Array title="zulater has a reputation beyond repute">
Two words for you. Actionable intelligence. If Bush had it on Bin Laden I'm certain he would have used it too.Originally Posted by The Patriot
Actually, Obama did something new. He broke international law by ordering a ground force strike in a sovereign nation without permission - something that tentative-toed Bush NEVER did.
"A man's got to know his limitations."
Surely you know, that's just the nature of the game! Be prepared for plenty of off-handed mentions of how Osama is dead during the coming campaign.You think we didn't know that? His entire speech last night was him commending himself and trying to get reelected. I was afraid that our beloved Pres was going to get hurt patting himself on the back. And I've never heard to many "I's" and "me's" in a speech before. I think maybe he should just "change" his name to Ibama or Mebama. Whattaya think?
Array title="NJarhead has much to be proud of">
[QUOTE=The Patriot;160530]Surely you know, that's just the nature of the game! Be prepared for plenty of off-handed mentions of how Osama is dead during the coming campaign.
Again I ask, you think we don't know that?The man needs all the help he can get.
It was the innate kind Bush lacked.
"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02
"And if we have Osama bin Laden in our sights and the Pakistani government is unable or unwilling to take them out, then I think that we have to act, and we will take them out. We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al Qaeda. That has to be our biggest national security priority." - Barack Obama (2008 debate)
Since Obama had the timing of this worked out so closely, does anyone think it's a coincidence that this mission was launched EXACTLY 8 years to the day of Bush's original "Mission Accomplished" gaffe?
(I do have to admit, I'm joying the incredible hypocritical new "Faux-hawk" lefties suddenly embracing all the very things they've hated so much for the last 10 years)
Fire Goodell
The timing was decided because of amount of moonlight. Are you clueless about how these operations work?
Why? We could have waited another month or two, surely...or maybe another 3 months. Hell, Obama should have waited until 9/11/11. That would have maximized the political gains...
Point being, this guy is a very good politician. His first (and second and third) thought about every matter is the political risk/reward. I would not put it past him to launch on the anniversary.
Fire Goodell
You think he would delay and possibly miss bin Laden because of a non-operational reason? Obama isn't that stupid. His military advisors aren't that stupid. People who believe crap like you posted might just be that stupid. It's totally amazing how the hatred clouds reason for some people.
That's fine...the ad hom's were inevitable.
Back to reality here...
I can't seem to find a liberal anywhere who's willing to concede that Bush had ANYTHING to do with any of this. However, Leon Panetta let a little something slip here...let's see if anyone catches what he's really saying:
Four years ago, we uncovered his identity, and for operational reasons, I can't go into details about his name or how we identified him, but about two years ago, after months of persistent effort, we identified areas in Pakistan where the courier and his brother operated. Still we were unable to pinpoint exactly where they lived, due to extensive operational security on their part. The fact that they were being so careful reinforced our belief that we were on the right track.
Then in August 2010, we found their residence, a compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, a town about 35 miles north of Islamabad. The area is relatively affluent, with lots of retired military. It's also insolated [sic] from the natural disasters and terrorist attacks that have afflicted other parts of Pakistan.
- CIA Director Leon Panetta
At the very BEST, Obama simply continued an ongoing program. I wish someone would PLEASE give Bush at least a part of the credit he deserves for this. Calling me stupid for saying that Obama is a deft and able politician is one thing, but completely ignoring that all the major components in this mission came before Obama or extended out of Bush's term are beyond ridiculous.
Fire Goodell
Not quite
The Bush administration has concluded that Osama bin Laden was present during the battle for Tora Bora late last year and that failure to commit U.S. ground troops to hunt him was its gravest error in the war against al Qaeda, according to civilian and military officials with first-hand knowledge.
Array title="NJarhead has much to be proud of">
I suppose you're an expert?? When were you a CIA operative?
There is a bit of gratification in knowing that this POS is dead, but he's still only one man and he was no longer an active figure in Al Queada. I commend Obama for making the bold decision of going into Pakistan secretly, but at the same time, do we really want to aggravate an already delicate relationship with a fragile government who posses nuclear weapons? That country is split and susceptible to a coup; undermining their officials does not help them any. Why do you think we give them billions of dollars each year? Are you clueless about how these things work???
Array title="NJarhead has much to be proud of">
He delayed for months actually. And his only say was "Go" or "no go." These decisions are based on intelligence that in this case specifically took no less than four years to gather. What, did you think they found him on Friday and Obama organized the operation for the following day? Don't you know how these things work???
Array title="NJarhead has much to be proud of">
Bush, like Clinton, used precision weapons rather than sending in troops. There is also the possibility that Bin Laden was tipped off by our "ally" prior too the strike. Obama made a smart decision to send in ground forces on that compound, but he also made the decision for other reasons like avoiding civilian casualties and positive identification. Look, one good decision in a sea of bad ones does not suddenly make him a great president.
Array title="NJarhead has much to be proud of">
Anyone want to discuss Water Boarding now? I'm surprised that the President could morally use this intelligence considering how it was obtained.
Array title="zulater has a reputation beyond repute">
Perhaps, but what was the risk/ reward of the moment? I mean if we incurred several hundred casualties in a potential ambush situation maybe it wouldn't have been worth it?
"A man's got to know his limitations."
Array title="zulater has a reputation beyond repute">
Eric Holder will be having night sweats in an effort to refrain from issueing arrest warrants for all involved in this successfull operation. I'm serious too.Anyone want to discuss Water Boarding now? I'm surprised that the President could morally use this intelligence considering how it was obtained.
"A man's got to know his limitations."
Bush also made the mistake of trusting our Afghan "allies" to take him out at Tora Bora, which they "failed" to do (more like looked the other way while OBL beat feet the hell out of there).
On a side note, I'm glad word of this operation didn't find its way to Wikileaks before it was completed, or the bastard would have probably gotten away again. SOME state secrets are OK. Really.
Battleball Champion!One is saying he if of no interest in order to catch him off guard.
The other is telegraphing his plans.
Hmm, which is smarter? I for one am not in the camp that thinks giving the enemy all your secrets (ala left media) so they can counter you.
Wait a minute, I'm to dizzy from that spinning to respond...
Battleball Champion!It's very simple really. No one in their right mind would believe for ONE second that Bush would give OBL a pass so to take those words at face value is, IMO, ignorant.
As for Obama's statement, well, if you are ignorant to the ways of war then you speak your mind which tips off the enemy.
Battleball Champion!Sort of like the police chasing a speedster in a car. Give the appearance of not chasing and they relax, let their guard down, which can ultimately lead to their capture.
If you constantly go after them with sirens blaring then he will continue to work like hell in order to evade you.
I don't see the complexity in what I'm saying.
It's amazing, isn't it? We used "illegally" obtained tainted evidence from "clearly innocent civilians" detained in a facility that was slated to be closed (at least according to campaign promises), to conduct an illegal operation invading a sovereign country to "assassinate" a peaceful Muslim. Or something like that.Anyone want to discuss Water Boarding now? I'm surprised that the President could morally use this intelligence considering how it was obtained.
That's how these very same people who are feting Obama would have spun the EXACT same actions had Bush been sitting in the oval office rather than Obama...well, all but the peaceful Muslim part. Even the fauxhawks can see OBL for the dirtball he was. But they'd certainly want to see him tried and imprisoned for life (No death penalty!), not shot in the head.
Fire Goodell
Battleball Champion!I for one believe the end justifies the means. If you have a person who targets the safety of our country, you do what needs done to remove that thread. Period.
We left behind a King who thought like that and created a bill of rights saying the opposite. The means matter.
yes, well said. However we currenlty have a political class whose only "ends" are to get re-elected and exempt themselves from the same rule of law that we hold so dear. instead of pointing fingers at the Dems or the Republicans I say they all, with unfortunately few exceptions, need to get a reality check. Americans as a whole are about fed up with the "Washington Way." I am sick of seeing men and women get elected on high ideals and promises to only engage in the same thing as the people they railed against as canidates. We are in serious trouble in this country and it is time the adults took charge again.
Array title="Craic has a reputation beyond repute">
The Bill of Rights originally applied only to citizenry, and did not include traitors.
I do not believe in any way, shape, or form, that a person taken from a battlefield should be placed in the American Legal system. The Bill of Rights was not intended nor SHOULD it be extended to them.
American citizens who fight against this country overseas also forfeit their citizenship and thus, the protection of the Bill of Rights. Both of those were facts until activism took over our courts.
While distasteful, the concept of water boarding was not part of the idea against torture. The Rack. Electric Shock. Cutting a man from the the breastbone to the naval and pealing away each layer of skin, THOSE are torture, least, in its originating definition.
It's honorable to want to keep our hands clean. I am all for it. However, there comes a fine line which such rules stop being laws for the common good, and start being a suicide pact for a nation.
The Bill of Rights weren't the granting of rights to citizens in any way. They were the enumeration of just some of the rights the founders believed all men had and retained by virtue of the people not granting power over those items to the government being formed. Look it up.
Array title="Craic has a reputation beyond repute">
Now you're just dreaming. I don't know if we HAVE an adult in politics.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
