why can't US capture/kill OBL

124678

Comments

  • Last Exodus
    Last Exodus Posts: 782
    hes fucking dead man
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    soulsinging wrote:
    could have. but i dont think he would have. anyway, it was conjecture on my part. i think for all the "war president" rhetoric bush tosses around, gore would have handled both of these wars far better than bush has done.

    I seriously doubt that but ok.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    mammasan wrote:
    Come on you know Gore would have run up the white flag and handed Bin Laden the keys to the White House. ;)

    nah, he would have already ceded the united states to those liberal hippy french and it woulda been chirac's job to hand over the keys.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Last Exodus wrote:
    hes fucking dead man


    I sure hope so but what makes you so sure?
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I seriously doubt that but ok.

    why so? what has bush done that's been effective? from the beginning he's used divisive rhetoric to alienate our allies. he refuses to work with them or share control, which lead to things like us bombing canadian troops instead of the taliban, he ignored generals on multiple occasions that said more troops were needed (in both conflicts) and he had no post-invasion plan for EITHER nation before we invaded. gore's a smart guy and knows he's not a military general. he would have listened to his advisors and let the experts run the show and made sure it was done cohesively.

    i made a huge mistake campaigning for nader that year...
  • onelongsong
    onelongsong Posts: 3,517
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I sure hope so but what makes you so sure?

    based on what i would do if i were a part of a group and the leader drew fire from a group of people we couldn't beat; i'd kill him. just being asociated with him is a death sentence. since we are not dealing with reasonable people; we can't expect them to think reasonably. but that's what i would do.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    onelongsong wrote:
    based on what i would do if i were a part of a group and the leader drew fire from a group of people we couldn't beat; i'd kill him. just being asociated with him is a death sentence. since we are not dealing with reasonable people; we can't expect them to think reasonably. but that's what i would do.

    only al-quaeda wants the fire... they thrive on it. makes them seem more legitimately threatening and ups recruiting.
  • polaris
    polaris Posts: 3,527
    Rockin'InCanada wrote:
    It certainly makes policy easier to dictate...something to rally people around....make even an abstract concept of terrorism be labelled to one face.

    However that politcal route has a consequance that being once you paint a face to an abstract concept you will undoublty create some sort of hate not just for the man (where reasoning for ill feelings is more than acceptable) but for who he is, the colour he is, the race he is, etc.

    Certainly not all, in fact the majority, will fall into that hate trap but it does create more problems.

    even better!! ... divisiveness makes it harder for dissent ...
  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    i always wonder, and you can call me a conspircay nut fine, about the connection in the Carlysle Group. Both members of the Bush and Bin Laden families are members, and it is an orginization that profits from war, among other things.

    Bush on one side, Bin Laden on the other, meanwhile both their families are making bank....
  • onelongsong
    onelongsong Posts: 3,517
    soulsinging wrote:
    only al-quaeda wants the fire... they thrive on it. makes them seem more legitimately threatening and ups recruiting.

    but if their purpose is to become a legitimate "government" or whatever they're seeking; killing the rouge would give them acceptance.
  • Last Exodus
    Last Exodus Posts: 782
    jlew24asu wrote:
    I sure hope so but what makes you so sure?


    But it wouldn't surprise me. The guy was too much of a narcissitic fuck to be able to keep quiet all these years. There was a time he was releasing a video a month. Now its Al Zawahiri and has been for some time. If Bin Laden were alive, it would be a tweak to Geroge Bush every time he made a new video. And he hasn't. I think alot of those purported videos and audios were so generic they could have been made in anticipation of Bin Laden's death to keep us guessing.

    I also think it serves our government's interests to keep us thinking he's alive. Because if the dude is dead, aint the war over?
  • Last Exodus
    Last Exodus Posts: 782
    icarus wrote:
    jlew won the thread


    So why no videos in over a year or more? Dead. He may have been killed at Tora Bora. If he was, Al Qaeda would have had to admit a huge defeat by saying so.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Last Exodus wrote:
    But it wouldn't surprise me. The guy was too much of a narcissitic fuck to be able to keep quiet all these years. There was a time he was releasing a video a month. Now its Al Zawahiri and has been for some time. If Bin Laden were alive, it would be a tweak to Geroge Bush every time he made a new video. And he hasn't. I think alot of those purported videos and audios were so generic they could have been made in anticipation of Bin Laden's death to keep us guessing.
    i'm with ya here. you make a strong argument for it being true
    Last Exodus wrote:
    I also think it serves our government's interests to keep us thinking he's alive. Because if the dude is dead, aint the war over?

    this part, not so much. I do not think Bush would withhold this information. why? to profit from the war personally? to start his own oil company when he retires?


    dont you think he ( or any sitting president) will want to be remembered as the president who got bin laden?

    keeping bin ladens death a secret would not benefit his legacy.

    I believe if bin laden is very caught or proven to be dead in the next 2 years, Bush's legacy will be hurt even worse. he will be known as the guy who fucked up Iraq (although history is still be written there, somethings gotta give) and the president how couldnt catch the man who attacked our country on 9/11.
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Last Exodus wrote:
    So why no videos in over a year or more? Dead. He may have been killed at Tora Bora.
    he has appreared on many videos since tora bora. are the real? well thats debatable but still happened.

    Last Exodus wrote:
    If he was, Al Qaeda would have had to admit a huge defeat by saying so.

    thats true
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    onelongsong wrote:
    but if their purpose is to become a legitimate "government" or whatever they're seeking; killing the rouge would give them acceptance.

    they have no desire to become a legitimate government. who gave you that nonsense idea? they dont even have a unified command structure or a unified nationality or a unified ethnic background. all they have in common is the koran and a hatred of the west. their goal is not to become a government or legitimate political group, their goal is destruction of western power. and they dont care how much heat it gets them, they firmly believe they are dying for a noble cause in some sort of battle against good and evil. they dont give a damn about international acceptance.

    man, where do you get your news?
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    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.


    you have to keep the boogey man alive...
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    icarus wrote:
    i think its pretty clear he's in Waziristan


    why? becasue you read a few government provided news clippings in the last few days. the story and info was provided by a "pentagon insider"... aka we were spoon fed bullshit :D
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    my2hands wrote:
    why? becasue you read a few government provided news clippings in the last few days. the story and info was provided by a "pentagon insider"... aka we were spoon fed bullshit :D

    how is that not a logical explanation? do you know where this area in question is located? are you aware that this may be the only place on earth where osama is welcomed and can move about relatively freely without the risk of a government intervention?


    are you that closed minded to think any information that comes from the US government, the media, or several experts is complete bullshit?

    people from many different countries, educational backgrounds, religions, all confirm that this might be the only place he can be.

    where do you think he is? and who spoon fed you the bullshit?
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    jlew24asu wrote:
    how is that not a logical explanation?
    i havent seen any logical explanations from my government about the "war on terror" yet
    do you know where this area in question is located?
    why yes, actually i do. your intelectaul challenges on this board are quite boring. you are not the only person with a brain and a map.
    are you aware that this may be the only place on earth where osama is welcomed and can move about relatively freely without the risk of a government intervention?
    whether he is there or not is irrelevant. if the US military wanted to extract him, they would. period, end of story. i was only pointing out that most "info" or "intel" is provided by the US government and miliatry, they have an agenda, as always, which is not the same agenda they portray to me and you. read your articles in the mainstream media about the "war on terror" or intel, and it is always provided by the Pentagon or DC. the media then just repeats it as fact. every single time.

    are you that closed minded to think any information that comes from the US government
    no, i am open minded enough to realize the constant lies and spin the government feeds the public.
    the media
    i do not trust one thing the mainstream media tells me. they dont discuss real issues, they are consumed with feeding you worthless "stories" to keep you distracted from the real discussions that need to take place. at work today around the cooler first mention poverty, see the reaction, then mention anna nicole smith and watch the reaction. i do this to entertain myself, you will enjoy the obvious results. i do enjoy the independant media and other media outlets that focus on the truth and real news worthy stories or topics. Democracy Now! being an example
    or several experts is complete bullshit
    depends on the expert, i tend to trust them more than the government and mainstream media, as i hope you do
    people from many different countries, educational backgrounds, religions, all confirm that this might be the only place he can be.
    irrelevant to the point i am making about spoon fed propaganda. and dont worry, if you want to get technical i can say the same about Iraq WMD ;)
    where do you think he is? and who spoon fed you the bullshit?
    i never was a fan of "wheres Waldo" because it doesnt matter where he is, if Uncle Sam doesnt want to find him
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    my2hands wrote:
    i havent seen any logical explanations from my government about the "war on terror" yet why yes, actually i do. your intelectaul challenges on this board are quite boring. you are not the only person with a brain and a map. whether he is there or not is irrelevant. if the US military wanted to extract him, they would. period, end of story. i was only pointing out that most "info" or "intel" is provided by the US government and miliatry, they have an agenda, as always, which is not the same agenda they portray to me and you. read your articles in the mainstream media about the "war on terror" or intel, and it is always provided by the Pentagon or DC. the media then just repeats it as fact. every single time.


    no, i am open minded enough to realize the constant lies and spin the government feeds the public. i do not trust one thing the mainstream media tells me. they dont discuss real issues, they are consumed with feeding you worthless "stories" to keep you distracted from the real discussions that need to take place. at work today around the cooler first mention poverty, see the reaction, then mention anna nicole smith and watch the reaction. i do this to entertain myself, you will enjoy the obvious results. i do enjoy the independant media and other media outlets that focus on the truth and real news worthy stories or topics. Democracy Now! being an example depends on the expert, i tend to trust them more than the government and mainstream media, as i hope you do

    irrelevant to the point i am making about spoon fed propaganda. and dont worry, if you want to get technical i can say the same about Iraq WMD ;)

    i never was a fan of "wheres Waldo" because it doesnt matter where he is, if Uncle Sam doesnt want to find him

    yeah man, damn the man!

    if our intel is not supposed to come from the pentagon, where should our defense intelligence info come from? aren't they the very definition of experts? all they do is watch things like that... so who is better qualified to tell us where bin laden might be? who would you maybe trust if they said bin laden is in X?

Categories