made the global environment one of is priorities."
 
Well done, Rick. I am SHOCKED that the New York Times refuses to allow this Clinton/CIA story to see the light of day (not!).
 
As most people here know, pfs has his own "facts", the ones that have currency in the Lib Parallel Uniiverse. :D Bill Clinton's decimation of the CIA, his destruction of its personnel, operations, and capabilities is well known by just about everyone else. It is this wreckage and degradation of the main US weapon against islamofascists that Bush inherited in his first year on the job - 2001. When you destroy such a key government agency, you can't wave a magic wand, say "Shazaam!", and recreate it in a second. Below is an account of Bubba and the CIA by a pulitzer prize winning author. The other incidents that are emblematic of Clinton's weakening of US intelligence capability, like bombing the african aspirin factory, or bouncing around the rubble in a long-abandoned al qaeda camp with million dollar a copy cruise missiles, is not denied my any serious writer or official.

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/4/20/11545.shtml

care to post more incorrect info? about 2 min of actul research and you know figure out you don't have a clue...but since you long since have proved you don't care about facts...I realy don't see the point...people who actually care about this stuff, and not just use it to attack politicians know how much crap your shoveling.

your one of the people who screawed wag the dog when we did anything, and then cried about not doing anything after the fact I can tell. partisan hack job.
 
care to post more incorrect info? about 2 min of actul research and you know figure out you don't have a clue...but since you long since have proved you don't care about facts...I realy don't see the point...people who actually care about this stuff, and not just use it to attack politicians know how much crap your shoveling.

your one of the people who screawed wag the dog when we did anything, and then cried about not doing anything after the fact I can tell. partisan hack job.

Notice another thing about pfs? He claims to have "facts", but when you make assertions, he never comes back with "you're wrong, and here's the rebuttal".

Nah, it's just "Duh, you're wrong", and the only reason he has is that it doesn't match up with what he read in the huffington post. :D
 
Werbung:
How is it a major victory? I've seen middle east expert commentators who say for about the last five years, osama had become largely a figurehead, and wasn't involved in planning operations. In going after osama, obozo was fighting the last war - it was something that would have had a REAL effect if Clinton had done it back in the 1990s, instead of firing cruise missiles at african aspirin factories. It's basically a media even to show a "tough" obozo in the runup to the 2012 election, to cancel out people's memories of him running around the world bowing, scraping, and apologizing.

My response is a bit delayed, but here it goes anyway.

Bin Laden's death is important in a symbolic way...and if you believe the rhetoric coming out that he was still involved in planning etc, then it was important in a tactical way as well.

But, regardless, I think his death is important mostly for symbolic reasons.
 
Back
Top