Osama | Page 4 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Osama

Not a chance that they killed him. They got him and are gonna get the info they need from him first.
There claiming that within an 8 hour period they killed him and buried him at sea??
Yea rite.
Way to much intel to be lost by killing the leader of the Taliban. They need to know what he knows before putting a bullet in his head.
 
boooya said:
Not a chance that they killed him. They got him and are gonna get the info they need from him first.
There claiming that within an 8 hour period they killed him and buried him at sea??
Yea rite.
Way to much intel to be lost by killing the leader of the Taliban. They need to know what he knows before putting a bullet in his head.
Click to expand...

I very much doubt that taking him alive was even an option considering the kind of compound he was [supposedly] in. That guy wasn't leaving that house alive no matter what.
 
haisam10 said:
Y does everyone take this as truth. They killed Osama and promptly buried him at sea. U would think someone of that significance would have their picture taken or something else as proof of death. Something doesn't feel right here.
Click to expand...

They reportedly did take pictures and a DNA sample. Are you disputing the claim that he was killed, or the claim that he has been buried?
 
fastar1 said:
Seriously.

Negotiate with anyone you want something from, why not? Seriously.
Click to expand...

I'm not big on playing nice with people who indiscriminately kill civilians and harbour terrorists who fly airplanes into skyscrapers. What kind of message does this send?

If you disagree with us, kill a few thousand of our civilians and then we'll sit down to negotiate with you.
 
mmmnaked said:
I'm not big on playing nice with people who indiscriminately kill civilians and harbour terrorists who fly airplanes into skyscrapers. What kind of message does this send?

If you disagree with us, kill a few thousand of our civilians and then we'll sit down to negotiate with you.
Click to expand...

Being closed to negotiation changes what in that scenario, exactly?
 
It changes perception. Terrorist attacks will not get you a round table conference with our government. We will not listen to your concerns, you will not get to voice your opinion. You will be hunted down and killed.
 
mmmnaked said:
I'm not big on playing nice with people who indiscriminately kill civilians and harbour terrorists who fly airplanes into skyscrapers. What kind of message does this send?

If you disagree with us, kill a few thousand of our civilians and then we'll sit down to negotiate with you.
Click to expand...

us? What are you an American... makes sense now.
 
Freestyle72 said:
us? What are you an American... makes sense now.
Click to expand...

gen·er·al·i·ty (jn-rl-t)
n. pl. gen·er·al·i·ties
1. The state or quality of being general.
2. An observation or principle having general application; a generalization.
3. An imprecise or vague statement or idea.
4. The greater portion or number; the majority.
 
mmmnaked said:
It changes perception. Terrorist attacks will not get you a round table conference with our government. We will not listen to your concerns, you will not get to voice your opinion.
Click to expand...
That, I can kinda agree with.

You will be hunted down and killed.
Click to expand...
This becomes the reason we should be open to negotiation. If we're going to react in any way at all, negotiation always needs to be an option on the table. Otherwise we should just ignore any attack, shrug it off and move on. Yes, this is also an option.
 
mmmnaked said:
I'm not big on playing nice with people who indiscriminately kill civilians and arm+train+support terrorists who fly airplanes into skyscrapers. What kind of message does this send?
Click to expand...

That we still need to negotiate with the U.S. because we share a border and have close economic ties, but that we should be very careful about it :cool:
 
fastar1 said:
That, I can kinda agree with.


This becomes the reason we should be open to negotiation. If we're going to react in any way at all, negotiation always needs to be an option on the table. Otherwise we should just ignore any attack, shrug it off and move on. Yes, this is also an option.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that sitting idly by is an option either. Responding to terrorist attacks is obviously an incredibly complicated and costly proposal, but I can't say that simply shrugging off the WTC attacks would've had favourable results. I think the right move was definitely military retaliation on a region known to foster these terrorists.. but the domestic reaction at home should've been very different.
 
FiReSTaRT said:
That we still need to negotiate with the U.S. because we share a border and have close economic ties, but that we should be very careful about it :cool:
Click to expand...

Hindsight is 20/20 and international politics have always been ugly.

The "good" guy today isn't necessarily gonna be the good guy 20 years from now. Regimes change, ideologies evolve. I don't for a second believe that 9/11 was orchestrated by anyone other than foreign terrorists, but it's a well known fact that Osama and his cronies were at one point funded by the USA because they were deemed to be the "favourable" position in that region. It might've seemed right to them at the time. It's stupid, but it's a fact of life. You gotta wonder how badly the CIA f'd Bin Laden and a thousand other guys just like him in the past.
 
mmmnaked said:
I'm not sure that sitting idly by is an option either. Responding to terrorist attacks is obviously an incredibly complicated and costly proposal, but I can't say that simply shrugging off the WTC attacks would've had favourable results. I think the right move was definitely military retaliation on a region known to foster these terrorists.. but the domestic reaction at home should've been very different.
Click to expand...

The 9-11 attacks definitely warranted a response, and there wasn't any real option politically other than to attack someone. Anyone.

Not that I have any idea what alternative there was to the use of force either, but I think it's fair to say now that the response to the attack was overreaching in it's scope.
 
fastar1 said:
They reportedly did take pictures and a DNA sample. Are you disputing the claim that he was killed, or the claim that he has been buried?
Click to expand...

What in the world are they going to compare his DNA to? I doubt they have any of his on file since he has been rogue since the end of the cold war. The only other option would be family members, but they are wealthy Saudis who cant be forced to do anything. Should be interesting.

As for negotiating with terrorists, you dont do it because, if you do it once then they will learn your weakness and will continue to terrorize; it will lead to anarchy. To maintain order, you dont give into their demands. It shows power.
 
I don't consider the war in Iraq a response to 9/11. The real response was Afghanistan, and while the mission may not have gone exactly as hoped and the objectives changed a few times over the years, the basic response was right. Send forces over there and attempt to clean out the terrorist scumbags.
 
Freestyle72 said:
You are an Engineer. Surely you can recognize that the collapse of these two buildings was at the very minimum a controlled demolition. I am no conspiracy theorist since the US has ****** off a lot of countries. But if you watch the Trade center go down on video that is undoubtedly a controlled demo. I don't care what anyone says. No building that size collapses on it's own shortly after ANY kind of collision.
Click to expand...


You need to read up on the construction of those two towers. It's no surprise the buildings collapsed internally, as they were built very differently than most buildings, with the main structure being on the outside like an exoskeleton. You can see the remnants of this in the remains of the pilings and superstructure left sticking up afterwards.
 
Sounds a little strange that they buried him out to sea so quick, and because of " religious practices ". Since when did the USA care about any religion besides Christianity ? At least Saddam was hanged, and had tons of videos depicting it, but this ?. Who knows..... Osama could of signed any deal to just have this done and then dis-appear for good.
 
Man I told a few people about this last night and they startin WHYLEN. They wouldnt shut up about Osama being Obamas cousin or some crazy crap IDK. Me personally, I think a picture of the b@stard should be provided to everyone ON national TV to proove this. That could be just me though as I get older I hear about some new sh1t and a lot of it seems kinda true lol
 
mmmnaked said:
Hindsight is 20/20 and international politics have always been ugly.
The "good" guy today isn't necessarily gonna be the good guy 20 years from now. Regimes change, ideologies evolve. I don't for a second believe that 9/11 was orchestrated by anyone other than foreign terrorists, but it's a well known fact that Osama and his cronies were at one point funded by the USA because they were deemed to be the "favourable" position in that region.
Click to expand...

Is that why we're conducting bombing raids for al-Quaeda right now, just like we did in the late 90's? :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom