[Doctor.]

(Original post by alex5455)
actually you said how can i condone killing a child, when i never condoned it, so as i said stop putting words in my mouth

how is it stupid? the man was no ordinary criminal, if he was put on trial and imprisoned there would have been attacks aimed at forcing the americans to free him, he was too dangerous to be allowed to live.

Because there isn't any attacks against Americans now?

[alex5455]

(Original post by Doctor.)
Because there isn't any attacks against Americans now?

no successful ones on the mainland. which is what would have been targeted by every terror group out there if bin laden was taken there for trial/imprisonment. more hostages would have been taken and killed to try and gain his freedom

[Doctor.]

(Original post by alex5455)
no successful ones on the mainland. which is what would have been targeted by every terror group out there if bin laden was taken there for trial/imprisonment. more hostages would have been taken and killed to try and gain his freedom

Instead there are countless attacks on their troops... They're still being attacked either way?

[alex5455]

(Original post by Doctor.)
Instead there are countless attacks on their troops... They're still being attacked either way?

are you being deliberately difficult?

the attacks on the troops would happen anyway and were happening before bin laden was killed, what im saying is by killing bin laden on the spot they saved having him around for people to try and free, no one can take a hostage and say bring bin laden back to life or we will kill them etc

[Doctor.]

(Original post by alex5455)
are you being deliberately difficult?

the attacks on the troops would happen anyway and were happening before bin laden was killed, what im saying is by killing bin laden on the spot they saved having him around for people to try and free, no one can take a hostage and say bring bin laden back to life or we will kill them etc

Because what you're saying Is pretty much crap.

There would most defiantly be an increase in attacks. Hostage situations are happening all the time anyway? It wouldn't make a differnce, they'd be pissed off either way. Hence killing would happen, dead or alive. Which Is actually what did happen

[alex5455]

(Original post by Doctor.)
Because what you're s
aying Is pretty much crap.

There would most defiantly be an increase in attacks. Hostage situations are happening all the time anyway? It wouldn't make a differnce, they'd be pissed off either way. Hence killing would happen, dead or alive. Which Is actually what did happen

Your just spouting off now, yes they happened anyway
And still are but bin laden being imprisoned they would have had one more motivation to try attacks and intimidation, and purely because of that the world won when bin laden died

[Pindar]

(Original post by JonathanNorth)
Why would they want to make something like this up?

Well done. At least you are asking questions.

(Original post by JonathanNorth)
Other than the publicity, I don't understand why they would lie about this. Publicity for an organisation which essentially is a secret service is well... not a good idea. I would have thought they would have wanted to keep it a secret.

Organisations such as these choose what they wish to hide or reveal. Some reveal information through well timed "leaks" which reveal information which just happens to benefit their agenda or information they would have been forced to release anyway.

The good publicity of foiling a terrorist plot is undeniably desirable in an election year, and keeping the public scared of an external enemy to increase control has always been a well travelled path for politicians.

(Original post by JonathanNorth)
However, the reason I'm saying it is plausible is the fact that this is the job of a CIA agent. So the CIA actually doing their job makes this more plausible, than a hill-billy claiming to have organised this!

Considering the well-documented history of the CIA, staging a terrorist attack is pretty plausible as well. As well is spinning a story to suit their agenda.

[Pindar]

(Original post by alex5455)
one day people will actually read what people type not what they want to believe, do you say bin laden didnt deserve to be killed?

No... of course not. No one "deserves" to be killed. Two wrongs don't make a right.
That's a logical fallacy.

[Pindar]

(Original post by alex5455)
since you obviously cant cope with understanding things not directly spelled out for you, BIN LADEN DESERVED TO DIE i said nothing about his son.

We're not talking about Osama Bin Laden, we're talking about the fact armed terrorists gunned his young son down in his home, whilst he was unarmed in his pjamas. You're saying people should be murdered in cold blood because they're simply related to someone suspected of a crime.

Regardless, civilised people don't believe in the death penalty. No one deserves to be murdered, especially if they have never been convicted of a crime. You're advocating the death penalty against people without trial, simply because they're in the wrong place at the wrong time. That's barbaric. Go to North Korea if you're a fan of that.

(Original post by alex5455)
i know your a terrorist supporting consipiracy theorist, but alleged crimes? everyone knows hes responsible for atrocities and he had admitted them killing him was perfectly justified

"Everyone knows"? Argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy btw. Just because everyone thinks something doesn't make it true.

Has it been proven in an open fair trial in a court of law? No. Therefore they are only alleged crimes.

If you have some amazing new evidence that no one else has seen which suggests Bin Laden committed those crimes, please submit it. Otherwise stop posting mindless speculation and wild conspiracy theories with no basis. It's tiring listening to these nuts.

[alex5455]

(Original post by Stefan1991)
We're not talking about Osama Bin Laden, we're talking about the fact armed terrorists gunned his young son down in his home, whilst he was unarmed in his pjamas. You're saying people should be murdered in cold blood because they're simply related to someone suspected of a crime.

Regardless, civilised people don't believe in the death penalty. No one deserves to be murdered, especially if they have never been convicted of a crime. You're advocating the death penalty against people without trial, simply because they're in the wrong place at the wrong time. That's barbaric. Go to North Korea if you're a fan of that.



"Everyone knows"? Argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy btw. Just because everyone thinks something doesn't make it true.

Has it been proven in an open fair trial in a court of law? No. Therefore they are only alleged crimes.

If you have some amazing new evidence that no one else has seen which suggests Bin Laden committed those crimes, please submit it. Otherwise stop posting mindless speculation and wild conspiracy theories with no basis. It's tiring listening to these nuts.

No i said bin laden deserved to die, where do i say his son should be killed to? oh wait i didnt stop putting words in my mouth.

alleged crimes? go watch the videos he sent in to news agencies admitting master minding terrorists plots that have killed thousands, he admitted doing it where is the doubt? thats how everyone knows because he TOLD us he did it

[Pindar]

(Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
im afraid then, you are the 'liar'. Bin laden didnt even live with all his wives abd children prior to moving to pakistan, once there officially on the run from the americans, he called for various wives and children to join him - in full knowledge he could be raided or even bombed by the americans for his crimes. What a hero. including one wife he had been seperated from for years previously.

You are saying someone is to blame for the military deciding to indiscriminately obliterate their house and everyone inside?

(Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
Seals have all said they elimated the targets they felt at the time were threats to themselves - they are not in the habit of simply exectuing people who mean no harm - unlike bin laden and various islamists. Bin laden got a burial (of sorts) over and above what he deserved - seeing as he offered nowhere near the same to his own victims.

Please view the actual interviews with the SEALs themselves. They openly admit they had never an intention of apprehending Bin Laden, hence why they immediately opened fire on the stairs when they only thought they caught a glimpse of him. A SEAL himself said he desperately wanted to be the one to kill him, armed or unarmed.

"The plan was for the Seals to “overpower bin Laden’s guards, shoot and kill him at close range, and then take the corpse back to Afghanistan”.

"“There was never any question of detaining or capturing him,” the officer said. “It wasn’t a split-second decision. No one wanted detainees.”"

Watch the documentary "Shoot to Kill" by Channel 4 with interviews with the SEAL team and Obama.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...the-start.html

Yes, i'm sure soldiers only ever want to kill if they think someone is a threat to them That explains why soldiers on the Collateral Murder tape are begging their officers to let them shoot wounded civilians on the ground, begging them to pick up weapons so they can shoot them from a helicopter hundreds of feet away, but then shoot them anyway.

[SDK94]

(Original post by Stefan1991)

"Allegedly". You don't just assassinate someone suspected of a crime. You are suggesting the government should have the power to be judge, jury and executioner over people's lives. That would be tyranny and fascism.

I thought I was out of this but now I'm compelled again, unfortunately, to argue with somebody whose arguments are completely biased. Bin Laden himself claimed responsibility for the 9/11 attacks and the failed attempt with the Detroit airliner. He's certainly convicted of crimes. You don't just get put on the CIA's most wanted list for being 'suspected' of crimes. Please.

[Pindar]

(Original post by SDK94)
I thought I was out of this but now I'm compelled again, unfortunately, to argue with somebody whose arguments are completely biased. Bin Laden himself claimed responsibility for the 9/11 attacks and the failed attempt with the Detroit airliner. He's certainly convicted of crimes. You don't just get put on the CIA's most wanted list for being 'suspected' of crimes. Please.

I wasn't aware there was some sort of mechanism which necessitates conviction to be put on the CIA's most wanted list (which I doubt).
So the CIA only goes after escaped convicts? Surely convicts are most likely to be already in prison. Surely they are only suspects.

I don't understand how my arguments are biased, I only go off established facts. If someone showed me evidence of Bin Laden himself committing the 9/11 terror attacks, I'd be happy to change my views. Otherwise, I conclude it is inconclusive.

I didn't know he admitted anything with the Detroit airliner. Is this another piece of undoctored video evidence that you can show me? Regardless, a confession is not a conviction. And no conviction is an innocent person. Case closed.

[Pindar]

(Original post by alex5455)
alleged crimes? go watch the videos he sent in to news agencies admitting master minding terrorists plots that have killed thousands, he admitted doing it where is the doubt? thats how everyone knows because he TOLD us he did it

Where are these videos of Osama himself admitting to it? What crimes are you talking about? Be more specific please.

You mean these videos supplied by the CIA without any sound?



Otherwise I'd like to see these videos and reassess.

[Indo-Chinese Food]

(Original post by Stefan1991)
You are saying someone is to blame for the military deciding to indiscriminately obliterate their house and everyone inside?



Please view the actual interviews with the SEALs themselves. They openly admit they had never an intention of apprehending Bin Laden, hence why they immediately opened fire on the stairs when they only thought they caught a glimpse of him. A SEAL himself said he desperately wanted to be the one to kill him, armed or unarmed.

"The plan was for the Seals to “overpower bin Laden’s guards, shoot and kill him at close range, and then take the corpse back to Afghanistan”.

"“There was never any question of detaining or capturing him,” the officer said. “It wasn’t a split-second decision. No one wanted detainees.”"

Watch the documentary "Shoot to Kill" by Channel 4 with interviews with the SEAL team and Obama.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...the-start.html

Yes, i'm sure soldiers only ever want to kill if they think someone is a threat to them That explains why soldiers on the Collateral Murder tape are begging their officers to let them shoot wounded civilians on the ground, begging them to pick up weapons so they can shoot them from a helicopter hundreds of feet away, but then shoot them anyway.

so why pretend that bin laden was a honest family man, when he didnt call his many wives and kids to live with him , till he went on the run from the US in Pakistan. Its clearly an islamist principle that the man can take many wives and children to protect him from the bullets of his enemies


once again the link to which you refer confimrs little of your daft fabrications - it simply says the raid on bin laden in pakistan was a shoot to kill mission- which is of no surprise, these guys were hunting a man that had killed without remorse thousands of innocent non-combatants, and lead islamists that used human shields and concealed suicide bombers (even women and children) as a matter of course. No wonder they took the policy to shoot people in that house, im surprised that they left so many alive frankly.
rightly so then that the seals would admit to be queing to put two int he face of bin laden, , do you not think the russian, amercan and british troops wouldnt have done the same to hitler if they reached his bunker before he offed himself?

[alex5455]

(Original post by Stefan1991)
Where are these videos of Osama himself admitting to it? What crimes are you talking about? Be more specific please.

You mean these videos supplied by the CIA without any sound?



Otherwise I'd like to see these videos and reassess.

Maybe it wasn't even Bin Laden in the compound. They admit all evidence was circumstantial. There's no firm evidence Bin Laden was even at the compound and it seems increasingly unlikely.

The video he sent after september 11th springs to mind immediately........ google is your friend.

why is it you automatically ignore all the other videos of bin laden just to focus on soundless ones from the cia?

oh this will be fun, go on then lets have some "evidence" that it wasnt bin laden who was killed

[Pindar]

(Original post by alex5455)
The video he sent after september 11th springs to mind immediately........ google is your friend.

why is it you automatically ignore all the other videos of bin laden just to focus on soundless ones from the cia?

oh this will be fun, go on then lets have some "evidence" that it wasnt bin laden who was killed

Where did I say there was evidence that it wasn't Bin Laden who was killed?
I'm saying I can't find any reliable evidence that it was Bin Laden who was killed. You know, with the body quickly disposed at a secret location at sea and no photographic evidence released?

You seem sure it was him, what are you going on? The people who did the raid said they weren't sure at all (50% at best) that it was going to be him. If it wasn't him, wouldn't it have looked a little bit embarrassing invading the sovereignty of your ally, losing a million dollar helicopter and murdering a home of innocent civilians for nothing?

Because if the people carrying out the operation's instincts were wrong and they admit they knew it was likely they could be wrong right up until the raid, that's what would have happened.

[Pindar]

(Original post by alex5455)
The video he sent after september 11th springs to mind immediately........ google is your friend.

You mean the video that has already been discredited?

[Pindar]

(Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
so why pretend that bin laden was a honest family man, when he didnt call his many wives and kids to live with him , till he went on the run from the US in Pakistan. Its clearly an islamist principle that the man can take many wives and children to protect him from the bullets of his enemies

Because he's been fighting a war for decades perhaps?

(Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
once again the link to which you refer confimrs little of your daft fabrications - it simply says the raid on bin laden in pakistan was a shoot to kill mission

Which is exactly what I've been saying.... what are these "fabrications"? You just contradicted yourself... the only thing I was trying to argue is exactly what you just said.

(Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
- which is of no surprise, these guys were hunting a man that had killed without remorse thousands of innocent non-combatants

Source? Evidence?

(Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
No wonder they took the policy to shoot people in that house, im surprised that they left so many alive frankly.

That really is disgusting. I can't believe we actually have people like you walking around on this planet. You actually make me feel physically ill.
I'm ashamed to be human sometimes.

(Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
rightly so then that the seals would admit to be queing to put two int he face of bin laden, , do you not think the russian, amercan and british troops wouldnt have done the same to hitler if they reached his bunker before he offed himself?

I guess you never heard of this historical set of events called the Nuremberg Trials?

[Indo-Chinese Food]

(Original post by Stefan1991)
Because he's been fighting a war for decades perhaps? ?

A war he himself started .......

(Original post by Stefan1991)

Which is exactly what I've been saying.... what are these "fabrications"? You just contradicted yourself... the only thing I was trying to argue is exactly what you just said.?

No it wasnt.

(Original post by Stefan1991)

Source? Evidence??

I could ask for the same from you. I will need to borrow your tin-foil hat before you start though.

(Original post by Stefan1991)

That really is disgusting. I can't believe we actually have people like you walking around on this planet. You actually make me feel physically ill.
I'm ashamed to be human sometimes. ?

Youre more disgusted by navy seals going in heavy into a terrorists fortress than the realisation that women and children were co-erced by islamists to blow up civilians? Yes you should be ashamed.

(Original post by Stefan1991)
I guess you never heard of this historical set of events called the Nuremberg Trials?

You think that was likely? What happened to Mussolini after the war? Tojo?