why can't US capture/kill OBL

suns rivalsuns rival Posts: 15,926
edited February 2007 in A Moving Train
with it's state of the art defense & intelligence capabilities, why can't the world's most powerful nation capture/kill a mere mortal like Osama? just curious.
scratching my butt...
kinakamot ang aking puwit...
me rascando pompis...
krap mijn reet...
boku no ketsuoana o kizu...
bahrosh teezy...
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13456

Comments

  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    suns rival wrote:
    with it's state of the art defense & intelligence capabilities, why can't the world's most powerful nation capture/kill a mere mortal like Osama? just curious.

    He's too useful to the Bush administration alive. He's a good propaganda tool.
  • Seriously, they've spent too much time and resource on creating the perfect caricature of a terrorist/boogyman. They need those timely terror warnings to evoke fear and also draw attention away from whatever bad press they are getting from week to week.
    hate was just a legend
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    because he is hiding in an area US isnt allowed to go.

    most likely here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waziristan
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Byrnzie wrote:
    He's too useful to the Bush administration alive. He's a good propaganda tool.


    really I have heard bush say several times he isnt worried about bin laden. (which I totally disagree with)

    http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/2002/11/13_Laden.html
  • suns rival wrote:
    with it's state of the art defense & intelligence capabilities, why can't the world's most powerful nation capture/kill a mere mortal like Osama? just curious.

    Do you really think it'll make the slightest bit of difference if they do?!
    93: Slane
    96: Cork, Dublin
    00: Dublin
    06: London, Dublin
    07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
    09: Manchester, London
    10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
    11: San José
    12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Do you really think it'll make the slightest bit of difference if they do?!

    yes of course it will.
  • jlew24asu wrote:
    yes of course it will.

    and what makes you think that? Bin Laden is a far more insignificant figure than the propaganda machine would have you believe.
    93: Slane
    96: Cork, Dublin
    00: Dublin
    06: London, Dublin
    07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
    09: Manchester, London
    10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
    11: San José
    12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
  • Uncle LeoUncle Leo Posts: 1,059
    jlew24asu wrote:
    yes of course it will.

    How? It won't make the world safer. It's not like he doesn't have people ready to assume his leadership role.
    I cannot come up with a new sig till I get this egg off my face.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    jlew24asu wrote:
    because he is hiding in an area US isnt allowed to go.

    most likely here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waziristan

    Or maybe he's in here...

    http://www.political-news.org/images/full_size/halliburton-gets-3672-million-bonus-for-work-in-iraq.jpg
  • Uncle LeoUncle Leo Posts: 1,059
    and what makes you think that? Bin Laden is a far more insignificant figure than the propaganda machine would have you believe.

    I think he is a significant figure. I just hope that capturing him does not lead to complacency.
    I cannot come up with a new sig till I get this egg off my face.
  • jlew24asu wrote:
    yes of course it will.

    convincing and deep
    hate was just a legend
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Uncle Leo wrote:
    How? It won't make the world safer. It's not like he doesn't have people ready to assume his leadership role.

    it will be a symbolic victory and it may very well make the world safer. he is the leader and creator of el queda. as much as I hate the guy, he is a smart evil person who is capable of horrible things.

    he will not be easiest replaced
  • mammasanmammasan Posts: 5,656
    jlew24asu wrote:
    because he is hiding in an area US isnt allowed to go.

    most likely here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waziristan

    As much as I dislike this administration you can't really place blame on them for not trying. You are correct in stating that we can't get him because he is in a region that we have no access to. What this administration is in fault of is outsourcing the job of capturing him when we invaded Afghanistan and he was holed up in Tora Bora. Had we did the job ourselves instead of hiring local militia we probably would have captured or killed him.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • KannKann Posts: 1,146
    suns rival wrote:
    with it's state of the art defense & intelligence capabilities, why can't the world's most powerful nation capture/kill a mere mortal like Osama? just curious.

    surface area of a man = 0,2m²
    surface of the earh = 510 067 420 km²
  • TheGossmanTheGossman Posts: 1,120
    suns rival wrote:
    with it's state of the art defense & intelligence capabilities, why can't the world's most powerful nation capture/kill a mere mortal like Osama? just curious.


    because Bush said several times that he could care less were Bin Laden is, I'm sure Bush would let Laden marry one of his daughters if he asked!
    9/4/98, 8/4/00, 12/8/02, 12/9/02, 4/15/03, 4/16/03, 4/19/03, 4/25/03, 4/26/03, 4/28/03, 4/29/03, 4/30/03, 7/8/03, 7/9/03, 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 10/6/04, 9/1/05, 9/2/05, 5/16/06, 5/17/06, 5/27/06, 5/28/06, 5/30/06, 6/1/06, 6/3/06, 8/5/07, 6/11/08, 6/12/08, 6/14/08, 6/16/08, 6/24/08, 6/25/08
  • Uncle Leo wrote:
    I think he is a significant figure. I just hope that capturing him does not lead to complacency.

    What's significant about him? He was the leader of a small, disorganised and ramshackle band of renegades, who managed to pull off an admittedly huge and horrifying terrorist act, but if you think he's got any sort of real pull amongst most of the very disparate and unrelated groups who've all gone calling themselves "al-Qaeda in X,Y & Z" since 9/11, then you're very much mistaken.
    93: Slane
    96: Cork, Dublin
    00: Dublin
    06: London, Dublin
    07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
    09: Manchester, London
    10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
    11: San José
    12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    What's significant about him? He was the leader of a small, disorganised and ramshackle band of renegades, who managed to pull off an admittedly huge and horrifying terrorist act, but if you think he's got any sort of real pull amongst most of the very disparate and unrelated groups who've all gone calling themselves "al-Qaeda in X,Y & Z" since 9/11, then you're very much mistaken.

    you really dont get it. el queda is much more the a small, disorganized and ramshackle band of renegades. they have the will and ability to do some unspeakable bad things. why would you take them so lightly?
  • jlew24asu wrote:
    it will be a symbolic victory and it may very well make the world safer. he is the leader and creator of el queda. as much as I hate the guy, he is a smart evil person who is capable of horrible things.

    he will not be easiest replaced

    1. Symbolic of what, exactly?
    2. The chances of it having any significant impact on global affairs (except for the probable brief intensification of violence in retaliation) is almost non-existence.
    3. Bin Laden is not in control of what you think al-Qaeda is - and al-Qaeda is not what you think it is.
    4. He did not create al-Qaeda, in any sense.
    5. He doesn't need to be replaced - he's been replicated


    Go do some research.
    93: Slane
    96: Cork, Dublin
    00: Dublin
    06: London, Dublin
    07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
    09: Manchester, London
    10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
    11: San José
    12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    Kann wrote:
    surface area of a man = 0,2m²
    surface of the earh = 510 067 420 km²

    George Bush..


    http://www.exzooberance.com/virtual%20zoo/they%20walk/monkey/Indian%20Monkey%20485096.jpg
  • The fact that we haven't found Bin Laden isn't a hit against the Administration. It's a hit against the Green Berets, Delta Force and SEALS that are activley searching for him.


    It's called Task Force 20.
    www.myspace.com/olafvonmastadon
  • mammasanmammasan Posts: 5,656
    The fact that we haven't found Bin Laden isn't a hit against the Administration. It's a hit against the Green Berets, Delta Force and SEALS that are activley searching for him.


    It's called Task Force 20.

    I wouldn't pin it on Task Force 20. How much are they expected to accomplish if they aren't even allowed to set foot in the region where the man is hiding.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • jlew24asu wrote:
    you really dont get it. el queda is much more the a small, disorganized and ramshackle band of renegades. they have the will and ability to do some unspeakable bad things. why would you take them so lightly?

    It's actually you who doesn't get it. The notion that al-Qaeda is a global co-ordinated network of terrorists with cells in every country etc, etc, etc is a complete fallacy. al-Qaeda up until and even after 9/11 consisted of a hardcore group of maybe a dozen or so men. Beyond that, there were many disparate groups who were connected to bin Laden and his associates, but in no way were they under allegiance to him nor was he their leader. And then there is the loose radical Islamist ideology that others who think like bin Laden subscribe to, and call themselves "al-Qaeda" - not in the sense of being a huge unified organisation, but in the sense of the literal meaning of the word - "foundation", "principle, "maxim". While many of these people might look up to bin Laden, to think that he controls them or their actions, that he is their boss, that they even have the same ideas or methods - and crucially, to think that "cut off the head and the body will die" - is to profoundly misunderstand the nature of radical Islamist militancy.
    93: Slane
    96: Cork, Dublin
    00: Dublin
    06: London, Dublin
    07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
    09: Manchester, London
    10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
    11: San José
    12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
  • mammasan wrote:
    I wouldn't pin it on Task Force 20. How much are they expected to accomplish if they aren't even allowed to set foot in the region where the man is hiding.


    He hasn't always been in the same place.
    www.myspace.com/olafvonmastadon
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    1. Symbolic of what, exactly?
    islamic extremism

    2. The chances of it having any significant impact on global affairs (except for the probable brief intensification of violence in retaliation) is almost non-existence.
    really says who? you?

    3. Bin Laden is not in control of what you think al-Qaeda is
    again, how the fuck do you know?

    -
    and al-Qaeda is not what you think it is.
    this is just to name a few..

    * 2/1993: Bombing of World Trade Center; 6 killed.
    * 10/1993: Killing of U.S. soldiers in Somalia.
    * 1994: Investigation of the WTC bombing reveals that it was only a small part of a massive attack plan that included hijacking a plane and crashing it into CIA headquarters.
    * 6/1996: Truck bomb explodes outside Khobar Towers military complex in Saudi Arabia; 19 American servicemen killed, hundreds of others injured.
    * 8/1998: Bombing of U.S. embassies in East Africa; 224 killed including 12 Americans.
    * 12/1999: Plot to bomb millennium celebrations in Seattle foiled when customs agents arrest an Algerian smuggling explosives into the U.S. Other Algerians subsequently arrested were "Afghan alumni."
    * 12/1999: Jordanian police arrested members of a cell planning attacks against Western tourists.
    * 10/2000: Bombing of the USS Cole in port in Yemen; 17 U.S. sailors killed.
    * 9/11/2001: Destruction of WTC, attack on Pentagon.
    * 4/11/2002: Explosion at ancient synogogue in Tunisia leaves 17 dead, including 11 German tourists.
    * 5/2002: Car explodes outside hotel in Karachi, Pakistan, killing 14, including 11 French citizens.
    * 6/2002: Bomb explodes outside American Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, killing 12.
    * 10/2002: Nightclub bombings in Bali, Indonesia, kill 202, mostly Australian citizens.
    * 10/2002: Suicide attack on a hotel in Mombasa, Kenya, kills 16.
    * 5/2003: Suicide bombers kill 34, including 8 Americans, at housing compounds for Westerners in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
    * 5/2003: Four bombs kill 33 people, targeting Jewish, Spanish, and Belgian sites in Casablanca, Morocco.
    * 8/2003: Suicide car bomb kills 12, injures 150, at Marriott Hotel in Jakarta, Indonesia.
    * 11/2003: Explosions rock a Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, housing compound killing 17.
    * 11/2003: Suicide car bombers simultaneously attack two synagogues in Istanbul, Turkey, killing 25 and injuring hundreds. The following week a British bank in Istanbul is bombed.
    * 3/2004: Ten terrorists bombs explode almost simultaneously during the morning rush hour in Madrid, Spain, killing 202 and injuring more than 1,400. A Moroccan affiliate of al-Qaeda claims responsibility.
    * 5/29–31/2004: Terrorists attack the offices of a Saudi oil company in Khobar, Saudi Arabia, then take foreign oil workers hostage in a nearby residential compound. After a stand-off, three of the four assailants escape, leaving 22 people dead, all but three of them foreigners.
    * 6/11–19/2004: Terrorists kidnap and execute Paul Johnson, Jr., an American, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Nearly a week after his capture, photos of his body are posted on an Islamist website. Saudi security forces find and kill four suspected terrorists, including the self-proclaimed military leader of al-Qaeda in Saudi Arabia, after they are seen dumping a body.
    * 12/6/2004: Militants, believed to be linked to Al-Qaeda, drive up to the U.S. consulate in Jiddah, Saudi Arabia, storm the gates, and kill 5 consulate employees, none of whom were American. Saudi security forces subdue the attackers, killing four.
    * 7/7/2005: Bombs exploded on 3 trains and a bus in London, England, killing 52.
    * 10/1/2005: 22 killed by 3 suicide bombs in Bali, Indonesia.
    * 11/9/2005: 57 killed at 3 American hotels in Amman, Jordan.


    4. He did not create al-Qaeda, in any sense.
    you kidding right? who did then? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

    al-Qaeda or al-Qaida or al-Qa'ida (Arabic: القاعدة al-qāʕida, trans. 'the base') is the name given to an international alliance of militant Sunni Islamist organizations established in 1988 by Osama bin Laden.
    5. He doesn't need to be replaced - he's been replicated
    this is the dumbest attempt I have ever seen at trying to sound clever. nice try

    Go do some research.
    who me?
  • jlew24asu wrote:
    because he is hiding in an area US isnt allowed to go.

    most likely here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waziristan

    yeah, cos like that's ever stopped the US in the past!
    Kann wrote:
    surface area of a man = 0,2m²
    surface of the earh = 510 067 420 km²

    osama is about 6' 3" and hiding in a nation where the average height is 5' 7". he should stand out like dogs bollocks! and he has dodgy kidney's which means he need dialasis every few days. he shouldn't be that hard to spot. if anyone REALLY wanted to find him.
    What's significant about him? He was the leader of a small, disorganised and ramshackle band of renegades, who managed to pull off an admittedly huge and horrifying terrorist act, but if you think he's got any sort of real pull amongst most of the very disparate and unrelated groups who've all gone calling themselves "al-Qaeda in X,Y & Z" since 9/11, then you're very much mistaken.

    tell that to all the people who did on the madrid underground. and the london underground. and in the bali bomb. all people loyal to al-Qaeda and ultimately mr bin laden. the people in the uk who perpertrated the underground bomb on 7/7 and the failed attempt 2 weeks later had all been to al-Qaeda training camps in pakistan. they weren't there to get a sun tan. if you call them disorganised and underestimate them you are in big trouble.

    and don't forget the nazi's started off as a bunch of ramshackle band of renegades with a leader that people failed to take seriously.
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    It's actually you who doesn't get it.

    I get it just fine. come up with something more original next time

    The notion that al-Qaeda is a global co-ordinated network of terrorists with cells in every country etc, etc, etc is a complete fallacy. al-Qaeda up until and even after 9/11 consisted of a hardcore group of maybe a dozen or so men.
    you are good at pretending to know what you are talking about.

    Al-Qaeda has its origins in the uprising against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Thousands of volunteers from around the Middle East came to Afghanistan as mujahideen, warriors fighting to defend fellow Muslims. In the mid-1980s, Osama bin Laden became the prime financier for an organization that recruited Muslims from mosques around the world. These "Afghan Arab" mujahideen, which numbered in the thousands, were crucial in defeating Soviet forces.
    Beyond that, there were many disparate groups who were connected to bin Laden and his associates, but in no way were they under allegiance to him nor was he their leader. And then there is the loose radical Islamist ideology that others who think like bin Laden subscribe to, and call themselves "al-Qaeda" - not in the sense of being a huge unified organisation, but in the sense of the literal meaning of the word - "foundation", "principle, "maxim". While many of these people might look up to bin Laden, to think that he controls them or their actions, that he is their boss, that they even have the same ideas or methods - and crucially, to think that "cut off the head and the body will die" - is to profoundly misunderstand the nature of radical Islamist militancy.

    Al-Qaeda's leadership oversees a loosely organized network of cells. It can recruit members from thousands of "Arab Afghan" veterans and radicals around the world. Its infrastructure is small, mobile, and decentralized—each cell operates independently with its members not knowing the identity of other cells. Local operatives rarely know anyone higher up in the organization's hierarchy.

    Al-Qaeda differs significantly from more traditional terrorist organizations. It does not depend on the sponsorship of a political state, and, unlike the PLO or the IRA, it is not defined by a particular conflict. Instead, al-Qaeda operates as a franchise. It provides financial and logistical support, as well as name recognition, to terrorist groups operating in such diverse places as the Philippines, Algeria, Eritrea, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Tajikistan, Somalia, Yemen, and Kashmir. Furthermore, local groups may act in the name of al-Qaeda in order to bolster their own reputation—even if they are not receiving support from the organization.
  • jlew24asujlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Arctangent wrote:
    yeah, cos like that's ever stopped the US in the past!
    are you suggesting we invade pakistan?
  • soulsingingsoulsinging Posts: 13,202
    jlew24asu wrote:
    because he is hiding in an area US isnt allowed to go.

    most likely here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waziristan

    yeah, that's stopped us in the past.
  • Your research consists of Wikipedia?! Very reliable, I must say.

    Again, all of those - sorry most of those - attacks you list are claimed by people calling themselves "al-Qaeda something or other" ie. there is usually a qualifying title. That does not mean they are a part of a centralised network. For example, the group calling itself "al-Qaeda in Iraq" was run by al-Zarqawi, a man with little if any links to bin Laden. IT IS NOT THE SAME ORGANISATION! Same with the (conveniently) "self-proclaimed military leader of al-Qaeda in Saudi Arabia" that you quoted (or copy&pasted), or whatever. These are disparate, unconnected groups set up after 9/11, but sharing similar broad ideologies. As for the 1993 WTC bombing, the term al-Qaeda was not used once in the FBI investigation that followed. Why? Because, it simply didn't exist in the sense that we now think of al-Qaeda.

    And don't you think it's peculiar that bin Laden himself never used the term al-Qaeda until 2001, after the US media had started using it?

    Do some real research
    93: Slane
    96: Cork, Dublin
    00: Dublin
    06: London, Dublin
    07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
    09: Manchester, London
    10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
    11: San José
    12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
  • mammasanmammasan Posts: 5,656
    He hasn't always been in the same place.

    True, but he has kept to the same region. I don't care how good our specials ops are, if we don't have access to the region where he is hiding no amount of men, technology, training, etc... is going to help us get him.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
Sign In or Register to comment.