Wot no Bin Laden thread?

[The Gaffer]

Come on, the biggest news for - oh, well actually, since the Royal Wedding - but anyway - you know.

This looks great for Obama. The Republicans must be spewing. :lol:

Any bets on how they are going to spin it?

[Valandil]

OK - this will henceforth be the "No Bin Laden" Thread.

Oh sure, some conservatives are finding fault with President Obama right now. But most are relieved it's over. Only a very few either see it, or want to spin it, as a liberal or conservative issue. Of course, that few probably includes most of the media, who would love to find a story there.

I think only a few are really elated and celebrating. As I said, I'm somewhat relieved it's over, but also a little sad (as a Christian). I would not celebrate anyone's death - but I understand and sympathize with those who do. He certainly was a man who promoted violence and caused grief to many. I don't think it was likely to end any other way. We were about certain to find him - eventually. And once found, even if we would pursue a first option to capture, that's much more difficult to pull off. Especially if, as I suspect, he would seek to avoid capture at all costs.

[Valandil]

Just found this:

http://specials.msn.com/A-List/Lifes...entid=28592513

So you see, I really think a lot of people, including some liberals and many in the media, just don't get conservatives.

I sure hope - that all the liberals praising President Obama over this - would be equally magnanimous toward President Bush if this had taken place during his presidency.

[Draken]

Originally Posted by Valandil

So you see, I really think a lot of people, including some liberals and many in the media, just don't get conservatives.

What, like why that bloke with the ridiculous hair jumped onto an urban myth about Obama's place of birth, got strung along just long enough to look stupid, was proved wrong, had the mickey taken publically and then said it was a triumph for HIM?

What's to not get?


But back to the point - a pretty impressive mission. Lots of firepower and no survivors. A bit like one of their hostage rescues, come to think of it.

[inked]

Didn't look hard enough for a Bin Laden thread, did you , Gaffer? Oi vey!
But I appreciate a pun as much as the next person, so good title for the thread.

Note to all, this is the consequence of Bush's actions as well as the Obaminator. He called both Clinton and Bush to inform them before the news went public, according to news sources here in the USA.

[The Gaffer]

I think you are right, Valandil. All sides tend to judge the "opposition" by their most extreme proponents because it fulfils our need to feel vindicated.

However, by having the likes of Sarah Palin and Donald Trump to the fore, the Republicans are not making the Democrats' job any harder.

Also, I think you are forgetting the near-unanimous support that Bush got for his ill-conceived strategy. His administration instantly branded any dissent as unpatriotic.

Obama has shown he has far more class than that.

If Bush had put the same emphasis on capturing Bin Laden, all this might have been done and dusted years ago, with less loss of life, less waste of resource and greater emphasis on the things that really matter.

[The Gaffer]

Sorry I missed your thread Inked.

Originally Posted by inked

Note to all, this is the consequence of Bush's actions as well as the Obaminator. He called both Clinton and Bush to inform them before the news went public, according to news sources here in the USA.

Good effort!

"It's as much Bush's credit because Obama called him up".

7/10.

What telling insights do you think Bush proffered that made the decisive difference?

[Insidious Rex]

Its a short term bump for Obama whether Fox News likes it or not. It doesnt really matter that some of the intelligence leading to the success date back to 2005. Obama made the call and was at the helm when it happened. So he gets the boost. Thats the psychology of politics. Its the same concept as everyone blaming Obama for the horrible economy he walked into. Now if we get Ghaddafi in the next couple months Obama will really get a spike. But a spike will only be so useful when speculators are driving up the cost of gas to the point where you have to take out a second mortgage to fill your tank.

I have to wonder if those seals werent under orders to "eliminate with extreme prejudice" because the administration didnt want to deal with the political rancor of trying bin Laden or sticking him in Gitmo. And dumping him at sea saves the world a martyrs shrine for the extremists to rally around. Good ridance. See what you can accomplish when you free up your resources from invading Iraq for not having weapons of mass destruction?

[inked]

Gaffer,

It was Bush's effort that Obama continued that got Osama. Clinton had the opportunity years before and blew it. (Remember the car bombs that failed ?)

"Osama Bin Laden has been linked to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing(6 dead, thousands injured), the 1998 bombings of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania(223 dead, 4,000 wounded), the 2000 attack on the USS Cole(17 dead, 39 injured) and the September 11, 2001 attack on the World Trade Center(you already know those numbers).

Bin Laden probably motivated the 2004 Madrid bombings(191 dead) as well as the 2005 London attacks(56 dead, 700 injured)." (The MCJ, 5/3/11, summary of terrorism attributable to the deceased)

"What telling insights do you think Bush proffered that made the decisive difference?"

easy. War on Terror.

[The Gaffer]

Are you saying that Bush didn't divert resources from the hunt for Bin Laden to the Iraq invasion?

[inked]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...tory?track=rss

From Reuters Reuters

May 1, 2011, 9:39 p.m.
Former President George W. Bush, who was in office at the time of the Sept. 11 attacks and famously said he wanted Osama bin Laden dead or alive, on Sunday called the death of the al Qaeda leader a "momentous achievement."

President Barack Obama called Bush in Dallas at 9:04 p.m. central time to inform him that bin Laden was dead and they spoke for four minutes, a Bush spokesman said.

The Sept. 11 attacks were a defining moment of Bush's presidency. He launched the war in Afghanistan and the hunt for bin Laden spanned the rest of his presidency.

"This momentous achievement marks a victory for America, for people who seek peace around the world, and for all those who lost loved ones on September 11, 2001," Bush said in a statement.

"The fight against terror goes on, but tonight America has sent an unmistakable message: No matter how long it takes, justice will be done," he said.

=====================================

I merely point out the historically obvious, G. Even the LA TIMES got that right!

[The Gaffer]

Thanks for that. It doesn't address the question, of course...

[Insidious Rex]

Thats because its true Gaff.

And of course Bush has turned DOWN Obama's offer to join him in New York at a ceremony to SHARE in the success of the mission. No reason given.

[inked]

This was carried out under the legal warrant issued by the UN in 2001 giving the US the right to capture and/or kill those who engaged in the 9/11 terror against us. Under international law this is execution.

Security Council Resolution 1368 (2001), 12 September 2001

The Security Council,

Reaffirming the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations,

Determined to combat by all means threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts,

Recognizing the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence in accordance with the Charter,

1. Unequivocally condemns in the strongest terms the horrifying terrorist attacks which took place on 11 September 2001 in New York, Washington (D.C.) and Pennsylvania and regards such acts, like any act of international terrorism, as a threat to international peace and security;

2. Expresses its deepest sympathy and condolences to the victims and their families and to the People and Government of the United States of America;

3. Calls on all States to work together urgently to bring to justice the perpetrators, organizers and sponsors of these terrorist attacks and stresses that those responsible for aiding, supporting or harbouring the perpetrators, organizers and sponsors of these acts will be held accountable;

4. Calls also on the international community to redouble their efforts to prevent and suppress terrorist acts including by increased cooperation and full implementation of the relevant international anti-terrorist conventions and Security Council resolutions, in particular resolution 1269 of 19 October 1999;

5. Expresses its readiness to take all necessary steps to respond to the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, and to combat all forms of terrorism, in accordance with its responsibilities under the Charter of the United Nations;

6. Decides to remain seized of the matter.
(City University London
http://www.staff.city.ac.uk/p.willet...OR/SC-1368.HTM )

Gaffer, from the complaints about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan on both side of the pond, I would say that the answer to your "Are you saying that Bush didn't divert resources from the hunt for Bin Laden to the Iraq invasion?" is a decisive NO. That's my take.

[The Gaffer]

Thanks for the answer. I know how influential UN resolutions are in US politics.

But I wonder what your evidence for that belief is.

Originally Posted by Obama

shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al-Qaida

That suggests to me that it was less of a priority before.

Originally Posted by Bush

I don't know where he is, I just don't spend that much time on it.

.

That suggests to me that it was less of a priority before.

[inked]

The Presidents had other matters to worry about than only Bin, wot? Since Obama inherited and plucked the fruit of the on-going effort over 9+ years, I'd contend that it didn't get ignored or abated or sidelined. Your mileage obviously differs.

No doubt, Gaffer, you'd argue that the Royal Wedding wasn't allowed to interfere since the Obama's weren't on the invite list!

[brownjenkins]

Bush was never that interested in catching Osama. His main goal was finding and excuse to invade Iraq, which had left his dad with a questionable legacy. If you do the math, Osama's "safehouse" was set up right around the Iraqi surge, right around the time when there also was a substantial boost of US aide to Pakistan by the Bush administration, supposedly to help facilitate that surge. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a bit of quid pro quo going on.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Just 'cause sanctity of life has come on the other thread, I suppose I'll come out as having been fairly horrified that Osama was killed, and not captured, and even more horrified by the jingoistic triumphalism over his killing from right-wing Christians.

If notions of 'sanctity of human life' are taken seriously, they can't just be 'sanctity of unborn fetal life,' they have to be about human life.

It may be permissible to take life to save life. But since the ones who are so ecstatic about the death of Osama tend to be the same ones who rave about the sanctity of human life, I'll just say: If that is more than an empty political phrase, it is never permissible to exult and delight in the death of a human being.

Conception to natural death. Deposit: $0.02.

[Tessar]

Agreed x1,000.

[The Gaffer]

I congratulate you, Tessar and GW. I didn't want to be the one to say it. I agree that it is highly unpleasant and bitterly ironic.

Maybe the answer is that those who are crowing about it are not proper Christians.

Further, the rule of law is the rule of law, and not to be set aside just because a person's crimes were particularly heinous. Was this an ex-judicial execution?