Bin Laden dead!

motokid wrote:

kjharn wrote:

I like Jager. While I don't necessarily always agree with his point of view, he backs everything up with sound reasoning and a good amount of proof, too.

Proof???

Please. The "proof" Jager posts regarding Iraq is slanted, biased, incomplete, and/or just false.

America was never threatened or attacked by anyone or anything that could be even remotely associated with Iraq.

Iraq was not a part of the war on terror. Not until after we invaded.

There are plenty of countries and dictators that "could be threats" to America. North Korea comes to mind pretty damn fast. So does Iran.

Have we invaded NK? Iran?

The attack on Iraq was senseless, costly, and it redirected focus away from Afghanistan, which has now shown to be a massive error in judgement.

We've gained very little to nothing by attacking Iraq, and lost huge. For what? Nothing.
So many lives lost on both sides. So many innocent people, and courageous soldiers have been sacrificed for what?

Chances are the attack on Iraq did more for bolstering hatred towards America than it did for defeating terrorists.

I said I didn't always agree

Good. Just checking.


That being said....I'm fully supportive of the original invasion of Afghanistan, and the most recent SEAL mission into Pakistan
and the killing of bin Laden regardless of if he had a gun in his hand, or not.


I'm sick of all this bullshit regarding questions about why bin Laden wasn't captured alive.

Justice was served regarding bin Laden. No questions need to be asked.
Bravo to the SEAL team and Obama for what transpired.

And lets be honest, Saddam Hussein kept Iran in check. So actually, we created an even bigger problem by removing him from power. What was it the Bush Sr. said about over throwing Suddam in the Gulf War? Oh yeah, "there is no viable exit strategy." Maybe W should have listened to his dad. Yes I know Saddam was bad etc. etc. But so are other dictators and we don't 'feel the need' to invade those countries.

motokid wrote:

I'm sick of all this bullshit regarding questions about why bin Laden wasn't captured alive.

Justice was served regarding bin Laden. No questions need to be asked.
Bravo to the SEAL team and Obama for what transpired.

Lots of coverage/debate this side of the pond, but clearly not the same angle. It may bring about a form of closure for the 9/11 relatives, but I fear long term in won't have much effect, since al qaeda is an ideology rather than an institution. In the UK, there are hundreds of thousands of Pakistanis & their descendants, so we need to be VERY careful how this is handled. My 2 pence worth: i believe the US administration did EXACTLY the right thing, in burying OBL at sea & not releasing photographs. My guess is that sometime in the future, someone will leak the pictures.....

mash100 wrote:

My 2 pence worth: i believe the US administration did EXACTLY the right thing, in burying OBL at sea & not releasing photographs. My guess is that sometime in the future, someone will leak the pictures.....

Agree 100%

I was watching the news last night, and there was talk that they might release pics of him, but due to the nature of the photos they may be too gory for squeamish stomachs.

SheWolf wrote:

I was watching the news last night, and there was talk that they might release pics of him, but due to the nature of the photos they may be too gory for squeamish stomachs.

I think it's more reasonable to be concerned that exposing those photos might inflame and incite more violence.


I have no problems with not releasing pictures.

"Oh hey....check it out! Osama's extruded eyeballs! I hope someone brought some ketchup!"

Quote :

The latest drink hitting the bars? The Bin Laden Cocktail..two shots and a splash of water.

"...But increasing oil supply - particularly a non-OPEC oil supply - helps keep world oil prices down..."

This has GOT to be the top BS quote of this thread. Where was all the CHEAPER non-OPEC AMERICAN oil during the last few oil price-gouging incidents? How about all the cheaper non-OPEC CANADIAN oil? Trading oil futures on the commodities markets has made collusion legal. No company, or country, is going to sell oil for less money when they can get MORE for it. I remember when the Alaskan oil came on-line. There were no plummeting prices then. America didn't get a break.

More drilling for oil resulting in falling oil prices is a myth. No business would flood a market with product just to watch profits fall. Stock market collusion prevents any positive outcome from supply vs. demand, at least for the consumer. I saw, a little while ago, that May futures rose an added $2.49 per barrel of crude even while actual supplies were maxed out. At that point in time we actually had no more storage for "wet barrels". So the price run-up was pure speculation. So much for supply and demand. That is a quaint notion from long ago much like a Norman Rockwell print.

Dancamp wrote:

Unlike you I don't feel compelled to be holder of the truth on everything.

Unlike me, Dan, you provide NOTHING to back up ANY claim you make (never mind the fact you seldom get anything right to begin with).

Never.

Ever.

Doesn't matter if it's your claims that Canada never dropped a bomb in Kosovo.

Or your claims that you have property rights in Canada.

You never, EVER post anything to back up your claims. You just make pronouncements. And then get upset when people don't agree and poke holes in your statements.

So... so as not to hurt your feelings... nobody should point out the outright falsehood of so much that you post? Stuff that isn't even a debate, such as the above two examples?

I don't think I'm the holder of all truths - but I am pretty comfortable that I can provide a rational, logical argument to back up what I say. I'm pretty sure you and a few others here don't agree with those arguments - but you certainly seem unable to provide anything in the way of rebutting them either.

Why is that, Dan?

And that is the essential difference between us - aside from the fact you're a happy socialist in a welfare province, and I'm a happy individual from a province that gets taxed to send transfer payments to support that socialist utopia that can't support itself.

motokid wrote:

kjharn wrote:

I like Jager. While I don't necessarily always agree with his point of view, he backs everything up with sound reasoning and a good amount of proof, too.

Proof???

Please. The "proof" Jager posts regarding Iraq is slanted, biased, incomplete, and/or just false.

I guess I'm going to have to call bullshit on you.

Especially since you, like Dan, seem utterly incapable of ever providing a rational argument to back up what you say.

So, what exactly of what I posted was false and incomplete?

I quoted what Hans Blix reported to the UN just days before the US invaded. Are you claiming he did not say that or it is in some way incomplete?

I posted what President Clinton said - before and after the attack on Iraq. I even provided YouTube links to his speeches. Was that false or incomplete? Are those YouTube clips of him forgeries?

Was it false where I pointed out that President Clinton signed a bill calling on the US to bring about regime change in Iraq just prior to the end of his presidency? Was it "biased" of me to mention that?

I posted links to YouTube clips of the current Secretary of State supporting the war with Iraq. Was that false or incomplete? Misleading?

What about the rest of those Democrats who agreed with the war - some of whom can also be seen in those YouTube clips I provided (and which I suspect you never watched). Was that false and incomplete as well?

Quote :

America was never threatened or attacked by anyone or anything that could be even remotely associated with Iraq.

Well, thank God you have the privilege to make that assessment years afterwards. Nothing like the luxury of hindsight to improve one's batting average considerably.

I might understand you if you were just as pissed at ex-President Clinton, Hillary Clinton, and all the rest of the Democrats who supported the war as well. But with you it is (and I quote again "ALL Bush"). I don't know where you believe all the Democrats were at the time, but yes, they actually were in Washington.

Quote :

The attack on Iraq was senseless, costly, and it redirected focus away from Afghanistan,

And it bagged a guy who apparently had nothing to do with Afghanistan but we're now being told was instrumental in bagging bin Laden.

Yes, you've mentioned the "redirected focus" thing before. A talking point for parrots, brought to you by the media.

So let me ask you yet again - what exactly was this letdown in Afghanistan you keep parroting on about? Surely you have something specific in mind, based on your extensive knowledge of our operations over in Afghanistan? Surely you aren't making comments that are slanted, biased, incomplete, and/or just false!

Did fast air and tac air quite flying missions?

Did we pull all our JSF people out of Afghanistan?

Artillery quite doing fire missions?

Do you know how many troop INCREASES there were in Afghanistan during that time?

How in your calculations of "redirected focus" do you figure in the Canadians and Brits assuming operational command of the two most active provinces in Afghanistan at that time? Should we have told them to screw off and go home so as not to risk being accused of "redirected focus" by people who neither understand coalition operations nor have any idea of what was going on in Afghanistan at the time?

Quote :

which has now shown to be a massive error in judgement.

Yes, Bush has said that is his greatest regret of his presidency.

Of course, he shares that error in judgement with President Bill Clinton, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former speaker Nancy Pelosi, two former Democrat presidential candidates and numerous other prominent Democrats.

So they're either just as dumb as dumb ol' Bush. Or he is actually so incredibly smart that he just acts stupid and actually duped all these lifelong politicians - including President Clinton while Clinton was still president!

Or possibly, not having your luxury of hindsight, from a position with no responsibility for the safety of the American people either, they also didn't like what they were hearing from Blix and the Brits, and everyone else. And weren't prepared to risk the lives of 300 million people on those uncertainties.

Go watch the YouTube video of all those Democrats, MotoKid. Bush was hardly alone in his fears about NBCW and Iraq - in fact, President Clinton, Al Gore, and more than a few other Democrats preceeded Bush in their fears and beliefs that he was probably still continuing with an NBCW program.

If you must hate, you could at least hate fairly and include the Democrats who felt the same way in your bitterness.

SheWolf wrote:

I was watching the news last night, and there was talk that they might release pics of him, but due to the nature of the photos they may be too gory for squeamish stomachs.

Yeah. We can watch Saddam being hung and pictures of his dead and bloody two evil brats after they were killed by our forces, brought to us by the government.

We can watch Daniel Pearl having his head sawed off on TV.

But seeing a picture of a dead terrorist - heavens, the country would collapse. We'd need to enact a nationwide PTSD program to treat the entire population.

Then of course we have those who say it might "inflame" them.

The Shi'a and other Muslims these Wahabbist/extremist turds have been murdering for years are just as glad to see him gone as we are, many have said by his actions he isn't a true Muslim anyways, and short of us deliberately desecrating his body, they don't care at all.

But yes, the naive want us to believe the terrorist whackjobs are going to hate us less because we didn't show a picture of his corpse.

They are going to hate us less because we showed him the respect to give him what amounted to a military funereal for terrorists, better than he would have gotten on a battlefield.

Yep, that'll do it. We can all come home. They'll respect us now.

I could care less whether they post pictures of him or not - but they will, eventually, when it is politically expedient to do so. He's crab food, and that's what matters as far as I'm concerned.

But the idea we might "inflame" these people who strap bombs on adolescent children and mentally handicapped adults to go into crowds and blow themselves up in hopes of killing a few Infidels, Christian version or "not real Muslim" version, is just plain ridiculous.

Jesus Jager - simply because you post 100,000 word monologues more often than most people blink their eyes doesn't mean the crap you post isn't full-on crap.

It doesn't get any simpler than this:

1) al Qaeda was not in Iraq prior to our un-provoked attack

2) Saddam/Iraq was not any more of a threat to US than North Korea, Iran, Egypt, or Cuba....

3) Iraq did NOT attack the US in any way

4) The "justification" for going into Iraq was based on nothing more than half-truths, flat-out fiction, and fearmongering at a time when "we" were most vulnerable to listening to such shit.

As for the pictures and video of hangings and beheadings - how thick are you?
USA did not release or control those images. We did not hang Saddam, not did we kill pearl.

if you can't connect those dots the next 100,000 word diatribe you post won't mean diddly-squat.

Jäger wrote:

He's crab food, and that's what matters as far as I'm concerned.

Damn it, that's one of my favorite foods. Guess I'll have to stick to fish.

That crab's got to go a long fookin way from the Arabian Sea to a dinner plate in Canada.

I get my crabs from the Chesapeake Bay. Maryland Blue Crabs thanks very much. Covered in Old Bay.

I have a buddy who lives in Sharptown that keeps telling me he's gonna try getting me some of those sweet blue crabs. I'm also trying to talk him into getting a WR too bu he seems to have his mind set on a GS500.

I am happy that Bin laden is dead. No one can and should get away with a mass murder.

rokka wrote:

I am happy that Bin laden is dead. No one can and should get away with a mass murder.

Yep. I'm happy he's dead as well. I really wish I could shake the hand of the Seal team member that put the bullet in his head.

Sure! I would dine them really well if they past my region. I would also learn them to drink Vodka our way at my expense.

Along with the lovely arctic char that you have in abundance there.

Did you mean like this

rokka wrote:

No one can and should get away with a mass murder.

You do understand that some people say that same thing about USofA, Bush specifically, and now even Obama on some smaller level?

Off with their heads!!