Bin laden whacked!!!!!

[stainless1911]

More or less. Im neither a bush fan, nor an obama fan.

I would like to modify our entire system, fed, state, local, to prohibit terms like "democrat," "republican," and so on. Let people examine the individual, the issue, and then make a decision.

 

[Grapeshot]

These two Bin Laden threads are freaking hilarious. Righties are an odd breed of purported 'thinker'. I would recommend some of you properly ventilate the room where you clean your firearms.

Your line of - so-called 'reasoning' - is, hmm, cute.

I almost forgot to ask - are you stating that the military, and intelligence community are not under the control of the President of the United States, and they are two rogue Government entities that 'they' directly refused to follow the policies of the President, and acted on their own, without any direction from the President?

Hmmmmm - OK, I'll accept that I am seen as cute my some.:lol:

Bush didn't do us any favors with the economy.

O_mama ratcheted up to a fine art the plunder of the American people.

Bush declared War on Terrorism - created Gitmo and allowed the "techniques."

O_mama took a kinder gentler approach to our disagreement, promised to close Gitmo and stopped the "techniques" and our intelligence community and military managed to deliver in spite of the handicaps - maybe left the anointed one with no choice - yes that is indeed possible.

O_mama, the "hero of the day," made a political move IMO and deserves little or no credit for what others (not on his team) accomplished.

Strangely to some perhaps, I don't rank this event that extremely satisfying - if the entire terrorist network collapsed as a result of this then yes, but that is hardly the case.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

Not on the way to the states. Buried at sea! Using the Muslim respect issue of a burial within 24hrs.
IMO he deserved no respect in his burial...ground into hamburger and fed to the hogs maybe but not to pollute the ocean.

I hope they kept pictures...no body...no proof of death.

JMO

The reason they dumped him in the sea, apparently, is that they found that Saddam's grave has become a some sort of 'shrine', and they did not want Bin Laden to have a 'shrine' - neither do I. Respecting religious practice in this instance, considering Bin Laden, and his religious belief is known throughout the Muslim world, would be interpreted as an attack against Muslims. The decision is a well-balanced decision, IMO.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

Hmmmmm - OK, I'll accept that I am seen as cute my some.:lol:

Bush didn't do us any favors with the economy.

O_mama ratcheted up to a fine art the plunder of the American people.

Bush declared War on Terrorism - created Gitmo and allowed the "techniques."

O_mama took a kinder gentler approach to our disagreement, promised to close Gitmo and stopped the "techniques" and our intelligence community and military managed to deliver in spite of the handicaps - maybe left the anointed one with no choice - yes that is indeed possible.

O_mama, the "hero of the day," made a political move IMO and deserves little or no credit for what others (not on his team) accomplished.

Strangely to some perhaps, I don't rank this event that extremely satisfying - if the entire terrorist network collapsed as a result of this then yes, but that is hardly the case.

Other than your obvious Hannity terminology, I will respond.

'Techniques', you mean 'torture'?

Gitmo is obviously a legal conundrum, unfortunately. I am not sure if Bush intentionally created such a legal conundrum, or accidently, regardless, 'it' is one.

Aside from your response being packed with hyperbole, I get what you are saying, and of course I disagree with many of your assertions such as, President Obama "plundering Americans," and that President Obama 'handicapped" Gitmo, and the intelligence community. Apparently whatever President Obama may have changed with regard to policies, it did not compromise 'our' ability to track Bin Laden down, and put a bullet in his head.

 

[stainless1911]

+1.

They saw that one coming. A wise move IMO, a grave would empower terrorists for decades.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

I should mention that President Obama amping up the war in Afghanistan, ordering Pirates to be sniped, and putting Bin Laden down, makes it hard for Republicans to argue that Democrats are 'soft' on national security. I am sure Republicans will attempt to argue that Democrats are 'soft' on national security. Americans aren't as stupid as Republicans look.

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. special forces set out to kill Osama bin Laden and dump his body in the sea to make it harder for the al Qaeda founder to become a martyr, U.S. national security officials told Reuters on Monday.
"This was a kill operation," one of the officials said."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_binla...lYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDdXN0ZWFtMzlzbWlz

 

[DontTreadOnMeVa]

Other than your obvious Hannity terminology, I will respond.
Apparently whatever President Obama may have changed with regard to policies, it did not compromise 'our' ability to track Bin Laden down, and put a bullet in his head.

...don't be so sure. Looks like the original tip may well be another thing that Obama 'inherited' from Bush! If Obama had been running things from the start, we may well have not gotten that tip, and Osama would still be hanging out in Pakistan.


----------------------


http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/05/02/2197802/tip-that-led-to-bin-laden-may.html

Tip to bin Laden may have come from Guantánamo

BY TOM LASSETER

MCCLATCHY NEWSPAPERS

WASHINGTON — More than 8,000 miles from the walled compound where U.S. forces killed Osama bin Laden, some of the men who helped make it happen are probably sitting today in cells at Guantánamo.
While it's not publicly known which detainees gave CIA or Guantánamo interrogators the nom de guerre of one of the few al Qaeda couriers trusted by bin Laden, a senior U.S. official confirmed that crucial piece of intelligence was gathered from "detainees in the post-9/11 period."

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

...don't be so sure. Looks like the original tip may well be another thing that Obama 'inherited' from Bush! If Obama had been running things from the start, we may well have not gotten that tip, and Osama would still be hanging out in Pakistan.


----------------------


http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/05/02/2197802/tip-that-led-to-bin-laden-may.html

Tip to bin Laden may have come from Guantánamo

BY TOM LASSETER

MCCLATCHY NEWSPAPERS

WASHINGTON — More than 8,000 miles from the walled compound where U.S. forces killed Osama bin Laden, some of the men who helped make it happen are probably sitting today in cells at Guantánamo.
While it's not publicly known which detainees gave CIA or Guantánamo interrogators the nom de guerre of one of the few al Qaeda couriers trusted by bin Laden, a senior U.S. official confirmed that crucial piece of intelligence was gathered from "detainees in the post-9/11 period."

The interesting thing is that Bush had 7 years to take out Bin Laden, knowing he was in Pakastan, but no boots on the ground, nothing - in fact, Bush claimed to not think about Bin Laden much. Obama does what...scopes out Bin laden's compound, puts two choppers on the ground, kills Bin Laden, and dumps his worthless a$$ in the sea.

Let's say that a Gitmo detainy offered the information on Bin Laden's whereabouts, when was this detainee captured? If he was captured under Bush, then why didn't Bush jump on it, or why wasn't Bush's policy of water-boarding extracting this crucial information of where Bin Laden is?

 

[Grapeshot]

Aside from your response being packed with hyperbole, I get what you are saying, and of course I disagree with many of your assertions such as, President Obama "plundering Americans," and that President Obama 'handicapped" Gitmo, and the intelligence community. Apparently whatever President Obama may have changed with regard to policies, it did not compromise 'our' ability to track Bin Laden down, and put a bullet in his head.

Don't confuse simile or metaphor with hyperbole.

If Bush is to blame for all of our or O_mama's woes, then too he should be credited at least in some part for the successes.

If so strong on national security et al - where is our border security? Jus' sayin'.

Please, you may have the last word - otherwise I return you to your scheduled program.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

Don't confuse simile or metaphor with hyperbole.

If Bush is to blame for all of our or O_mama's woes, then too he should be credited at least in some part for the successes.

If so strong on national security et al - where is our border security? Jus' sayin'.

Please, you may have the last word - otherwise I return you to your scheduled program.

First, I did not say that Bush is to blame for all of Obama's woes. Do you refute that Bush overseen the greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression? If so, link me up, I am willing to read the information.

Second, you degrade your arguements by your disrespectful reference of the President as "O_mama's." It is not only an attack against the President personally, but most significantly against the Office, and the Nation. Where would a term like that come from anyhow, if you don't mind?

Also, I have not read(e) that we do not have border security. has there been some change in border policy that I have missed in my daily reading? Link, please.

 

[Grapeshot]

First, I did not say that Bush is to blame for all of Obama's woes. Do you refute that Bush overseen the greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression? If so, link me up, I am willing to read the information.

Second, you degrade your arguements by your disrespectful reference of the President as "O_mama's." It is not only an attack against the President personally, but most significantly against the Office, and the Nation. Where would a term like that come from anyhow, if you don't mind?

Also, I have not read(e) that we do not have border security. has there been some change in border policy that I have missed in my daily reading? Link, please.

Will only respond to the "second" point -

I have not spoken or written his name since the election and will not. Simply leaving a letter out of his name is IMO, not disrespectful. If I were caused to meet him face to face, I would refer to him as Mr. President.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

Will only respond to the "second" point -

I have not spoken or written his name since the election and will not. Simply leaving a letter out of his name is IMO, not disrespectful. If I were caused to meet him face to face, I would refer to him as Mr. President.

I would accept that, but it is obvious, if you look at the spelling, that you are not simply leaving the letter 'b' out of his name. You have spelled the name "O_mama's" which by your explanation would spell 'Obmama's'. The least you could do is not state that you are doing one thing when it is obvious you are doing another. I am wondering what you are attempting to imply, or mean by your choice of lettering of the name you use in place of Obama's actual last name. Could you explain?

It appears that not only with you, but with a number of people that I have seen spell Obama's name a number of different ways, other than how his name is spelled, is that, there seems to be an attempt on delegitimizing either his position, or who he in fact is, which is a man with the last name "Obama."

I am genuinely curious if you do this type of 'thing', or have done this type of name alteration with other Presidents that you did not like, or did not support, and if so, how did you spell them, and why? Also, why his name is so detestable that you would not even verbalize it - doesn't that sound odd to you, that a person would go to such lengths?

There are a number of people on here that likely view my calling you out on this as just another 'leftist' rant, so be it. I am simply trying to reach down into, and understand why a person would go out of their way to do some thing like that. Particularly people who claim to respect the office, while at the same time attempt to undermine it by disrespecting the President who currently occupies the office - who, keep in mind, was voted in by a majority of Americans.

I really hope that you offer a honest, open response, unlike some of the detractors on here who have the nasty habit of placing implications, and hyberbole in their responses, and then when called out, deny, deny, deny, like the intellectual cowards that they are. And I say "intellectual cowards" because people know precicely what they are implying, what they are typing, and to deny it, and act as if their implication is without some underlying 'thing' is cowardice as far as I am concerned.

 

[slowfiveoh]

Beretta has unfortunately proven herself to be a huge fan of Saul Alinsky, and is a notorious proponent of communism and socialism.

With such Gems as:

"People need to be controlled"

or

Well...just read my signature.

Her argumentation is circular and repetitive, as if the repeating of the same thing over and over again will somehow validate her points.
She lacks the capacity for true abstract thought.
She will state one thing in one conversation, then completely state the opposite while somehow trying to justify the previous comment through some twisting or contorting.
She will take something you said, then completely remove your comments to change the meaning to something egregious.
Beretta has no integrity with her comments whatsoever.

For the record, she blatantly twisted and contorted one of my statements once, and the moderators forced her to immediately remove it because she did not quote me precisely, and altered my comments to change the meaning.


She has a terrible track record.

Why you people respond to her self-inflated bleating is beyond me. It's like arguing with a 4 year old who won't cop to leaving her ice cream on the couch.


In regards to the successes of the US Navy and the operators of Seal Team 6, I lend out a hefty Army sourced HOOAH.

Now go home and shag your wives, grill some burgers, and enjoy your decorations. Your country and fellow servicemen could not be prouder.

 

[rotorhead]

You people do realize you're arguing over the stupidest junk, right?

If anyone thinks there is anything more than a cosmetic difference between Bush's doctrines and Obama's doctrines as the apply to the hunt for Bin Laden, they really have no clue as to what's going on out there.

This stuff changes by the minute and if anyone thinks you're getting updated as it happens, you've got some serious issues. We're talking about nearly ten years of ever-changing actions. Through it all both administrations used the press and the nation to it's advantage in the hunt with what they've released concerning it. Add to that the other BS such as the "wikileaks" (an operation which I personally feel was by design, as well) and you get an even more convoluted picture, all of which is designed to work toward the advantage of the people who have a direct role in the mission.

The twists and turns, the dead ends, the progress and the setbacks, the press releases and the "leaks", all of it. It's wrapped up sometimes by design, and sometimes as reaction to immediate factors- but virtually all of it is intentionally set on our tables for digestion as determined by those who actively play the game.

So, keep arguing. You're not hurting a thing. In fact, you're helping.

Or, you could wake up a little and realize that you, as worldly and informed as you think you are, are so far in the dark that you don't have a clue about what's going on.

I include myself, by the way, so don't feel alone

 

[j4l]

^^^100% correct.

 

[Gunslinger]

The interesting thing is that Bush had 7 years to take out Bin Laden, knowing he was in Pakastan, but no boots on the ground, nothing - in fact, Bush claimed to not think about Bin Laden much. Obama does what...scopes out Bin laden's compound, puts two choppers on the ground, kills Bin Laden, and dumps his worthless a$$ in the sea.

Let's say that a Gitmo detainy offered the information on Bin Laden's whereabouts, when was this detainee captured? If he was captured under Bush, then why didn't Bush jump on it, or why wasn't Bush's policy of water-boarding extracting this crucial information of where Bin Laden is?

Obooba didn't do d***. The intel apparatus is virtually the same as under Bush. SEAL Team 6 has been around since 'Nam. Bush started the process, obooba did nothing but let the process take its course. Intel existed since last Aug. What took our "commander" in chief so long? Busy getting his birth "certificate" drawn up? The credit goes to the intel community, not only the CIA but several others, and our military. That obooba will try to portray himself as the 'hero' merely comments on him as a clown. Waiting for the picture of him with an M-4 in his hand...

 

[beebobby]

Bush gave up (at least publicly) trying to find him.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1244536/posts
Cheney didn't care either.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming."
—Dick Cheney, "Interview of the Vice President by Tony Snow", March 29, 2006

President Obama, thanks for not giving up on this campaign promise.
" And we must make it clear that if Pakistan cannot or will not act, we will take out high-level terrorist targets like bin Laden if we have them in our sights."

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

Obooba didn't do dick. The intel apparatus is virtually the same as under Bush. SEAL Team 6 has been around since 'Nam. Bush started the process, obooba did nothing but let the process take its course. Intel existed since last Aug. What took our "commander" in chief so long? Busy getting his birth "certificate" drawn up? The credit goes to the intel community, not only the CIA but several others, and our military. That obooba will try to portray himself as the 'hero' merely comments on him as a clown. Waiting for the picture of him with an M-4 in his hand...

First you state that Obama did nothing, then you state that it was Bush's 'process', then you point out that the intel existed since August, asking why Obama did nothing, then attribute all of the credit to the 'intel community'. So which is it? Why would you ask why Obama didn't do anything in August, if Obama had nothing to do with this. By your assertion the question should be asked of the 'intel community', that is, since Obama has nothing to do with, and is apparently not connect to the 'intel community', according to your response.

Don't worry hon, I am sure your response makes sense to 'Slow'.

And this whole time I thought the President oversees the military, and CIA, considering, He hires, and fires the leaders of the military, and CIA.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

"People need to be controlled"

Aside from the improper quotation of my statement, considering you removed the statement from its context - yes, generally, people need to be controlled which is why we have laws (*not all laws are 'necessary'), and why we have MSNBC, and FOX News for the average American to consume, and be directed, and told what to think.

It has been some time since you placed my 'responses' in your signature, but I will respond to them, so that people understand what the responses mean, and offer you a peek into Linguistics.

Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady
Personal responsibility is a facade created by religious people in particular...




(r)eligious people manufacture the notion of 'personal responsibility', that is different than (R)eligion manufacturing the notion of 'personal responsibility'. The reason I point this out is because only an individual can manufacture some 'thing'. A (R)eligion cannot manufacture any 'thing' because (R)eligion is merely an Institution, ruled by individuals, but (R)eligion does not manufacture any 'thing', it merely has policies that have been manfactured by (r)eligioous people, implemented, and attributed to a particular system of 'belief'.

Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady
Religion uses i[t] as a tool, they did not create it.





Yes, (R)eligion uses (acts as a symbol of) the notion of 'personal responsibility' as a tool, but indirectly. Remember, (R)eligion is an Institution. (r)eligiouos people manufacture 'notions', as well as (R)eligion.

"(r)eligious people," and "(R)eligion" are not the same 'thing'.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

[/QUOTE]

For the record, she blatantly twisted and contorted one of my statements once, and the moderators forced her to immediately remove it because she did not quote me precisely, and altered my comments to change the meaning.

I have to call BS on this line. I made a distinction between what you had posted, and the changes that I made ("...,[],...etc.). I did remove your statement from its context, as you have removed my statements from their context. It was clear where I added, and subtracted words from your statements which I placed in my signature, then later took down.

To be honest, I didn't think you were going to be such a boob about the signature, considering you skirt the line when it comes to personally attacking people. Don't worry though, I will not hold it against you if you want to get your toys together, and go home. I would be upset about it too, not