OSAMA BIN LADEN IS DEAD

[ufojoe]

yep, I've read all 19 pages and only one poster said he thinks OBL should not have been killed (UfoJoe) but instead captured and tortured for any possible info on other terrorists, then killed.

I didn't just say, "He should not have been killed." IF it was possible and IF he surrendered, I think he should have been captured. But I don't think that was their orders. IMO, it was a kill mission. Kill all the adult males in the house. And from what I have read, he didn't surrender. Only way to know what happened for sure is to release the helmet cam footage, starting with the part where OBL poked his head out on the third floor landing (when they shot and missed) and up to his final moments. There was no way to tell if any part of the house was booby tapped or OBL was able to set off any explosions to kill them all. So, maybe killing him was the best thing. And only option.

I know Obama had various specialists on hand in case he was captured but I think that was just for show.

Really not interested in debating this any more. Already stated all of my opinions on it.

[Morgan]

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/the-situation-room-cold-open/1327352

[dbucfan]

To be honest I am not interested in the who, what, where and whatfor. If OBL is dead I am happy. Simply put I don't care if we bent/broke a number of "international" rules/law." As long as that ass is dead and, observing how others care/utilize "international law", I don't give a fruck!

I'm kind of incredulous at the volume of posts spent on the "legality" of the whole operation considering WHO was taken out and without one American life lost... also, I'm certainly no expert on international law, but I'll go out on a limb and say this operation was just as "legal" internationally as the invasion and occupation of Iraq was.

Geez - let's hope the press feels it was a lot more legal than that - bc that crap was carried on for an awfully long time - even by some on this board....

[Fitz66]

Wonder how valid this source is:

http://socyberty.com/issues/white-house-insider-obama-hesitated-panetta-issued-order-to-kill-osama-bin-laden/#ixzz1LadyQ8xu

[JayAuggs]

Wonder how valid this source is:

http://socyberty.com/issues/white-house-insider-obama-hesitated-panetta-issued-order-to-kill-osama-bin-laden/#ixzz1LadyQ8xu

I have the same question you do, how valid is the source?

I'm not saying I'm anti or pro Obama here, but just looking at the source, its fairly obvious which side they lean.  Especially the quote regarding Obama's working as an absentee President - Anyone reading should take that into account.

Also, knowing military law, I also seriously doubt a U.S. military commander would go above the President's head.  The military's backbone is a chain of command process and not following orders is equivalent to treason.  I'm not naive enough to think it would never happen, but I just don't see it with Petraus, or something as big as killing Bin Laden by bombing Pakistan.

Just my two cents here though, as we'll likely never know the full facts (and to me, it really doesn't matter as long as OBL is dead)

[John Galt?]

yep, I've read all 19 pages and only one poster said he thinks OBL should not have been killed (UfoJoe) but instead captured and tortured for any possible info on other terrorists, then killed.

I didn't just say, "He should not have been killed." IF it was possible and IF he surrendered, I think he should have been captured. But I don't think that was their orders. IMO, it was a kill mission. Kill all the adult males in the house. And from what I have read, he didn't surrender. Only way to know what happened for sure is to release the helmet cam footage, starting with the part where OBL poked his head out on the third floor landing (when they shot and missed) and up to his final moments. There was no way to tell if any part of the house was booby tapped or OBL was able to set off any explosions to kill them all. So, maybe killing him was the best thing. And only option.

I know Obama had various specialists on hand in case he was captured but I think that was just for show.

Really not interested in debating this any more. Already stated all of my opinions on it.

Well I was just trying to keep it short so I paraphrased you a bit. Trying to avoid a white tiger type post

[dbucfan]

JG - did you read this one?  Big IF - but if it is true - wow, it will come out if true. 

http://socyberty.com/issues/white-house-insider-obama-hesitated-panetta-issued-order-to-kill-osama-bin-laden/#ixzz1LadyQ8xu

[John Galt?]

JG - did you read this one?  Big IF - but if it is true - wow, it will come out if true. 

http://socyberty.com/issues/white-house-insider-obama-hesitated-panetta-issued-order-to-kill-osama-bin-laden/#ixzz1LadyQ8xu

 

[dbucfan]

It tracks alongside the thread you initiated... how odd with the timing

[John Galt?]

It tracks alongside the thread you initiated... how odd with the timing

I found the Obama losing "it" article while reading your link. Same author.

[dbucfan]

It tracks alongside the thread you initiated... how odd with the timing

I found the Obama losing "it" article while reading your link. Same author.

On the face of it, sounds like a guy with either an agenda (most likely) or someone deep inside the WH with both access and intent to ruin Barry.  Agenda to attempt to ruin the executive branch would seem more likely.  Will keep an eye out for someone to collaborate - until then iffy imvho

Did you look at the other articles/links offered - 90% the blogger has a great imagination and is hoping something matches somewhat with someone else's report.  Sorry I wasted the time of others...

[John Galt?]

Sounds like the author or his "source" has a serious vendetta against Valerie Jarrett.

[dbucfan]

Sounds like the author or his "source" has a serious vendetta against Valerie Jarrett.

A good target - but now the veracity is an issue.

[jbear]

To be honest I am not interested in the who, what, where and whatfor. If OBL is dead I am happy. Simply put I don't care if we bent/broke a number of "international" rules/law." As long as that ass is dead and, observing how others care/utilize "international law", I don't give a fruck!

 I'm certainly no expert on international law, but I'll go out on a limb and say this operation was just as "legal" internationally as the invasion and occupation of Iraq was.

Sure but where was the left in regard to the "injustice" to Iraq at that time?  Beating a dead horse I know. 

Anyway, I've all but given up on a democracy run by people.  Human beings are flawed and manage to lie even to themselves, ussually going so far as to make objective thought an impossibility..... I just wish people would try to get better, try to learn and try to be objective about what they want to happen and how far they'd be willing to go to achieve that end.  Then talk about it openly without all the "who's side are you on?" BS.  Most of the posters in this thread get that but there are still a few stragglers who pigheadedly refuse to see the obvious.

The obvious being, (for those few)... Insisting on a yes/no, good/bad resolution to a complex issue (ie. It's ok to invade another country to kill/assasinate a bad man) is not condusive to openminded, objective thought, or at least the attempt at it.  Thats obvious to some, lost on most.   

Edit:  Only the first line was directed at Klink.  I had in mind, a certain bigmouth who shall remain nameless at this time.