imfdb.org  

Go Back   imfdb.org > The Forum > Off Topic

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 05-02-2011, 02:42 PM
k9870's Avatar
k9870 k9870 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Maine
Posts: 4,255
Default

Say what you want about musharraf but he wasnt a pussy when it came to fighting terrorists like then new paki gov.
__________________
"I don't need luck, I have ammo!"

Grunt, Mass effect 3
  #32  
Old 05-02-2011, 03:08 PM
MT2008's Avatar
MT2008 MT2008 is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,507
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spartan198 View Post
As much as I want to believe one of our Team 6 boys ventilated OBL's skull, things aren't really adding up when I further contemplate it.

Firstly, only one photograph of his remains is circulating the web and it's believed to be a digitized hoax (Google "Osama Bin Laden Corpse" and decide for yourself, but while an admittedly gruesome image, it looks Photoshopped to me).

And secondly, we've seen in the past how US military/federal agents love to make a show of parading captured terrorists in front of TV cameras or releasing photos of dead ones' remains into the media. But with the most wanted terrorist in US history now allegedly dead and his remains in US custody, they ever so suddenly, and with very little fanfare, give him a quiet "burial" at sea? It makes no sense. Since when does our government decline an opportunity to toot its own horn? Never that I know of. And keep in mind that our failure to immediately capture OBL has constantly been used as a joke against us by the international community. Why would they decline an opportunity to rub this back in the faces of the likes of Moscow, Tehran, and Beijing? They wouldn't, they'd want to make us look as badass and tough as possible in our rivals' eyes.

I want to believe we got him just as much as you guys do, but the course of events aren't matching up to me. With the only known photographic evidence being suspect, no known publicly-available video footage of the raid, and our only "confirmation" that he's dead coming from the mouth of the president and "sources" of various news agencies that may or may not be credible, I'm finding this whole situation a little suspect and hard to swallow.
I think you are being a little too cynical.

As Evil Tim pointed out, it's a bad idea to publicly display Bin Laden's body if he has followers who will just see him as a martyr. This isn't a case of the Obama administration being "respectful" of Islamic tradition due to their liberal naivety; there are historic precedents where the same decision was made.

That being said, I'd expect the horn-tooting to commence sooner rather than later. Obama's address last night was full of swag and confidence that I've almost never heard in any speech he's given related to the War on Terror. I can already tell that he's going to milk this victory for all it's worth (because let's face it - he needed this, badly, to have a chance in 2012).
__________________
Cry "Havoc," and let slip the hogs of war.
  #33  
Old 05-02-2011, 04:13 PM
Markit's Avatar
Markit Markit is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 99
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by k9870 View Post
Obama didnt do anything. It was the military going balls out and kicking ass.
Yes, but his national security team was the one that had to verify the info that Bin Laden was at the site was credible, and for such a high-value target, Obama obviously had to sign the final authorization to attack. So in that regard, he did have to do something.

Quote:
Originally Posted by funkychinaman
No, it appeared we went in with the full cooperation of the Pakistanis. Getting India and Pakistan to agree on something? It's been a hell of a week for the president.
I think the choppers actually came from Afghanistan, and judging by reports that they flew under Pakistani radar and the SEALs blew up a damaged helicopter on-site before leaving, they probably only solicited Pakistani cooperation after the fact.

Last edited by Markit; 05-02-2011 at 04:18 PM.
  #34  
Old 05-02-2011, 04:53 PM
Markost Markost is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Soviet Republic of Argentina
Posts: 620
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by k9870 View Post
Obama didnt do anything. It was the military going balls out and kicking ass.
Yeah, but who´s going to take the credit for it?
__________________
Keep calm, and get to teh choppa
  #35  
Old 05-02-2011, 04:59 PM
MT2008's Avatar
MT2008 MT2008 is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,507
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by k9870 View Post
Obama didnt do anything. It was the military going balls out and kicking ass.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markit View Post
Yes, but his national security team was the one that had to verify the info that Bin Laden was at the site was credible, and for such a high-value target, Obama obviously had to sign the final authorization to attack. So in that regard, he did have to do something.
Exactly. By k9870's definition, no President in history can ever claim credit for successful military operations unless they are the ones who personally gather the intelligence and lead the troops on the ground themselves. Kennedy can't be given any credit for resolving the Cuban Missile Crisis (actually, some historians would argue that it's partially his fault the crisis occurred), and Carter can't be blamed for the debacle of the Iran hostage crisis.

Sorry, k9870, but I think you are trying a little too hard to discredit a President you don't like. Don't. One doesn't have to like Obama to admit that he did something right (or, indeed, very well) on this one occasion. Or are you just being sarcastic again? (Yes, I considered that possibility, but you aren't very good at conveying sarcasm in your posts, as I'm sure you've seen repeatedly by responses to them.)
__________________
Cry "Havoc," and let slip the hogs of war.
  #36  
Old 05-02-2011, 05:15 PM
funkychinaman's Avatar
funkychinaman funkychinaman is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Bucks County, PA
Posts: 2,525
Default

I'm not going to take anything away from Barry. He made the call, it happened on his watch, and he deserves to reap as much political capital out of this as he can. But, as a partisan, I would like to point out that he didn't do anything that GWB wouldn't have done. In the end, he didn't negotiate bin Laden's surrender, he didn't coax bin Laden's friends to turn on him, they took him out with brute force, shooting first and asking questions later, just like GWB would have.
__________________
"Me fail English? That's unpossible!"
  #37  
Old 05-02-2011, 05:31 PM
MT2008's Avatar
MT2008 MT2008 is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,507
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by funkychinaman View Post
I would like to point out that he didn't do anything that GWB wouldn't have done. In the end, he didn't negotiate bin Laden's surrender, he didn't coax bin Laden's friends to turn on him, they took him out with brute force, shooting first and asking questions later, just like GWB would have.
Let's rephrase that a bit. While I (and many other commentators) have long since noticed that Obama's foreign policy is pretty much indistinguishable from Dubya's at this point, it would be more accurate to say that Obama now is more like Bush in the last two years of his presidency. If we talk "classical" neo-con Bush doctrine (invade countries, impose regime change, seek to spread democracy), Obama is still at least an improvement in that regard. But again, Bush himself was an improvement over Bush by the end.

Also, while Obama has been using drone attacks and targeted killings with a frequency that even Bush never approached, it is human intelligence and cooperation with foreign assets that makes all of this possible. There is a lot of debate right now amongst counterterrorism scholars about targeted killings and Obama's use of them (some scholars claim that it's undermining our "soft power" capabilities in the Muslim world). Personally, I am a huge fan of strikes like the one that killed Bin Laden - whether it's drones or SF who conduct them. Al-Qaeda's entire program is based on the assumption that they can get us to keep invading Muslim countries and then bleeding us of our power with guerrilla warfare (the way that the Afghan mujahideen did to the USSR). Bush was stupid enough to fall for it, while still failing to kill Bin laden.

As far as I am concerned, Obama's administration has perfected an effective counter to the Islamists' style of warfare; they may still be able to parade around their "martyrs" in the Arab media who are killed by the drone attacks, but it's much harder to sell young jihadis on the idea of dying gloriously while fighting the Crusaders. Because there's nothing romantic about getting taken out by a Hellfire missile or killed in bed by Delta operators. Plus, targeted killings are cheap enough that we can do them indefinitely - whereas occupying an entire country is both expensive and futile, and almost always guarantees that the insurgents will win as long as their cause survives (no matter how many die). The fact that Obama recognized the efficacy of this method of warfare and has continued to employ it is something for which he deserves credit. I can forgive any and all of his retarded leftist peacenik rhetoric as long as he keeps the targeted killings going.
__________________
Cry "Havoc," and let slip the hogs of war.

Last edited by MT2008; 05-02-2011 at 05:45 PM.
  #38  
Old 05-02-2011, 05:51 PM
MT2008's Avatar
MT2008 MT2008 is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,507
Default

BTW, I notice there have been a lot of people pointing out that Bin Laden was killed in a residential area of Abbottobad, in an expensive villa. Everyone seems to be focused on what this says about Pakistani cooperation. I just find it interesting that he died this way, instead of in some cave within jihadi territory where he would have had to deal with the hardships of nature as well as combat. It's going to be just a little bit harder for Al-Qaeda to sell him as a "holy warrior" when he died in a fairly luxurious setting, with protection from rogue elements of a government that is already despised in most of the Muslim world for being an American ally (albeit a reluctant and difficult one). It makes him look more like a gangster than a rebel leader. If I were in the administration, my next move right now would be to flood the 'Net with snapshots of Bin Laden's compound.
__________________
Cry "Havoc," and let slip the hogs of war.

Last edited by MT2008; 05-02-2011 at 05:55 PM.
  #39  
Old 05-02-2011, 05:57 PM
k9870's Avatar
k9870 k9870 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Maine
Posts: 4,255
Default

Apaprently hes been in that setting a very long time too. Our first lead was august i think? And the compunds been standing like 5 years. I really dont understand pakistan though. They see this big compound and never check it out? Have a military installation near by? They could have just blown the gate open and taken osama out, theyd look good to the americans too. Hell their economy sucks bad enough the reward money wouldve come in handy too.
__________________
"I don't need luck, I have ammo!"

Grunt, Mass effect 3
  #40  
Old 05-02-2011, 06:09 PM
MT2008's Avatar
MT2008 MT2008 is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,507
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by k9870 View Post
Apaprently hes been in that setting a very long time too. Our first lead was august i think? And the compunds been standing like 5 years. I really dont understand pakistan though. They see this big compound and never check it out? Have a military installation near by? They could have just blown the gate open and taken osama out, theyd look good to the americans too. Hell their economy sucks bad enough the reward money wouldve come in handy too.
Remember that when you talk about the "Pakistani government", you basically aren't talking about a single cohesive entity. If Bin Laden was receiving Pakistani government protection, we're probably talking about rogue elements of the military (particularly the ISI), not the entire government. It's not even obvious that those dudes would have been motivated solely by ideology, either (Bin Laden might have simply been paying them off).

But we'll find out more, I am sure. Bin Laden's death is probably going to cast more light upon the ISI-Taliban-Al-Qaeda relationship than ever before.
__________________
Cry "Havoc," and let slip the hogs of war.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.