Osama Bin Laden is dead

[deuce king]

Originally Posted by bboy1827

Originally Posted by Deuce King

Originally Posted by bboy1827

Umm, not saying I agree with him, but on that point he's actually right. Those were Columbian Military troops, at that time the United States was providing Columbia with guns, weapons, intelligence and training, not to fight Escobar, but in our effort in the "War on Drugs" and also to help the "democratic" Columbia government fight against the FARC, which was a communist movement spreading throughout Latin America at the time. So while those weren't US soilders, those were more thank Likely US guns in that pic, and what really counts? Either way, I don't think those pics were plastered all over the news, nor do I agree with the point he's trying to make...but the Columbian (Along with just about every other Latin American "democratic" nation)  military was hired by the US in an attempt to stop drugs and the spread of Communism...not asking you to believe me, but read the various books on the subject.

That's all you really needed to say champ, because that's all that really matters regarding this subject.

Sorry I like to drop Knowledge when I can. My bad, wrong place for that I guess.

Nah your cool.  I'm with you in dropping knowledge and speaking your mind, I'm just saying I think with your breakdown on the killing of Escobar that might be TOO MUCH for some of these dudes in here currently.  They can only handle one thing at a time, and right now we're talking about the killing of Osama Bin Laden and lets face it some of these dudes can't even handle that right now.  Baby steps........

.
     

 

[solefood229]

If the pics were released most of yall would claim they were photoshopped anyway,

 

[solefood229]

If the pics were released most of yall would claim they were photoshopped anyway,

 

[solefood229]

If the pics were released most of yall would claim they were photoshopped anyway,

 

[solefood229]

If the pics were released most of yall would claim they were photoshopped anyway,

 

[createdestroy]

Originally Posted by tkthafm

It's not about what "gains" he will get. Who cares ?

The majority of the American people (you know, people who PAID for the bullet that went through Osama's head) want to see the pictures. Plain and simple.

So much for a democracy & criticizing other govts. for censorship. lol @ "backlash".
"Hello Americans, thanks for paying for the helicopters, the base they were launched from, the training of the troops, the weapons, the intelligence behind the operation, this microphone I'm speaking on... I understand most of you want to see the photos. I'm not going to let you anyway. Toodles" 

Scumbag Obama ?  

yea, and while we're at it I want citizens to get tours of CIA and NSA facilities. After all, it's our taxes that pay for them. And SEAL team 6 should do a live interview on TV because we pay their salaries.
/sarcasm

 

[createdestroy]

Originally Posted by tkthafm

It's not about what "gains" he will get. Who cares ?

The majority of the American people (you know, people who PAID for the bullet that went through Osama's head) want to see the pictures. Plain and simple.

So much for a democracy & criticizing other govts. for censorship. lol @ "backlash".
"Hello Americans, thanks for paying for the helicopters, the base they were launched from, the training of the troops, the weapons, the intelligence behind the operation, this microphone I'm speaking on... I understand most of you want to see the photos. I'm not going to let you anyway. Toodles" 

Scumbag Obama ?  

yea, and while we're at it I want citizens to get tours of CIA and NSA facilities. After all, it's our taxes that pay for them. And SEAL team 6 should do a live interview on TV because we pay their salaries.
/sarcasm

 

[tkthafm]

CreateDestroy wrote:

---

tkthafm wrote:

---

It's not about what "gains" he will get. Who cares ?

The majority of the American people (you know, people who PAID for the bullet that went through Osama's head) want to see the pictures. Plain and simple. 

So much for a democracy & criticizing other govts. for censorship. lol @ "backlash".
"Hello Americans, thanks for paying for the helicopters, the base they were launched from, the training of the troops, the weapons, the intelligence behind the operation, this microphone I'm speaking on... I understand most of you want to see the photos. I'm not going to let you anyway. Toodles" 

Scumbag Obama ?  

yea, and while we're at it I want citizens to get tours of CIA and NSA facilities. After all, it's our taxes that pay for them. And SEAL team 6 should do a live interview on TV because we pay their salaries.
/sarcasm

Nice straw-man.
You're going to have to try a lot harder than that to troll me. Comparing the release of Osama's photos to CIA/NSA tours ? 

Go that way ---->

 

[queencitysneakerqueen]

Originally Posted by solefood229

If the pics were released most of yall would claim they were photoshopped anyway,

THIS

 

[tkthafm]

CreateDestroy wrote:

---

tkthafm wrote:

---

It's not about what "gains" he will get. Who cares ?

The majority of the American people (you know, people who PAID for the bullet that went through Osama's head) want to see the pictures. Plain and simple. 

So much for a democracy & criticizing other govts. for censorship. lol @ "backlash".
"Hello Americans, thanks for paying for the helicopters, the base they were launched from, the training of the troops, the weapons, the intelligence behind the operation, this microphone I'm speaking on... I understand most of you want to see the photos. I'm not going to let you anyway. Toodles" 

Scumbag Obama ?  

yea, and while we're at it I want citizens to get tours of CIA and NSA facilities. After all, it's our taxes that pay for them. And SEAL team 6 should do a live interview on TV because we pay their salaries.
/sarcasm

Nice straw-man.
You're going to have to try a lot harder than that to troll me. Comparing the release of Osama's photos to CIA/NSA tours ? 

Go that way ---->

 

[queencitysneakerqueen]

Originally Posted by solefood229

If the pics were released most of yall would claim they were photoshopped anyway,

THIS

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by o fenomeno

Originally Posted by rashi

There is no !!%!$%% picture.

so you believe we didnt kill osama or we just didnt take pictures once we did? cause you sound dumb as hell either way. 

  
Who knows, whether I think we did or not it doesn't matter because we have no proof.

   But you are sooooooo smart because you believe what the government is telling you?


Supposedly his 12 year old "daughter" wrote a depostition stating it is infact Osama, was with or without gun to her head?

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by o fenomeno

Originally Posted by rashi

There is no !!%!$%% picture.

so you believe we didnt kill osama or we just didnt take pictures once we did? cause you sound dumb as hell either way. 

  
Who knows, whether I think we did or not it doesn't matter because we have no proof.

   But you are sooooooo smart because you believe what the government is telling you?


Supposedly his 12 year old "daughter" wrote a depostition stating it is infact Osama, was with or without gun to her head?

 

[in yo nostril]

Originally Posted by Hazeleyed Honey

Originally Posted by In Yo Nostril

wouldnt have been hard considering we had already been bombing them routinely for 10 years. it didnt take much for desert storm to win public approval. even without 9/11, Iraq cockblocking UN inspectors and the "threat" of them producing chemical weapons would have been enough to fully invade. might not have pleased everyone in America, but it wouldnt have held GW back.

i know you think there were many options for Iraq. i dont, and thats what im trying to say. The US-UK coalition bombed/patrolled those regions on the north-south borders for one reason, to be able to quickly and easily move troops in once the invasion began. think about how much of that country was already"controlled" by allied forces before the invasion began.

Wuldn't have been hard? Bombing them here and there and sanctions does not equal that we were at war with them (I am not saying you are implying that). Do you really believe the public was going to approve of this war without an outcry if 9/11 did not happen?

The inspectors were no longer really inspecting. They needed 9/11. Then why did they go to war that quick after 9/11? Why did they lie? Why even link it to 9/11? It could have happened years down the line to take out Saddam. But, it is so naive to think they would have done it in such a way without the American public to agree to sending troops just to take out Saddam for oil and corporate ventures.As 9/11 happened, war was only a few months later. As if they were coincided together and palnned to happen in proximity to each other.

here and there? they ran an absurd amount of sorties in the time period in which those no fly zones were imposed

. The allied coalition was able to waltz into those areas of Iraq like it was friendly territory once the war began.

and yes the public would have approved. obviously not everyone but enough to do it without a ton of domestic opposition. do you remember the outrage every time Sadaam rejected UN inspections? he was continuously toeing the line. its not like we were going to invade Australia and needed a huge event to be able to do it. Sadaam was always walking that line and we had just gone to war with the guy a few years before. it could not have happened years down the line with Sadaam. all im trying to say is that there was a plan for Iraq and it wasnt something that was conceived overnight because of 9/11. Im not totally discounting what you are saying. It definitely helped persuade people to accept the war on Iraq but it was not some necessary catalyst at all.

 

[in yo nostril]

Originally Posted by Hazeleyed Honey

Originally Posted by In Yo Nostril

wouldnt have been hard considering we had already been bombing them routinely for 10 years. it didnt take much for desert storm to win public approval. even without 9/11, Iraq cockblocking UN inspectors and the "threat" of them producing chemical weapons would have been enough to fully invade. might not have pleased everyone in America, but it wouldnt have held GW back.

i know you think there were many options for Iraq. i dont, and thats what im trying to say. The US-UK coalition bombed/patrolled those regions on the north-south borders for one reason, to be able to quickly and easily move troops in once the invasion began. think about how much of that country was already"controlled" by allied forces before the invasion began.

Wuldn't have been hard? Bombing them here and there and sanctions does not equal that we were at war with them (I am not saying you are implying that). Do you really believe the public was going to approve of this war without an outcry if 9/11 did not happen?

The inspectors were no longer really inspecting. They needed 9/11. Then why did they go to war that quick after 9/11? Why did they lie? Why even link it to 9/11? It could have happened years down the line to take out Saddam. But, it is so naive to think they would have done it in such a way without the American public to agree to sending troops just to take out Saddam for oil and corporate ventures.As 9/11 happened, war was only a few months later. As if they were coincided together and palnned to happen in proximity to each other.

here and there? they ran an absurd amount of sorties in the time period in which those no fly zones were imposed

. The allied coalition was able to waltz into those areas of Iraq like it was friendly territory once the war began.

and yes the public would have approved. obviously not everyone but enough to do it without a ton of domestic opposition. do you remember the outrage every time Sadaam rejected UN inspections? he was continuously toeing the line. its not like we were going to invade Australia and needed a huge event to be able to do it. Sadaam was always walking that line and we had just gone to war with the guy a few years before. it could not have happened years down the line with Sadaam. all im trying to say is that there was a plan for Iraq and it wasnt something that was conceived overnight because of 9/11. Im not totally discounting what you are saying. It definitely helped persuade people to accept the war on Iraq but it was not some necessary catalyst at all.

 

[will068]

-The US trains and aids Osama to fight the Soviets.

-Osama thanks the U.S. and remains extremely grateful for our help.

-The Gulf War begins and we take over the Middle East, bombing Iraq throughout the 90's.

-Bin Laden reacts to our flawed foreign policy by using terror tactics.

-9/11 happens. The U.S. responds by invading 2 countries, and by bombing Pakistan along with Yemen.

-We continued to bomb these countries for about 10 years, not realizing our interference with Middle Eastern politics is one of the main reasons why we were attacked on September 11th.

-We bomb Libya and support the rebels. We even consider arming them. In other words, something similar we did with Osama.

-The U.S. murders Osama.

-The U.S. continues to drop bombs on Libya and will continue the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan until further notice.

-We learned nothing.

 

[will068]

-The US trains and aids Osama to fight the Soviets.

-Osama thanks the U.S. and remains extremely grateful for our help.

-The Gulf War begins and we take over the Middle East, bombing Iraq throughout the 90's.

-Bin Laden reacts to our flawed foreign policy by using terror tactics.

-9/11 happens. The U.S. responds by invading 2 countries, and by bombing Pakistan along with Yemen.

-We continued to bomb these countries for about 10 years, not realizing our interference with Middle Eastern politics is one of the main reasons why we were attacked on September 11th.

-We bomb Libya and support the rebels. We even consider arming them. In other words, something similar we did with Osama.

-The U.S. murders Osama.

-The U.S. continues to drop bombs on Libya and will continue the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan until further notice.

-We learned nothing.

 

[hazeleyed honey]

Originally Posted by In Yo Nostril

here and there? they ran an absurd amount of sorties in the time period in which those no fly zones were imposed

. The allied coalition was able to waltz into those areas of Iraq like it was friendly territory once the war began.

and yes the public would have approved. obviously not everyone but enough to do it without a ton of domestic opposition. do you even remember the outrage every time Sadaam rejected UN inspections? he was continuously toeing the line. its not like we were going to invade Australia and needed a huge event to be able to do it. Sadaam was always walking that line and we had just gone to war with the guy a few years before. it could not have happened years down the line with Sadaam. all im trying to say is that there was a plan for Iraq and it wasnt something that was conceived overnight because of 9/11. Im not totally discounting what you are saying. It definitely helped persuade people to accept the war on Iraq but it was not some necessary catalyst at all.

I agree with you, the no fly zones and sanctions were put in place for decades in order to allow easier entry through war. I agree that the Iraq war was not planned overnight. 9/11 was used as a pretext and as if it was waited on.

I just do not think the American public or the electorate would have approved a full out war to topple Saddam if 9/11 did not happen. No way. I think a catalyst was definitely necessary to get the ball rolling and get in. To me it shows there was an intent, especially when they repeatedly lied with the threats and linked 9/11 with Saddam. They could have said, hey, we want to go to war with Saddam and not even linked any of it to 9/11 or lied about it, but they did. If they thought it was that easy, there was no need to lie to that extent. They knew they needed to lie to get the public's approval for that war and they knew they had to play on their fears.

But, k hun, we completely see differences and different views on this. But thanks for presenting logical arguments to discuss it! Appreciate it. But, how about we agree to disagree?

  

 

[hazeleyed honey]

Originally Posted by In Yo Nostril

here and there? they ran an absurd amount of sorties in the time period in which those no fly zones were imposed

. The allied coalition was able to waltz into those areas of Iraq like it was friendly territory once the war began.

and yes the public would have approved. obviously not everyone but enough to do it without a ton of domestic opposition. do you even remember the outrage every time Sadaam rejected UN inspections? he was continuously toeing the line. its not like we were going to invade Australia and needed a huge event to be able to do it. Sadaam was always walking that line and we had just gone to war with the guy a few years before. it could not have happened years down the line with Sadaam. all im trying to say is that there was a plan for Iraq and it wasnt something that was conceived overnight because of 9/11. Im not totally discounting what you are saying. It definitely helped persuade people to accept the war on Iraq but it was not some necessary catalyst at all.

I agree with you, the no fly zones and sanctions were put in place for decades in order to allow easier entry through war. I agree that the Iraq war was not planned overnight. 9/11 was used as a pretext and as if it was waited on.

I just do not think the American public or the electorate would have approved a full out war to topple Saddam if 9/11 did not happen. No way. I think a catalyst was definitely necessary to get the ball rolling and get in. To me it shows there was an intent, especially when they repeatedly lied with the threats and linked 9/11 with Saddam. They could have said, hey, we want to go to war with Saddam and not even linked any of it to 9/11 or lied about it, but they did. If they thought it was that easy, there was no need to lie to that extent. They knew they needed to lie to get the public's approval for that war and they knew they had to play on their fears.

But, k hun, we completely see differences and different views on this. But thanks for presenting logical arguments to discuss it! Appreciate it. But, how about we agree to disagree?

  

 

[james earl zones]

Originally Posted by will068

-The US trains and aids Osama to fight the Soviets.

-Osama thanks the U.S. and remains extremely grateful for our help.

-The Gulf War begins and we take over the Middle East, bombing Iraq throughout the 90's.

-Bin Laden reacts to our flawed foreign policy by using terror tactics.

-9/11 happens. The U.S. responds by invading 2 countries, and by bombing Pakistan along with Yemen.

-We continued to bomb these countries for about 10 years, not realizing our interference with Middle Eastern politics is one of the main reasons why we were attacked on September 11th.

-We bomb Libya and support the rebels. We even consider arming them. In other words, something similar we did with Osama.

-The U.S. murders Osama.

-The U.S. continues to drop bombs on Libya and will continue the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan until further notice.

-We learned nothing.

 

[james earl zones]

Originally Posted by will068

-The US trains and aids Osama to fight the Soviets.

-Osama thanks the U.S. and remains extremely grateful for our help.

-The Gulf War begins and we take over the Middle East, bombing Iraq throughout the 90's.

-Bin Laden reacts to our flawed foreign policy by using terror tactics.

-9/11 happens. The U.S. responds by invading 2 countries, and by bombing Pakistan along with Yemen.

-We continued to bomb these countries for about 10 years, not realizing our interference with Middle Eastern politics is one of the main reasons why we were attacked on September 11th.

-We bomb Libya and support the rebels. We even consider arming them. In other words, something similar we did with Osama.

-The U.S. murders Osama.

-The U.S. continues to drop bombs on Libya and will continue the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan until further notice.

-We learned nothing.

 

[finnns2003]

rashi, who is that in the photo?

 

[finnns2003]

rashi, who is that in the photo?

 

[in yo nostril]

Originally Posted by Hazeleyed Honey


But, k hun, we completely see differences and different views on this. But thanks for presenting logical arguments to discuss it! Appreciate it. But, how about we agree to disagree?

  

ok ok

 

[in yo nostril]

Originally Posted by Hazeleyed Honey


But, k hun, we completely see differences and different views on this. But thanks for presenting logical arguments to discuss it! Appreciate it. But, how about we agree to disagree?

  

ok ok