Osama bin Laden is dead!

EDouble

Will suck off black men for a dime
the administration is on egg shells to be politically correct nobody realy gives a fuck if he was armed or wasnt armed

regardless of what They say you cant correlate the military operation with what the government says to the media Why it happened, thats what they do


Im not getting in to the pictures but as far as comparison between Osama & Sadamm you can see just how they handled them personally, they couldnt assassinate Sadamm
 

Ristol

New York's Ambassador
Despite my elation upon this guy's death--proud to admit that (barbarism has its place, guys)--I am worried about the "revision" of what happened. First, Bin Laden was armed, used his wife as a shield, and went out in a blaze. Suddenly the White House press secretary tells us that none of that happened. No wife shield. No blaze of glory. And most insanely, BIn Laden was not armed. Now, I sincerely don't care what happened to Osama Bin Laden for his own sake; you couldn't pay me to. What bothers me is that President Obama, like his predecessor, does not have to follow the law when it's inconvenient for him. There are laws against "kill missions" in the Rules of Engagement. There are laws against killing unarmed prisoners too. But it's the wild west out there in regards to killing wanted terrorists. Or anyone the president thinks may be a terrorist. (Fantastically, this includes Americans! Awesome! The president can kill any American he feels like! And unlike some of you, I'm not making this shit up.)

That's why we have laws in the first place: because they're better than going with our guts and shooting to kill. People seek vengeance, the law in its majesty does not. The U.S. has broken international law so many times over the past ten years. Did we really need to break it when we killed Osama Bin Laden?
 

masta247

Well-Known Member
Staff member
^Yes. Also it's not that the "terrorist attacks" were there without a reason. Actually at times I think that these "terrorists" had a better reason for killing than Americans often have. At this point I'm not sure which side did more bad.
Americans killed way more innocent people in the middle east than the other way around. With no legitimate reason really. It's just that America can organize a slaughter with a smile on "in the name of freedom" - say what? America is amongst the last countries that bring freedom. However if anyone does something against their actions it's "terrorism".
Now watching Americans act like it's the biggest party in their history is pissing even me off. After what happened and what everyone seems to say now picture this - if someone's a "terrorist", a guy from a country that lost shitloads of lives to America's "terrorist" actions guess what that person would want to do if he had means to do so?
If someone murdered my innocent family and then killed a guy who sought revenge for that and then danced on their graves the least I'd try to do would be to spoil the party.

Now killing Bin Laden was irrelevant as far as Al-Qaeda's strength goes. He was just an ill, smart guy who was actually quite pro-American, who knew American government better than most politicians.
Americans tend to be ignorant and think like it was a single-guy army and Bin Laden was the root of all evil.
In reality it's a Hydra with thousands of armed people who can see what happens and then watch American news. Bin Laden was (apparently) only one of them.

Most people don't even care to see the whole story, they just take what they are given and push the propaganda further. On both sides actually. The whole "terrorism" matter and American rush for freedom is one of the most ridiculous and terrible things in contemporary history, yet Americans and the majority of western world fail to see it as anything other than righteous actions against tyranny of the "lesser world", like there are no thinking human beings there.
If you bomb and kill thousands of innocent people and raid their homes it's okay, if they find means to do even a little payback for their horrors it's "the biggest tragedy in the history of mankind".
 

Pittsey

Knock, Knock...
Staff member
The story seems to be continually changing. That is why I can't believe any version of the events. I am a bit of a stickler for the truth. I'd love to know what happened.

You know the 5 people you'd have for dinner dead or alive. Bush and OBL would be 2 of them. I'd love to know what they know.
 

masta247

Well-Known Member
Staff member
oh yes, Terrorists kill innocent people for no apparent reason, America kills terrorists in their quest for freedom and now Osama is dead, America dominates again in this glorious victory against all that is evil. Oh that America.
 

EDouble

Will suck off black men for a dime
oh yes, Terrorists kill innocent people for no apparent reason, America kills terrorists in their quest for freedom and now Osama is dead, America dominates again in this glorious victory against all that is evil. Oh that America.
who gives a fuck if they have a 'reason' or not? most people that Physically Do Something Physically Do Something because of a Reason

America will kill terrorists because they r terrorists its not that complicated and they target Americans as well

Why is what you say is a victory against evil why is that negative to you?
 

masta247

Well-Known Member
Staff member
It's not black and white. "Terrorists" wouldn't be terrorists for no reason, besides it's just a label.
In this case Americans are terrorists too because their killing of innocent people led to all of that. They are just powerful enough to afford a good PR.
"Terrorists" in the middle-east are "terrorists" because they are fed up of hopelessly watching their people die, and there's nothing else they can do about it.

Watching Americans party on the streets after Osama got killed is no different than watching people in the Middle-East burn American flags.
 

Jokerman

Well-Known Member
1. If OBL was killed recently how do you explain his silence for the last 8 years when he was so vocal after 9/11?

2. Why did the US army parade the bodies of Saddam's sons to the press, yet keep OBL's body under wraps?

3. Why bury him at sea within 24hours to satisfy his muslim beliefs? Were the Hussein boys muslim beliefs less important?

4. Are you seriously telling me they could find Saddam Hussein in a hole in the desert within a year, and they couldn't find OBL in a 3 story house for 6 years? Even with 15 Million quid on his head?

5. Navy seals aren't capable of disabling an unarmed man without shooting him in the head?
Some answers:

1. As someone already pointed out, he hasn't been silent. He kept releasing videos. In the last one he played the Leonardo DiCaprio death scene from Titanic.

2. For the same reason they're still debating whether they should release pics of him dead. They don't want to rile the terrorists and Muslims up in that part of the world any more than they have. No Muslims thought Saddam's sons were good Muslims or cared about them.

3. Same answer as 2. It's not their Muslim beliefs the Administration cares about, it's the reaction in the muslim world.

4. We were occupying Iraq. We're not occupying Pakistan, plus they probably actively allowed him to be there.

5. They never intended to take him alive. Many reasons for that, read about it. Doesn't mean it's a conspiracy. They're just not going be straight with every thing and don't have to.
 

Pittsey

Knock, Knock...
Staff member
^^

I am not saying there is a conspiracy. Just that I don't believe the information coming out of the white house. Lots of other reasons too. It just doesn't smell right.


Don't take this as an anti-USA opinion. I have the same opinion about the British Government and how they have handled many events.
 

S O F I

Administrator
Staff member
That is your debate? I can type random statements as well, that doesn't change the lack of consitency in the facts.

1. If OBL was killed recently how do you explain his silence for the last 8 years when he was so vocal after 9/11?

2. Why did the US army parade the bodies of Saddam's sons to the press, yet keep OBL's body under wraps?

3. Why bury him at sea within 24hours to satisfy his muslim beliefs? Were the Hussein boys muslim beliefs less important?

4. Are you seriously telling me they could find Saddam Hussein in a hole in the desert within a year, and they couldn't find OBL in a 3 story house for 6 years? Even with 15 Million quid on his head?

5. Navy seals aren't capable of disabling an unarmed man without shooting him in the head?

I am not saying I 100% disbelieve or that I believe any of the conspiracy theories. Nor am I saying he didn't deserve to die, although that isn't mine or America's call. There is a place called the Hague which would have made that decision. That is how justice works. I also feel he would have been more valuable alive.

I cannot help questioning the "facts".
I edited out the bold part ten minutes after I posted it cause I realized I was out of line haha. Didn't mean to insult you.

I responded with two very specific things. One, that the war on terror isn't over and that America knows that, and the other, that Osama did claim responsibility.

Also, what you claim are facts are not indeed facts. Here's a timeline of Osama's messages after 2001: http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/05/20115272955828212.html

Was he silent for the last 8 years? The answer is NO.
 

EDouble

Will suck off black men for a dime
besides it's just a label.
label doesnt matter in reality,im saying people responsible for targeting and killing innocent people wherever those innocent people live

They are just powerful enough to afford a good PR.
why does it seem like youre arguing about the perception of the shit? the same way it doesnt make America 100% right because they have 'good PR" it doesnt make Terrorists 100% right because they don't?



"Terrorists" in the middle-east are "terrorists" because they are fed up of hopelessly watching their people die, and there's nothing else they can do about it.
get the fuck out of here
 

Ristol

New York's Ambassador
Americans are terrorists too because their killing of innocent people led to all of that. They are just powerful enough to afford a good PR.
"Terrorists" in the middle-east are "terrorists" because they are fed up of hopelessly watching their people die, and there's nothing else they can do about it.
Wait a minute. That sounds familiar.
Terrorism against America deserves to be praised because it was a response to injustice, aimed at forcing America to stop its support for Israel, which kills our people.
Masta knocked down the towers. ;)
 

ill-matic

Well-Known Member
It's pretty clear this was more a symbolic gesture than anything else. In their eyes, this is essentially what the American people needed during this difficult economic period. It acts as a morale boost, a reason for some of them to feel relieved I suppose. Also, for the victims of 9/11, it provides them with closure, knowing that the man behind the death of their son, daughter, mother, father, brother, sister no longer has the gift of life. Also, it will add to the perception of Obama being capable of managing national security. It portrays him as competent and decisive. If you listen to the speech he gave, he lavishes a lot of the credit on himself. A lot of use of the word "I"... "I decided", "I gave the OK" etc. A lot of it is a calculated political move.
 
Oh god. It's Bin Laden. The silly cave who had a bad attitude so went to town. I feel sorry for him because he went the wrong way in life and got confused about what could be the right thing to do. He made a bad attitude choice to impress his friends and then he had to keep going or his friend would say he was an idiot and he flew himself into buildings to make his friend laugh. He acts like he is wearing a bed and he has dark eyebrows and is silly with his friends.
 

Latest posts

Donate

Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.

Members online

Top