Rumor has it that he fathered a single male child just before we took him out. He named his son after his own child-hood best friend: <span style='color:#000000;background:#000000'>Obama bin-laden</span>
ThansalThe New ScumJoin Date: 2002-08-22Member: 1215Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1843976:date=May 4 2011, 10:36 AM:name=lolfighter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (lolfighter @ May 4 2011, 10:36 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843976"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Maaaaan, think about it: If guns were people, whites would be a minority!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ok, that was golden :P
I read a couple random articles this morning with a lot of people coming down in the middle of this debate. I guess I'm there also.
My ideal (as an American) would be that he should have been captured, detained with out any mistreatment, put on trial, and executed. I think he should have had a trial for the world to see, I think he should have been given the chances that his victims did not. Why? Because we are better than them. Simply that. We believe in treating others fairly, not simply murdering them because we don't like them (even if our dislike is for a damn good reason).
That said, I accept this, even if it was a "Targeted Killing" (The polite, legal way to assassinate some one). Why? Because I don't think that this might fall under the "Better to act and seek forgiveness later" category. Any trial would be a show trial, what reasonable defense/prosecution could there be? His fate was decided long ago. Kidnapping him out of Pakistan also would have likely caused problems (really, who has jurisdiction over him?).
Ultimately, I hope that we are given some proof that he was actively resisting and that killing him was to protect their own lives, however, even if he wasn't, I'm not going to lose sleep over this. I hope that we can channel all of this energy into something positive, instead of just cheering over his death.
Many of the details first reported have turned out to be incorrect and many more are yet to be released. I think making any real argument of wrong doing at this point is a waste of time. If the Navy Seals decided it was too risky to detain and transport Osama in the middle of a fight fire, deep inside a country that doesn't want them there and with a helicopter crash further complicating things, I am willing to trust their judgement for the time being.
X_StickmanNot good enough for a custom title.Join Date: 2003-04-15Member: 15533Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1844009:date=May 4 2011, 05:52 PM:name=Thansal)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Thansal @ May 4 2011, 05:52 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1844009"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Any trial would be a show trial, what reasonable defense/prosecution could there be? His fate was decided long ago. Kidnapping him out of Pakistan also would have likely caused problems (really, who has jurisdiction over him?).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Kidnapping him out of Pakistan would've caused problems, but sending in a 25 man commando kill team without informing any Pakistan authority is okay? That argument kinda breaks down there.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My ideal (as an American) would be that he should have been captured, detained with out any mistreatment, put on trial, and executed.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think you mean put on trial and executed <i>if found guilty</i>. I'd like to remind everyone that Osama has never actually been found guilty of anything in any kind of courtroom or trial. In fact, most detained terrorists/terrorist suspects haven't been put through any form of trial, nor are they likely to be. You can argue all you like with trains of thought like "he admitted it" and/or "he's obviously guilty" but honestly, killing a man based solely on those arguments is... it's kind of terrifying, people.
<!--quoteo(post=1844010:date=May 4 2011, 06:11 PM:name=Sops)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Sops @ May 4 2011, 06:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1844010"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If the Navy Seals decided it was too risky to detain and transport Osama in the middle of a fight fire, deep inside a country that doesn't want them there and with a helicopter crash further complicating things, I am willing to trust their judgement for the time being.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Then they weren't trained and/or equipped well enough to do the job they were supposed to do. The team went in and killed people who were firing back, and detained at least a few adult women and children (not... not adult children, just the regular type of children). Some reports are saying they took at least one man back with them alive, and regardless of that, they still ransacked the compound for computer hardware which suggests to me that they had enough time to detain one unarmed man.
Seriously, if a seal team on a mission inside enemy territory can't handle an unarmed man (and one of their primary targets), no matter how hard he's resisting, without putting a bullet through his head, they are literally the worst special forces team in the history of the world. A shot to the leg, a buttstock to the head, a quick beating... anything. I'm aware that bullets to limbs and head injuries aren't as non-lethal as movies and fiction like to pretend, but they're still significantly less likely to kill someone than a shot to the head.
Actually with such a high value target, they could even get away with just overpowering him with manpower. Why do they even need to hurt him? But the orders were to kill him.
He's a frail old man with Marfan's and he's been on kidney dialysis for over 10 years.
<!--quoteo(post=1844026:date=May 4 2011, 12:52 PM:name=X_Stickman)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (X_Stickman @ May 4 2011, 12:52 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1844026"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Then they weren't trained and/or equipped well enough to do the job they were supposed to do. The team went in and killed people who were firing back, and detained at least a few adult women and children (not... not adult children, just the regular type of children). Some reports are saying they took at least one man back with them alive, and regardless of that, they still ransacked the compound for computer hardware which suggests to me that they had enough time to detain one unarmed man.
Seriously, if a seal team on a mission inside enemy territory can't handle an unarmed man (and one of their primary targets), no matter how hard he's resisting, without putting a bullet through his head, they are literally the worst special forces team in the history of the world. A shot to the leg, a buttstock to the head, a quick beating... anything. I'm aware that bullets to limbs and head injuries aren't as non-lethal as movies and fiction like to pretend, but they're still significantly less likely to kill someone than a shot to the head.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Perhaps things settled down enough for them to recover computers and detain children but all of those things almost certainly would have happen <u>after</u> Osama was shot, you have no idea what was going on at that moment. There are reports people were being used as human shields, maybe shooting him in the leg or getting close enough to hit him was not an option.
You are arm chair commanding with very little information to go on.
X_StickmanNot good enough for a custom title.Join Date: 2003-04-15Member: 15533Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1844041:date=May 4 2011, 07:25 PM:name=Sops)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Sops @ May 4 2011, 07:25 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1844041"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Perhaps things settled down enough for them to recover computers and detain children but all of those things almost certainly would have happen <u>after</u> Osama was shot, you have no idea what was going on at that moment.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
According to most reports, him being shot was pretty much the last thing that happened (other than ransacking the place for the hardware and loading the helicopters). They went into the compound, into the building, and then worked their way up. Sounds like he was in the highest part of the place.
The women/children who were cuffed and detained were detained during the firefight; after the fighting was over, they were moved outside the compound. That suggests to me that they were perfectly able to round people up during the attack (frankly it doesn't sound like there were too many people in the place to begin with).
I guess he could've made a move like he was going for a gun or something, but they would've specified that rather than the disturbingly vague "resisting". Hell, according to their own reports, the encounter with Bin Laden "lasted seconds" so how they could get "resisting" from that is questionable.
I wouldn't say Stickman is armchair-commanding, he's speculating. What else is he supposed to do? It's the same dilemma again:
"You can't say that. You have no idea what was going on at that moment. Your opinion is uninformed and therefore worthless because you don't have all the facts." "Well then give me all the facts so I can have an informed opinion!" "No, all the facts are top secret. All of them. You don't get the facts. Now, unless you're going to have an informed opinion, please stop speculating." "But I can't have an informed opinion without all the facts!" "Now you're getting it."
But it's okay. Wikileaks will tell us eventually. And if it turns out something untoward DID happen, the fact that we heard it through wikileaks rather than official sources will only make it a bigger PR disaster than it would've been. Karma, folks!
<!--quoteo(post=1844047:date=May 4 2011, 01:40 PM:name=X_Stickman)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (X_Stickman @ May 4 2011, 01:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1844047"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->According to most reports, him being shot was pretty much the last thing that happened (other than ransacking the place for the hardware and loading the helicopters). They went into the compound, into the building, and then worked their way up. Sounds like he was in the highest part of the place.
The women/children who were cuffed and detained were detained during the firefight; after the fighting was over, they were moved outside the compound. That suggests to me that they were perfectly able to round people up during the attack (frankly it doesn't sound like there were too many people in the place to begin with).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I think there is a difference between detaining a child, who may be willing to comply with the instructions of a man with a rifle, and securing a Osama, a man who would have made an effort to be killed rather then taken alive. (he had stated as much in earlier interviews) And actually transporting anyone detained probably would have happened afterward.
<!--quoteo(post=1844047:date=May 4 2011, 01:40 PM:name=X_Stickman)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (X_Stickman @ May 4 2011, 01:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1844047"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I guess he could've made a move like he was going for a gun or something, but they would've specified that rather than the disturbingly vague "resisting". Hell, according to their own reports, the encounter with Bin Laden "lasted seconds" so how they could get "resisting" from that is questionable.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I think you just gave a possible scenario, he may have been reaching for something or he may have been trying to escape. You and I have no idea what he was doing or who else was in the room. That is the whole problem with making conclusions at this point.
You are not necessarily wrong that they went in with the intent to shoot him but you do not have near enough information to know that.
<!--quoteo(post=1844052:date=May 4 2011, 01:57 PM:name=lolfighter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (lolfighter @ May 4 2011, 01:57 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1844052"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I wouldn't say Stickman is armchair-commanding, he's speculating. What else is he supposed to do? It's the same dilemma again:
"You can't say that. You have no idea what was going on at that moment. Your opinion is uninformed and therefore worthless because you don't have all the facts." "Well then give me all the facts so I can have an informed opinion!" "No, all the facts are top secret. All of them. You don't get the facts. Now, unless you're going to have an informed opinion, please stop speculating." "But I can't have an informed opinion without all the facts!" "Now you're getting it."
But it's okay. Wikileaks will tell us eventually. And if it turns out something untoward DID happen, the fact that we heard it through wikileaks rather than official sources will only make it a bigger PR disaster than it would've been. Karma, folks!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It has been two days, you are acting like the White House and Defense Department need to release all the information within the 24 hour news cycle or else they are hiding something.
It is not like they are being particularly tight lipped about this, if a few weeks go by without them release any information then I think it would be fair to start speculating but right now it is a bit foolish.
You asked Bin Laden to come peacefully? Yeah, like that's going to happen. You might have to use "reasonable force", pinning him down, cuffing him etc.
The chances are no one on that Seals team spoke Arab or Urdu, which Bin Laden does. And we all know Bin Laden speaks little to no English.
<!--quoteo(post=1844058:date=May 4 2011, 09:29 PM:name=Sops)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Sops @ May 4 2011, 09:29 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1844058"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It has been two days, you are acting like the White House and Defense Department need to release all the information within the 24 hour news cycle or else they are hiding something.
It is not like they are being particularly tight lipped about this, if a few weeks go by without them release any information then I think it would be fair to start speculating but right now it is a bit foolish.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> It's perfectly normal to start speculating about something when you hear about it. You can't criticise people for that unless the speculation is particularly outlandish. If people were to cling to their speculation in light of contrary facts, that'd be a different story, but that isn't the case here.
Besides, a few weeks from now the big news will be that Donald Trump's hair is actually a mind-controlling alien parasite that is trying to get a puppet of the Vryxlon elected president in 2012, and all the info about the assault on bin Laden's compound that was supposed to be released will be quietly swept under the rug. Better to get the speculatin' done now while the speculatin's good.
That_Annoying_KidSire of TitlesJoin Date: 2003-03-01Member: 14175Members, Constellation
edited May 2011
maybe because it's inflammatory?
"you might have to use "reasonable force", pinning him down, cuffing him etc."
military personal on military operations have zero obligation to make moves like police officers, in fact those who transition from police work get chewed out when they use the old habits of FREEZE ON THE GROUND.
they aren't police they shot him, possibly in cold blood Friday with it
[edit] priority number one on any operation is safety of members partaking, then objectives that is the mindset [/edit]
<!--quoteo(post=1844063:date=May 4 2011, 02:43 PM:name=lolfighter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (lolfighter @ May 4 2011, 02:43 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1844063"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->It's perfectly normal to start speculating about something when you hear about it. You can't criticise people for that unless the speculation is particularly outlandish. If people were to cling to their speculation in light of contrary facts, that'd be a different story, but that isn't the case here.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> What annoyed me about Stickman's post was that he did not sound like he was speculating out of lack of information but rather he decided he had enough information to draw a strong conclusion. He knew enough about what had happened that the strike team would have to be "literally the worst special forces team in the history of the world" to not be able to capture Osama alive.
X_StickmanNot good enough for a custom title.Join Date: 2003-04-15Member: 15533Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1844097:date=May 4 2011, 10:38 PM:name=Sops)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Sops @ May 4 2011, 10:38 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1844097"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What annoyed me about Stickman's post was that he did not sound like he was speculating out of lack of information but rather he decided he had enough information to draw a strong conclusion. He knew enough about what had happened that the strike team would have to be "literally the worst special forces team in the history of the world" to not be able to capture Osama alive.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
When I speculate about current events on an internet forum, I'm making absolute statements.
They didn't care so much about the video of Saddam being hung. Huh.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Didn't they? Because that's not how I remember it. Also, that video was released by the Iraqi goverment, and would have probably gotten out anyway, given it was recorded on a mobile phone.
locallyunsceneFeeder of TrollsJoin Date: 2002-12-25Member: 11528Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1843893:date=May 3 2011, 11:11 PM:name=locallyunscene)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (locallyunscene @ May 3 2011, 11:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1843893"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The Democratic senate leaders have stated none of the leads came from Gitmo nor "enhanced interrogation techniques" AKA torture.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually, to clarify because I misinterpreted what was said, the information did come from Gitmo, but did not come from torture according to the senate and former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
They didn't care so much about the video of Saddam being hung. Huh.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I can list 10 sites that all have videos of people being killed (shot, stabbed, beheaded, etc.) yet one man being shot in the head is TOO much? Bull...
On a different note, someone get the Navy SEAL Team Six logo and throw this song to it lol...
<!--quoteo(post=1844221:date=May 5 2011, 08:21 AM:name=Konohas Perverted Hermit)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Konohas Perverted Hermit @ May 5 2011, 08:21 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1844221"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I can list 10 sites that all have videos of people being killed (shot, stabbed, beheaded, etc.) yet one man being shot in the head is TOO much? Bull...<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> You think they are not releasing the photos because they may have gore?
Comments
<span style='color:#000000;background:#000000'>Obama bin-laden</span>
Ok, that was golden :P
I read a couple random articles this morning with a lot of people coming down in the middle of this debate. I guess I'm there also.
My ideal (as an American) would be that he should have been captured, detained with out any mistreatment, put on trial, and executed. I think he should have had a trial for the world to see, I think he should have been given the chances that his victims did not. Why? Because we are better than them. Simply that. We believe in treating others fairly, not simply murdering them because we don't like them (even if our dislike is for a damn good reason).
That said, I accept this, even if it was a "Targeted Killing" (The polite, legal way to assassinate some one). Why? Because I don't think that this might fall under the "Better to act and seek forgiveness later" category. Any trial would be a show trial, what reasonable defense/prosecution could there be? His fate was decided long ago. Kidnapping him out of Pakistan also would have likely caused problems (really, who has jurisdiction over him?).
Ultimately, I hope that we are given some proof that he was actively resisting and that killing him was to protect their own lives, however, even if he wasn't, I'm not going to lose sleep over this. I hope that we can channel all of this energy into something positive, instead of just cheering over his death.
Kidnapping him out of Pakistan would've caused problems, but sending in a 25 man commando kill team without informing any Pakistan authority is okay? That argument kinda breaks down there.
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My ideal (as an American) would be that he should have been captured, detained with out any mistreatment, put on trial, and executed.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think you mean put on trial and executed <i>if found guilty</i>. I'd like to remind everyone that Osama has never actually been found guilty of anything in any kind of courtroom or trial. In fact, most detained terrorists/terrorist suspects haven't been put through any form of trial, nor are they likely to be. You can argue all you like with trains of thought like "he admitted it" and/or "he's obviously guilty" but honestly, killing a man based solely on those arguments is... it's kind of terrifying, people.
<!--quoteo(post=1844010:date=May 4 2011, 06:11 PM:name=Sops)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Sops @ May 4 2011, 06:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1844010"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If the Navy Seals decided it was too risky to detain and transport Osama in the middle of a fight fire, deep inside a country that doesn't want them there and with a helicopter crash further complicating things, I am willing to trust their judgement for the time being.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Then they weren't trained and/or equipped well enough to do the job they were supposed to do. The team went in and killed people who were firing back, and detained at least a few adult women and children (not... not adult children, just the regular type of children). Some reports are saying they took at least one man back with them alive, and regardless of that, they still ransacked the compound for computer hardware which suggests to me that they had enough time to detain one unarmed man.
Seriously, if a seal team on a mission inside enemy territory can't handle an unarmed man (and one of their primary targets), no matter how hard he's resisting, without putting a bullet through his head, they are literally the worst special forces team in the history of the world. A shot to the leg, a buttstock to the head, a quick beating... anything. I'm aware that bullets to limbs and head injuries aren't as non-lethal as movies and fiction like to pretend, but they're still significantly less likely to kill someone than a shot to the head.
He's a frail old man with Marfan's and he's been on kidney dialysis for over 10 years.
Seriously, if a seal team on a mission inside enemy territory can't handle an unarmed man (and one of their primary targets), no matter how hard he's resisting, without putting a bullet through his head, they are literally the worst special forces team in the history of the world. A shot to the leg, a buttstock to the head, a quick beating... anything. I'm aware that bullets to limbs and head injuries aren't as non-lethal as movies and fiction like to pretend, but they're still significantly less likely to kill someone than a shot to the head.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Perhaps things settled down enough for them to recover computers and detain children but all of those things almost certainly would have happen <u>after</u> Osama was shot, you have no idea what was going on at that moment. There are reports people were being used as human shields, maybe shooting him in the leg or getting close enough to hit him was not an option.
You are arm chair commanding with very little information to go on.
According to most reports, him being shot was pretty much the last thing that happened (other than ransacking the place for the hardware and loading the helicopters). They went into the compound, into the building, and then worked their way up. Sounds like he was in the highest part of the place.
The women/children who were cuffed and detained were detained during the firefight; after the fighting was over, they were moved outside the compound. That suggests to me that they were perfectly able to round people up during the attack (frankly it doesn't sound like there were too many people in the place to begin with).
I guess he could've made a move like he was going for a gun or something, but they would've specified that rather than the disturbingly vague "resisting". Hell, according to their own reports, the encounter with Bin Laden "lasted seconds" so how they could get "resisting" from that is questionable.
"You can't say that. You have no idea what was going on at that moment. Your opinion is uninformed and therefore worthless because you don't have all the facts."
"Well then give me all the facts so I can have an informed opinion!"
"No, all the facts are top secret. All of them. You don't get the facts. Now, unless you're going to have an informed opinion, please stop speculating."
"But I can't have an informed opinion without all the facts!"
"Now you're getting it."
But it's okay. Wikileaks will tell us eventually. And if it turns out something untoward DID happen, the fact that we heard it through wikileaks rather than official sources will only make it a bigger PR disaster than it would've been. Karma, folks!
The women/children who were cuffed and detained were detained during the firefight; after the fighting was over, they were moved outside the compound. That suggests to me that they were perfectly able to round people up during the attack (frankly it doesn't sound like there were too many people in the place to begin with).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think there is a difference between detaining a child, who may be willing to comply with the instructions of a man with a rifle, and securing a Osama, a man who would have made an effort to be killed rather then taken alive. (he had stated as much in earlier interviews) And actually transporting anyone detained probably would have happened afterward.
<!--quoteo(post=1844047:date=May 4 2011, 01:40 PM:name=X_Stickman)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (X_Stickman @ May 4 2011, 01:40 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1844047"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I guess he could've made a move like he was going for a gun or something, but they would've specified that rather than the disturbingly vague "resisting". Hell, according to their own reports, the encounter with Bin Laden "lasted seconds" so how they could get "resisting" from that is questionable.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think you just gave a possible scenario, he may have been reaching for something or he may have been trying to escape. You and I have no idea what he was doing or who else was in the room. That is the whole problem with making conclusions at this point.
You are not necessarily wrong that they went in with the intent to shoot him but you do not have near enough information to know that.
"You can't say that. You have no idea what was going on at that moment. Your opinion is uninformed and therefore worthless because you don't have all the facts."
"Well then give me all the facts so I can have an informed opinion!"
"No, all the facts are top secret. All of them. You don't get the facts. Now, unless you're going to have an informed opinion, please stop speculating."
"But I can't have an informed opinion without all the facts!"
"Now you're getting it."
But it's okay. Wikileaks will tell us eventually. And if it turns out something untoward DID happen, the fact that we heard it through wikileaks rather than official sources will only make it a bigger PR disaster than it would've been. Karma, folks!<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It has been two days, you are acting like the White House and Defense Department need to release all the information within the 24 hour news cycle or else they are hiding something.
It is not like they are being particularly tight lipped about this, if a few weeks go by without them release any information then I think it would be fair to start speculating but right now it is a bit foolish.
The chances are no one on that Seals team spoke Arab or Urdu, which Bin Laden does. And we all know Bin Laden speaks little to no English.
It is not like they are being particularly tight lipped about this, if a few weeks go by without them release any information then I think it would be fair to start speculating but right now it is a bit foolish.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's perfectly normal to start speculating about something when you hear about it. You can't criticise people for that unless the speculation is particularly outlandish. If people were to cling to their speculation in light of contrary facts, that'd be a different story, but that isn't the case here.
Besides, a few weeks from now the big news will be that Donald Trump's hair is actually a mind-controlling alien parasite that is trying to get a puppet of the Vryxlon elected president in 2012, and all the info about the assault on bin Laden's compound that was supposed to be released will be quietly swept under the rug. Better to get the speculatin' done now while the speculatin's good.
I lol'd.
"you might have to use "reasonable force", pinning him down, cuffing him etc."
military personal on military operations have zero obligation to make moves like police officers, in fact those who transition from police work get chewed out when they use the old habits of FREEZE ON THE GROUND.
they aren't police
they shot him, possibly in cold blood
Friday with it
[edit]
priority number one on any operation is safety of members partaking, then objectives
that is the mindset
[/edit]
What annoyed me about Stickman's post was that he did not sound like he was speculating out of lack of information but rather he decided he had enough information to draw a strong conclusion. He knew enough about what had happened that the strike team would have to be "literally the worst special forces team in the history of the world" to not be able to capture Osama alive.
When I speculate about current events on an internet forum, I'm making absolute statements.
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02
Yay, more BS!
They didn't care so much about the video of Saddam being hung. Huh.
Yay, more BS!
They didn't care so much about the video of Saddam being hung. Huh.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Didn't they? Because that's not how I remember it. Also, that video was released by the Iraqi goverment, and would have probably gotten out anyway, given it was recorded on a mobile phone.
Actually, to clarify because I misinterpreted what was said, the information did come from Gitmo, but did not come from torture according to the senate and former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
<img src="http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m116/d00m3dd00d/1304580742278.png" border="0" class="linked-image" />
<img src="http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m116/d00m3dd00d/1304581401042.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
<img src="http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m116/d00m3dd00d/1304582537553.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
Yay, more BS!
They didn't care so much about the video of Saddam being hung. Huh.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I can list 10 sites that all have videos of people being killed (shot, stabbed, beheaded, etc.) yet one man being shot in the head is TOO much? Bull...
On a different note, someone get the Navy SEAL Team Six logo and throw this song to it lol...
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9P0BNqtHOsY" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9P0BNqtHOsY</a>
You think they are not releasing the photos because they may have gore?
<a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/05/05/136017082/reports-secret-stealth-black-hawk-helicopters-used-in-bin-laden-raid" target="_blank">http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/0...-bin-laden-raid</a>
<a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/05/05/136017082/reports-secret-stealth-black-hawk-helicopters-used-in-bin-laden-raid" target="_blank">http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/0...-bin-laden-raid</a><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
amgad never before seen publicly
sweet stealth version of awesome black hawk
<img src="http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/dangerroom/2011/05/mh-x3.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
<a href="http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/05/aviation-geeks-scramble-to-i-d-osama-raids-mystery-copter/3/" target="_blank">http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/05/av...stery-copter/3/</a>