Will we ever capture Bin Laden...

2»

Comments

  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    I heard that O.J. was on the case... Bin Laden is number two on his list... right after the real killer of Nicole and Ronald.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • jlew24asu wrote:
    it would still be a symbolic victory for the US in the war on terror.

    What good is a "symbolic victory" if it doesn't reduce the threat of terrorism? It wouldn't mean anything to me.
    jlew24asu wrote:
    yes he has more wealth but he is also much smarter. his actions are much more planned out then your average jihaidist. too many of those idiots are interested in being rock stars like the leader of el queda in iraq who was killed.

    bottom line is. he needs to be caught, preferably killed.

    I'm sure he is smarter than the "average jihadist", but there are plenty of smart people out there to take his place if he's ever captured or killed. That's the point. He's not a 1-in-a-million brainiac. His success has much more to do with his wealth and will than his brains.
  • El_KabongEl_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    mammasan wrote:
    We didn't catch Bin Laden because we sub-contracted the job to local Afghan militias. Their loyalty was not us but to whom ever paid them. Bin Laden was able to buy his way out of Afghanistan and into Pakistan. Had we sent enough troops to Afghanistan and did the job ourselves we porbabaly wouldn't be having this conversation right now. As far as him hiding in Pakistan, the Pakistani government will not allow our forces to cross into Pakistan to search for him. Now to me, and I could be wrong, that is harboring a terrorist.


    well, it has been reported, i think in the wall street journal, the head of pakistani intel <isi> wired a lot of money to mohammed atta shortly before 9/11....it was also reported pakistan bribed the 9/11 commission to keep their name out of their report and instead just refer to them as 'a foreign government' or something like that

    and then there;s the whole issue of that scientist selling nuke secrets....why are they are allies, again?
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Rushlimbo wrote:
    or do you mean o reilly?? Same places as you do only I dont swallow it down with a cup of sugar like you.


    same place as me? thats weird. I never heard bin laden was already dead.

    great job and dodging the question and throwing in such a witty comment. be honest. you googled "whitty comments" before you wrote this.
  • El_Kabong wrote:
    well, it has been reported, i think in the wall street journal, the head of pakistani intel <isi> wired a lot of money to mohammed atta shortly before 9/11....it was also reported pakistan bribed the 9/11 commission to keep their name out of their report and instead just refer to them as 'a foreign government' or something like that

    and then there;s the whole issue of that scientist selling nuke secrets....why are they are allies, again?

    Pakistan also has many nuclear weapons, and they have tons of anti-American demonstrations held there all the time...yet Iraq is the focus of the "war on terror". That right there should make it obvious to people that we're not in Iraq to fight terror.

    There is, however, one thing Iraq has a shitload of that Pakistan doesn't have much of.
  • mammasanmammasan Posts: 5,656
    El_Kabong wrote:
    well, it has been reported, i think in the wall street journal, the head of pakistani intel <isi> wired a lot of money to mohammed atta shortly before 9/11....it was also reported pakistan bribed the 9/11 commission to keep their name out of their report and instead just refer to them as 'a foreign government' or something like that

    and then there;s the whole issue of that scientist selling nuke secrets....why are they are allies, again?

    Pakistan asked our government that their country not be mentioned by name in the report, no offense but that's far from being a bribe. I know why Pakistan doesn't want us intruding into the tribal regions, that government is one mistep from a religious revolution. We have to abide simply because a military dictatorship, in Pakistan, is light years better thatn a fundamental Islamist theocracy. This would have never been an issues, or at least the probabality of it would have been slim, had we just did the job ourselves instead of farming out the work to local warlords and their militias, which is basically a bunch of unemployeed Afganies with cold war era Soviet AK-47s. The minute we depended on these people to do our dirty work and catch Bin Laden we failed in our mission.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • RushlimboRushlimbo Posts: 832
    jlew24asu wrote:
    same place as me? thats weird. I never heard bin laden was already dead.

    great job and dodging the question and throwing in such a witty comment. be honest. you googled "whitty comments" before you wrote this.


    I found it here ----> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/witty. What does the white man have to do with this?
    War is Peace
    Freedom is Slavery
    Ignorance is Strength
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    El_Kabong wrote:
    ...and then there's the whole issue of that scientist selling nuke secrets....why are they (Pakistan) are allies, again?
    ...
    Because idiots believe in that idiotic statement, "My Enemy's Enemy is My Friend".
    You'd think we'd have learned from the Usama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein cases, that's just a bunch of horseshit.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • I doubt he'll ever be captured. He was at and old age when he started running and there are no signs of anyone getting any closer. Maybe they should get that 'Dogg' bounty hunter guy to go lookin for him. From what i know theres still something like a 5mil bounty on him dead or alive.
    S'cuse the shit name!
  • El_KabongEl_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    mammasan wrote:
    Pakistan asked our government that their country not be mentioned by name in the report, no offense but that's far from being a bribe. I know why Pakistan doesn't want us intruding into the tribal regions, that government is one mistep from a religious revolution. We have to abide simply because a military dictatorship, in Pakistan, is light years better thatn a fundamental Islamist theocracy. This would have never been an issues, or at least the probabality of it would have been slim, had we just did the job ourselves instead of farming out the work to local warlords and their militias, which is basically a bunch of unemployeed Afganies with cold war era Soviet AK-47s. The minute we depended on these people to do our dirty work and catch Bin Laden we failed in our mission.


    http://www.telegraphindia.com/1060313/asp/nation/story_5962372.asp


    New Delhi, March 12: The Pakistan foreign office had paid tens of thousands of dollars to lobbyists in the US to get anti-Pakistan references dropped from the 9/11 inquiry commission report, The Friday Times has claimed.

    The Pakistani weekly said its story is based on disclosures made by foreign service officials to the Public Accounts Committee at a secret meeting in Islamabad on Tuesday.

    It claimed that some of the commission members were also bribed to prevent them from including damaging information about Pakistan.

    The magazine said the PAC grilled officials in the presence of foreign secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan and special secretary Sher Afghan on the money paid to lobbyists.

    “The disclosure sheds doubt on the integrity and honesty of the members of the 9/11 inquiry commission and, above all, the authenticity of the information in their final report,” it said.

    The report quoted an officer as saying that dramatic changes were made in the final draft of the inquiry commission after the lobbyists got to work. The panel was formed to probe the September 11 terror attack and make suggestions to fight terrorism.

    After the commission tipped the lobbyists about the damaging revelations on Pakistan’s role in 9/11, they contacted the panel members and asked them to go soft on the country. The Friday Times claimed that a lot of money was used to silence these members.

    According to the report, the lobbyists also helped Pakistan win the sympathy of 75 US Congressmen as part of its strategy to guard Islamabad’s interests in Washington. “US softened towards Pakistan only because of the efforts of the foreign office,” an official was quoted as saying in the report.

    The Pakistan foreign office defended the decision to hire the lobbyists, saying it was an established practice in the US.

    An observer at the Islamabad meeting said money could play an important role in buying powerful people. The remark came in response to comments made by some US officials after 9/11 that “Pakistanis will sell their mothers for a dollar”.

    Pakistan had emerged as front-runner in the fight against terrorism unleashed by the US after the terror strikes. Washington pumped in billions of dollars to win President Pervez Musharraf’s support in launching a crackdown on al Qaida network thriving on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    what do you suggest? we bomb and invade pakistan?
  • mammasanmammasan Posts: 5,656
    El_Kabong wrote:
    http://www.telegraphindia.com/1060313/asp/nation/story_5962372.asp


    New Delhi, March 12: The Pakistan foreign office had paid tens of thousands of dollars to lobbyists in the US to get anti-Pakistan references dropped from the 9/11 inquiry commission report, The Friday Times has claimed.

    The Pakistani weekly said its story is based on disclosures made by foreign service officials to the Public Accounts Committee at a secret meeting in Islamabad on Tuesday.

    It claimed that some of the commission members were also bribed to prevent them from including damaging information about Pakistan.

    The magazine said the PAC grilled officials in the presence of foreign secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan and special secretary Sher Afghan on the money paid to lobbyists.

    “The disclosure sheds doubt on the integrity and honesty of the members of the 9/11 inquiry commission and, above all, the authenticity of the information in their final report,” it said.

    The report quoted an officer as saying that dramatic changes were made in the final draft of the inquiry commission after the lobbyists got to work. The panel was formed to probe the September 11 terror attack and make suggestions to fight terrorism.

    After the commission tipped the lobbyists about the damaging revelations on Pakistan’s role in 9/11, they contacted the panel members and asked them to go soft on the country. The Friday Times claimed that a lot of money was used to silence these members.

    According to the report, the lobbyists also helped Pakistan win the sympathy of 75 US Congressmen as part of its strategy to guard Islamabad’s interests in Washington. “US softened towards Pakistan only because of the efforts of the foreign office,” an official was quoted as saying in the report.

    The Pakistan foreign office defended the decision to hire the lobbyists, saying it was an established practice in the US.

    An observer at the Islamabad meeting said money could play an important role in buying powerful people. The remark came in response to comments made by some US officials after 9/11 that “Pakistanis will sell their mothers for a dollar”.

    Pakistan had emerged as front-runner in the fight against terrorism unleashed by the US after the terror strikes. Washington pumped in billions of dollars to win President Pervez Musharraf’s support in launching a crackdown on al Qaida network thriving on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.

    Thank you for correcting me then.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • I doubt he'll ever be captured. He was at and old age when he started running and there are no signs of anyone getting any closer. Maybe they should get that 'Dogg' bounty hunter guy to go lookin for him. From what i know theres still something like a 5mil bounty on him dead or alive.

    I don’t think he’ll be caught either, or he would have been caught by now.

    And as far as the 5 million dollar figure…perhaps your thinking of how much Paris Hilton pocketed for showing up at a beer party over the weekend…

    The bounty on bin Laden’s head is 25 million plus the 2 million from the APA….so 5 x as much as Paris made over the weekend…:rolleyes:


    But if we did catch him, do you think prosecutors could make the charge of orchestrating the attacks on 9/11 stick…??? Or would they just kill him for being indicted on the 1998 embassy bombings and consider the rest a given…

    anyone?
  • mammasanmammasan Posts: 5,656
    I don’t think he’ll be caught either, or he would have been caught by now.

    And as far as the 5 million dollar figure…perhaps your thinking of how much Paris Hilton pocketed for showing up at a beer party over the weekend…

    The bounty on bin Laden’s head is 25 million plus the 2 million from the APA….so 5 x as much as Paris made over the weekend…:rolleyes:


    But if we did catch him, do you think prosecutors could make the charge of orchestrating the attacks on 9/11 stick…??? Or would they just kill him for being indicted on the 1998 embassy bombings and consider the rest a given…

    anyone?

    I haven't read to much on the edvince linking him to the 1998 embassy bombing so I can't really comment on that, but if it's anything like the evidence we have against him in the 9/11 attacks than it would all be circumstancial evidence. I don't think that in a fair trail Osama would ever be able to be convicted of any of these crimes. The trail would be the biggest circus side show dwarfing the OJ trial by infinite times. I don't think that catching him is even a realistic option simply because the problems that would arise on how to deal with him would out weigh the positives of having caught him. Killing him would only make him a martyr. He would be a martyr to all his current followers and any future followers, of his ideals, as well. He has already planted the seed and it has taken root, to kill him now is to make him immortal.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • ONCE DEVIDEDONCE DEVIDED Posts: 1,131
    the american admin needs it dog to wag
    thus osama ( who needs dialysis) wont be found. he will keep on sending messages at time when the admin needs to booga booga people.
    GWB said at the start of the Iraq invasion when asked about osama- " he isnt even on my radar'
    AUSSIE AUSSIE AUSSIE
  • the american admin needs it dog to wag
    thus osama ( who needs dialysis) wont be found. he will keep on sending messages at time when the admin needs to booga booga people.
    GWB said at the start of the Iraq invasion when asked about osama- " he isnt even on my radar'

    Wow, that's a quote I haven't heard before, care to give a source?
  • MrBrianMrBrian Posts: 2,672
    mammasan wrote:
    I haven't read to much on the edvince linking him to the 1998 embassy bombing so I can't really comment on that, but if it's anything like the evidence we have against him in the 9/11 attacks than it would all be circumstancial evidence. I don't think that in a fair trail Osama would ever be able to be convicted of any of these crimes. The trail would be the biggest circus side show dwarfing the OJ trial by infinite times. I don't think that catching him is even a realistic option simply because the problems that would arise on how to deal with him would out weigh the positives of having caught him. Killing him would only make him a martyr. He would be a martyr to all his current followers and any future followers, of his ideals, as well. He has already planted the seed and it has taken root, to kill him now is to make him immortal.

    Sounds about right,
    ---

    I would however love to see him caught and have a fair trial. I also believe that he would walk free. But this is why I think that America would rather kill him once they catch him.
  • Yeah…
    I don’t believe there’s anyway in hell the administration would allow him the world wide stage a fair trial would bring…but I sure would like to hear all the secrets he has in that head of his...I think.
Sign In or Register to comment.