Osama bin Laden Killing A Hoax? StuckInTheSixties: If you think it was a hoax, answer this question: What is the obvious danger in attempting such a hoax? Hmm?  Geoff: As I said in the thread in New Members - the biggest threat is that Al-Qaeda produce time-stamped footage of Osama and make the US govt. look like a bunch of tools. With the fact that his death could be easily disproved by the American government's enemies, for the president to announce his death would be sheer stupidity without there being no room for doubt in his mind. The only realistic alternative is that Osama died some time ago. In which case Al-Qaeda could still make the US govt. look stupid.  Comrade_: unless Al-Qaeda too has already been conquered, I have proof of thi... *shot by CIA operative*  Animal Lover: I was elated when I first heard the News and the only thing that makes me dubious about it is that it didn't half come at a handy time for Obama's failing presidency.  Malobear: "the biggest threat is that Al-Qaeda produce time-stamped footage of Osama and make the US govt. look like a bunch of tools."
I really dont see that in the future considering AlQaeda has apparently posted on several websites it posts to that Bin Laden is dead. Animal Lover: Malobear - wait for the cynics to say, "It suits Al Quieda to kid the world that he is dead!"  davidk14: . The plan to "get" OBL by the military was thoroughly planned and the invasion was practiced over and over and over. You would think the politicians would have gotten the story straight once the operation had concluded. I would like to see the debriefing documents of the SEAL Team members. That would be interesting. .  AussieOi: I haven't seen Osama waving at us recently wonder why? He would be if was alive and free I'm absolutely sure of it. GETERDONE! earlicker: Al Qaida came out and said that they accept that Osama Bin Laden is dead and that the United States would pay with blood... Geoff: OK, one side has possibly the largest arsenal of fusion bombs in the world. But hasn't used them. The other lives in caves and doesn't get disowned by their followers when they deliberately kill civilians. Which side has the moral high ground? StuckInTheSixties: There is a tendency for critics of the USA and her allies to fixate on the nuclear arsenals of those countries, and to use that as "proof" of the supposed moral bankruptcy of those countries. Those arsenals are a sad leftover from the cold war, and are slowly being whittled down in numbers by both the USA and Russia. But there is only one group of people in the world that wants to gain access to such weapons with the specific purpose of actually using them: fundamentalist Muslim extremists GETERDONE! earlicker: That is very true. I was on a website the last few days and the conversation concerned breaking ties with Pakistan. The fact that they have those weapons would make it a mistake in my opinion. Geoff: On a vague and not very tangenting tangent. In the book of 'Sum of all fears." the bad guys were Islamic fundamentalists (helped by native American terrorists - seriously - and German communists). //Edit - Spoiler alert :: Both the film and the book are about a terrorist group making a nuke (with salvaged Israeli plutonium) and bombing a US city (the film used Baltimore, the book used Denver) with it. In the movie (bearing in mind that 9/11 happened in between the movie being made and the film being shot*) they were all German neo-nazis. I don't think they ever explained why. Or why they halved Jack Ryan's age (although Harrison Ford was too old to play the hero). Morgan Freeman was good in the film though. * - In the book's sequel, a Japanese pilot flew a jumbo jet into the senate building in Washington DC during the inauguration of a new Vice President (which happened to be Jack Ryan). Killing almost all of both houses of the US legislature and the executive branch of government. Tom Clancy ended up making this into a good thing. StuckInTheSixties: The book "The Sum Of All Fears" is superb. I'm a HUGE Tom Clancy fan, and it's my favorite of all of his books. The movie is a sad, lame comparison to the book, with little in common other than the title, and the fact that a nuclear weapon is detonated in an American city where the Super Bowl is being played. I must make an important correction, Geoff: The plot of the book does not include "native American terrorists" as part of the small consortium that pull off the nuclear attack on the United States (Denver, specifically). There is only one "native American terrorist." He's on the run, and enraged because of the killing of his brother by the FBI. Seeking revenge on the government he blames for his brother's killing, he makes himself available to a small group of Palestinian terrorists, and is drawn into the plot simply as a pawn. After he's no longer useful to them, they murder him, slitting his throat and letting him bleed to death in the bathtub of a cheap motel room. In the story, he's not part of any group of "native American terrorists," as you stated. It's an important distinction, important to me, at least. He is the sole American involved in the plot, and certainly, the sole Native American. It's also worth pointing out that the "German terrorists" in the book are very different than those depicted in the movie. In the film, they're neo-Nazis, lame, cookie-cutter typical evil neo-Nazis that make for simple, cookie-cutter villains. In the original story from the book, the Germans are far more complex. They're East Germans, dedicated communists, dejected by fall of the Berlin Wall and the re-unification of Germany. Their lives are essentially ruined by these political changes in Germany, which they see as a betrayal to the socialist beliefs they hold sacred, and they blame this betrayal the Soviet leaders that allowed it to happen. Again, they're seeking revenge, and thus, collaborate with the Palestinians in a plan to foment war between the Soviet Union and the USA. StuckInTheSixties: Went no further than a few seconds into that video, and then saw it was that buffoon Alex Jones. (Post deleted by staff )  FogofWar: The military did not plan on taking out Osama bin Laden. The Military has had no mission to capture; kill, or even find Osama since he fled to Pakistan in 2002. The military is not a policing unit, we do not chase criminals and fight for justice. We use force to end force. We attack other armed forces. Our mission was the removal of terrorism from Afghanistan; and to control, by force, the threat to stability. Bin Laden was killed by the US Navy SEALS, special operations command; in conjunction with CIA intelligence. Special Forces is not the same as the conventional military. "But there is only one group of people in the world that wants to gain access to such weapons with the specific purpose of actually using them: fundamentalist Muslim extremists" North Korea is not Muslim. "That is very true. I was on a website the last few days and the conversation concerned breaking ties with Pakistan. The fact that they have those weapons would make it a mistake in my opinion." The US cannot break ties with Pakistan; and it is a far larger picture than just Pakistan's nuclear capabilities. The US needs Pakistan; hence why they stand by them through everything…even if it is Pakistan spitting in the face of the US. Unfortunately for the 'truth seeking' conspiracy nuts, there is little chance they will release any real 'evidence' of bin Laden's killing. The CIA and Special Operations units work in secrecy; keeping their missions classified; and for a reason. The less you know; the less the enemy knows. The US Navy SEALS are one unit in an international Special Operations coalition force in Pakistan; and have been there tracking bin Laden since 2002. There have even been a handful killed. The chance of them releasing this evidence is slim. However; like already mentioned by many; the best piece of evidence of Osama's death is his absence. Osama's entire goal was to bring down the "tyrant" USA; and what better way than exposing them as liars to their public? If the nation cannot trust their leaders; who would they follow? If Osama was alive; he would have exposed Obama as a liar by now. StuckInTheSixties: "North Korea is not Muslim." North Korea has the bomb. North Korea hasn't used the bomb. Proves my point. North Korea, thus far, is using its nukes for the same main reason everyone else does: deterrence and threat. FogofWar: North Korea hasn't used their nukes??? So those nukes they set off in tests over the ocean weren't nukes? They have demonstrated more potential to use nukes than any Islamic threat. Geoff: Pakistan tested their nukes as well. And the belligerence between Pakistan and India is sufficient that both countries built up nuclear arsenals. North Korea might be a pain in the arse, but their Government is more stable than the one in Islamabad. FogofWar: Pakistan is also currently a US ally. The likelihood of them stepping on American toes is high; but using nukes against America: zero! | Politics Chat Room 87 People Chatting Similar Conversations |
