T1B

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 2:33 am**

Now there is a Paki claim that they killed OBL and the US swooped in and stole the body:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/w ... 854920.htm

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 2:37 am**

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote: C'mon, would photos even convince you, or would you need to stick your fingers in his wounds?

mvscal wrote:I'll let you know when I see one, asshole.

This back and forth was one less comma away from being very uncomfortable.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 2:38 am**

PSUFAN wrote:
some of these cats were 8-10 years old when this shit went down - 9/11.
Almost all of us were posting on TOT.

Is that a swipe at Hostboard?

:o

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 2:39 am**

Tom In VA wrote:I look at it like, some of these cats were 8-10 years old when this shit went down - 9/11.

I can understand them feeling relieved. I remember being somewhat relieved when the "wall came down" and the Cold War was "over".

Guess what started when the cold war ended ? Guess what won't end with Osama's execution ?

I'll take the possibility that some backwards ass camel fuckers might blow something up every 10 or so years to the constant worry that WWIII is going to annihilate us all. And don't forget the thousands of Americans killed in that affair. If the "War of Terror" lasts another 100 years, it won't kill as many Americans as Vietnam.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 2:43 am**

BSmack wrote: If the "War of Terror" lasts another 100 years, it won't kill as many Americans as Vietnam.

It's because "War On Terror" isn't actually the descriptive for a real war. It's a slogan.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 2:45 am**

Martyred wrote:
PSUFAN wrote:
some of these cats were 8-10 years old when this shit went down - 9/11.
Almost all of us were posting on TOT.

Is that a swipe at Hostboard?

:o

Both were going fairly strong at the time. I remember most of us actually waited at least a day or two before we regressed into the partisan douchebaggery that we are so quick to delve into on affairs like this or Gifford's shooting.

Sure, IB was acting like a cunt, but that doesn't really count as a political thing. She's just a cunt.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 2:50 am**

BSmack wrote: I'll take the possibility that some backwards ass camel fuckers might blow something up every 10 or so years to the constant worry that WWIII is going to annihilate us all. And don't forget the thousands of Americans killed in that affair. If the "War of Terror" lasts another 100 years, it won't kill as many Americans as Vietnam.

I suppose. I don't view these guys as "backwards ass camel fuckers" though. Some are actually educated men, educated here or in London. The little jabs here and there might be some wacky fuck who went to a madrassa and was selected to strap a belt of explosives on, walk into a lobby of some resort and detonate it.

Right after 9-11 there was a story, I don't know if it's true or not, of one of the dudes caught being flown by helicopter - past the WTC and saying "We'll get it next time".

So I don't discount the claims Wikileaks put out as simple "Bagdad Bob" type ramblings. If anything, Al Queda, and the Jihadists have proven it is. Fealty to their cause and beliefs - literally to the point of death, and patience.

I think being vaporized in an instant is a better fate than what might come as a result of a few small scale nukes going off and the chaos, fear, and "terror" that would produce.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 3:08 am**

88 wrote:My first reaction was "finally!". Then, as the day wore on, I wished they had captured his ass so that he could have been tried and then be put to death.

I've always considered you as being a bright person. Think about what you've written. How many millions of US Taxpayer money would be wasted over a decade on this? How many sympathizer terrorist attacks world-wide by his followers would follow?

The only expenses we've incurred were gas money, the cost of a helo, a few explosives and bullets.

My only disappointment is on the carrier Carl Vinson that they washed him before dumping his carcass into the sea. I hope they merely wrapped him up in a white sheet and when he hit the water, he was then washed.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 3:11 am**

Atomic Punk wrote:
My only disappointment is on the carrier Carl Vinson that they washed him before dumping his carcass into the sea.

"Destroying evidence, no doubt! Dental records, NOW!"

Sincerely, mv-fake-moon-landings

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 3:12 am**

You gotta think they gave him concrete boots or something. Wouldn't want his body washing up ashore anywhere. That would be gross...and unsanitary.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 3:21 am**

Screw_Michigan wrote:You gotta think they gave him concrete boots or something. Wouldn't want his body washing up ashore anywhere. That would be gross...and unsanitary.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 3:39 am**

PSUFAN wrote:Almost all of us were posting on TOT.

TNW - Nishlord was imploring that we not go crazy and nuke everything from Istanbul to Islamabad.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 3:43 am**

Screw_Michigan wrote:You gotta think they gave him concrete boots or something. Wouldn't want his body washing up ashore anywhere. That would be gross...and unsanitary.

It's all good. Sharks are halal.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 4:17 am**

RACK AP, it's come full circle. When all this utter bullshit started, I remember Correlli Barnett arguing that anti-terrorism is a job for gendarmerie, not armies in the field, everyone with an actual brain was baffled. A colossal waste of time with a picture perfect, choreographed ending.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 4:27 am**

KC Scott wrote:I also didn't get why that same administration felt compelled to manufacture a war to cover their inability to terminate the source behind 9-11

What the fuck are you talking about?

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 4:29 am**

probably your penchant for Winston Churchill avatars and 'we're the new Rome' crap in 2005.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 4:34 am**

Scott's asking the question that begs to be asked at this point...why did we need a decade of war and a 3 trillion dollar expenditure to go with it if this was as simple as rattling up in a couple of copters and capping the tall skinny dude?

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 4:46 am**

KC Scott wrote:By the same token, I also didn't get why that same administration felt compelled to manufacture a war to cover their inability to terminate the source behind 9-11

Just speculating here.

1. The Northern Alliance, the CIA, and the initial RDF operations in Afghanistan were pretty effective at running the Taliban off at first. And the Taliban didn't particularly like foreigners at all so Osama's people weren't all that welcome - many left to fight somewhere else. Where ...

Iraq.

2. Unknown things about Saddam and his potential interaction with terrorists and WMD. Once Iraq was overthrown and documents were uncovered, interrogations made, terrorists captured and killed the terrain ahead seemed a bit more clear. So there are now two battespaces that yielded some intel resources.

3. The tenuous nature of Pakistan and Musharef vs. Taliban and the fact Pakistan does have nukes.

4. The fact the US hadn't really proved itself to the people of the region. Many weren't too keen to stick their necks out because they feared us "cutting and running" like we did under Reagan in 1983.

5. Time, distilling the information, finding the people, tracking the people, planning the operations, drilling the operations, etc.... etc....

It's just a hunch.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 4:51 am**

88 wrote:
Atomic Punk wrote:
88 wrote:My first reaction was "finally!". Then, as the day wore on, I wished they had captured his ass so that he could have been tried and then be put to death.
I've always considered you as being a bright person. Think about what you've written. How many millions of US Taxpayer money would be wasted over a decade on this? How many sympathizer terrorist attacks world-wide by his followers would follow?

The only expenses we've incurred were gas money, the cost of a helo, a few explosives and bullets.
There is no doubt that capping his dome with a double tap saved a lot of legal aggravation etc. Do you think we ought to have Seal Six stop by Gitmo on the way home and cap the rest of them?

Then why are you arguing for a trial for a self-confessed international terrorist? Now you are setting up a Straw Man by trying to equate his Gitmo followers as being on the same level?

BTW, SEAL 6 from the Richard Marcinko days no longer exists as its elements has been assimilated by JSOC.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 4:58 am**

Hassan Ghul - Captured, Iraq 2004. http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=13512344

Then in 2004, top al-Qaida operative Hassan Ghul was captured in Iraq. Ghul told the CIA that al-Kuwaiti was a courier, someone crucial to the terrorist organization. In particular, Ghul said, the courier was close to Faraj al-Libi, who replaced Mohammed as al-Qaida's operational commander. It was a key break in the hunt for in bin Laden's personal courier.

"Hassan Ghul was the linchpin," a U.S. official said.

Any more questions Scott ?

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 6:36 am**

PSUFAN wrote:Scott's asking the question that begs to be asked at this point...why did we need a decade of war and a 3 trillion dollar expenditure to go with it if this was as simple as rattling up in a couple of copters and capping the tall skinny dude?

Are you a child? Do you think this means that the war is over and everybody can come home now? This operation has absolutely no relevance to the war in Afghanistan whatsoever. Binny is a hood ornament nothing more.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 6:51 am**

Well I'm starting to back down a bit from the mission being one solely of symbolic nature.

I was premature in my assessment of that as apparently a "mother lode" of intel has been collected. Which stands to reason, facepalm myself, if anyone has some killer intel it HAS to be Bin Laden.

So getting a hold of that might have some great impact in future operations to thwart attacks - especially this alleged sleeper cell that will nuke places.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 6:56 am**

Tom In VA wrote:..apparently a "mother lode" of intel has been collected.

...from BSmegma's shorts maybe.

The intel collected is likely to pertain to the particular Pakistani maggots who have been hosting him. I'm sure it will make for some very interesting reading.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 11:26 am**

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Lord knows if this happened under Chimpy's watch you'd be sucking his dick like it was a drum stick deep fried in lard.

And so true of about 90% of this board.

KC Scott wrote:This thread makes me wonder what exactly, Obama would need to do to get any positive response from some of you fucks.

There's nothing he can do. After all, he has a D next to his name. Therefore, he's inherently evil incarnate to about 90% of this board.

mvscal wrote:Hey? WTF? I thought he wasn't a real Muslim? Isn't that what handwringers have been telling us for the last ten years?

The point wasn't that bin Laden wasn't a Muslim, it was that he doesn't represent all Muslims any moreso than Pat Robertson represents all Christians. But I guess that was just a bid too nuanced for a knuckle-dragging Neanderthal like yourself.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 12:37 pm**

Tom In VA wrote:Well I'm starting to back down a bit from the mission being one solely of symbolic nature.

I was premature in my assessment of that as apparently a "mother lode" of intel has been collected. Which stands to reason, facepalm myself, if anyone has some killer intel it HAS to be Bin Laden.

So getting a hold of that might have some great impact in future operations to thwart attacks - especially this alleged sleeper cell that will nuke places.

Another reason why President Obama made the right call to send the Seals in and not rely on a Predator drone or (wassup Bill Clinton) a cruise missile.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 1:05 pm**

BSmack wrote: President Obama

Did you genuflect as you typed that?

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 1:18 pm**

War Wagon wrote:
BSmack wrote: President Obama
Did you genuflect as you typed that?

That would be physically impossible to do both at the same time. Of course I genuflected BEFORE typing that.

:P

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 1:34 pm**

Papa Willie wrote:What's really odd about this? The people you're seeing on TV hootin' and hollerin' are young pups who voted for Obama. Why? Because they're young n' dumb. That's pretty typical, though. Jealous college professors normally trying flushing that sort of poo through a youngster's mind. Finally, most of them grow up a little and start seeing reality a little better.

But - they're happy, because they think it's making their vote look a little better now. NOW they don't have to think that this guy is possibly the shittiest President we've ever had. The timing of this thing is making me wonder more & more. This comes RIGHT on the heels of a report showing that Obama has gotten his shittiest approval ratings ever. When these people who voted for him are seeing that, it can NOT make them feel very good about themselves. So now we've got a story where the Commander in Narcissism pretty much says he took care of it all.

And now it's "We got him. We just threw him off a boat, so you can't see him". Ah yeah. The gov't would NEVER fucking lie to us, would it?

And you know what the most ironic thing is? All of these people dancing in the streets for Obama are the exact motherfuckers that are against the death penalty.

Weird. Nah - not weird - just fucking double standards. Let's just be fucking honest...

So NOW - he's going to fuck around and probably won't be pulling anybody out of Afghanistan for a good long while, because we're over there for OIL. Still - he killed bin Laden, so he can do no wrong with his sheep supporters.

Gitmo's still open. 50,000 TROOPS (not fucking re-named advisors) are in Iraq, and nobody's coming home from Afghanistan. And you won't hear jack shit about it, either...

You were too stupid to be admitted to any college. We get it.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 1:40 pm**

BSmack wrote:
War Wagon wrote:
BSmack wrote: President Obama
Did you genuflect as you typed that?
That would be physically impossible to do both at the same time.

Not according to Arch Angel.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 1:41 pm**

Tom In VA wrote:So getting a hold of that might have some great impact in future operations to thwart attacks - especially this alleged sleeper cell that will nuke places.

So do you really believe that Al Queerda actually has a nuclear bomb that they weren’t going to set off unless something happened to Bin Laden?

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 1:51 pm**

BSmack wrote:
Another reason why President Obama made the right call to send the Seals in and not rely on a Predator drone or (wassup Bill Clinton) a cruise missile.

Yes. This was all Obama's idea.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 1:56 pm**

trev wrote:
BSmack wrote:
Another reason why President Obama made the right call to send the Seals in and not rely on a Predator drone or (wassup Bill Clinton) a cruise missile.
Yes. This was all Obama's idea.

How early do you start drinking? Btheft didn't credit Obama with the idea, he said he authorized it.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 1:59 pm**

Goober McTuber wrote: So do you really believe that Al Queerda actually has a nuclear bomb that they weren’t going to set off unless something happened to Bin Laden?

I don't really believe much of anything but here's something I know.

Prior to 9/11 if you had asked me if I really believed a coordinated attack would take place in which jihadis hi-jacked planes and .......

BSmack,

Entirely plausible. That, and along with Bush's strategy of sticking it out in Iraq - sending in a SEAL team to do the dirty would garner much more respect in that region than simply lobbing cruise missiles. This had to be up close and personal. Obama did his job very well.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 1:59 pm**

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:
trev wrote:
BSmack wrote:
Another reason why President Obama made the right call to send the Seals in and not rely on a Predator drone or (wassup Bill Clinton) a cruise missile.
Yes. This was all Obama's idea.
How early do you start drinking?

You say this like it's a bad thing for Trev to be lubed up so early.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 2:02 pm**

I worry about trev sometimes. If she can't follow very simple reading comprehension, how can we expect her to accurately construct a triple decker ham sandwich?

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 2:03 pm**

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:How early do you start drinking? Btheft didn't credit Obama with the idea, he said he authorized it.

Chronic alcoholism, rampant stupidity...about one in the same.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 2:05 pm**

All I'll say on the matter is I am glad Obama did not follow up on his campaign promise to GTFO of the Middle East right away. I'm glad he stuck with the plan. I honestly didn't think he had the balls to authorize a unilateral mission such as this. I was wrong. One step forward after a trillion back. Hey, it's progress....

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 2:26 pm**

Bsmack sees Obama thru rose colored glasses. He doesn't think he had any help in this mission. Sure Obama gets the credit, he is president. But in my opinion, there were 99% more relevant people who deserve the credit for this. That is all. But I'll let Bsmack bask in his afterglow.

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 2:34 pm**

They're apparently going to release the photo(s)

Posted: **Tue May 03, 2011 2:51 pm**

Tom In VA wrote:sending in a SEAL team to do the dirty would garner much more respect in that region than simply lobbing cruise missiles.

Who gives a fuck if anybody in that shithole likes or respects us? The only thing I want from them is FEAR.

Yes, it was a nice touch dumping his body in the ocean but the only thing that matters is he's dead. I don't care how it was accomplished. I heard there were plans to take that place out with B-2 Stealth bombers and that would've been fine too. Do it in broad daylight rather than sneaking in under cover of darkness.

Obama did his job very well.

Yes, it had to be really tough for him to cut his round of golf short.

T1B

OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!

Re: OBAMA KILLS BIN LADIN!!!!!!!