112 replies to this topic

[Jok3r]

Just watching it on CNN now, it's kinda developing ATM, but... holy shit.

[Ghostrider]

I can't help but be skeptical after such a long time, but if US forces did get him then, well... cool.

So many resources towards the death of one man, it's pretty shocking. Also, people are partying on campus outside and shouting "USA, USA." xD

[Hobbesy]

Osama Bin Laden - World Hide-&-Go-Seek Champion

1993 - 2011

[NergiZed]

Well, I'd kinda like to see a photo of the body, but I think I can take the word of the Pres as long as he can dish out some delicious details, such as how they did the DNA verification as well as how we killed him (all I know that we did it with assassins, and not a drone)

[Destiny]

I seriously doubt it. Even though I know I shouldn't. Osama would not be so careless to...get caught in the open like that. Hope he's a goner.

[General]

He's gone but I fear this is just a beginning of something worse so I can't be happy about it, for Al-Qaeda; Osama was important but not indispensable, they are united not under a man but an idea, I just hope after effects of this attack not come to the innocent masses of America.

[deltaepsilon]

Was taken down by a SEAL team in Pakistan... apparently he used a woman as a human shield (the woman died)

[GDIZOCOM]

I can't believe it took less than 10 years after 9/11 to find him.I thought it was gonna take longer.This is just...amazing!

Edited by GDIZOCOM, 02 May 2011 - 06:53.

[SquigPie]

*Goes to /v/*
*Renamed: AMERICA FUCK YEAH!*
*Guiles Theme in the background*


YEEEEAAAAH!

Anyway, hope this means that Al Quada will be weakened.

Edited by SquigPie, 02 May 2011 - 06:58.

[Chyros]

URALI URALI URALI USA

Well, it only took ten years . But still, congratulations to the US forces for getting him. I hope the berieved ones from the 9/11 attacks can find some consolation from this.

SquigPie, on 2 May 2011, 8:58, said:

Anyway, hope this means that Al Quada will be weakened.

Unlikely, unfortunately .

[CJ]

I'm afraid this will cause a wave of paybacks in the shape of a lot of suicide bombers in western countries though...

[Major Fuckup]

CJ, on 2 May 2011, 15:41, said:

I'm afraid this will cause a wave of paybacks in the shape of a lot of suicide bombers in western countries though...

I agree.

[Alias]

Osama is just a figurehead, this really will not impact Al Qaeda (or any other terrorist organisation) and their operations in any way more than creating a martyr for their cause.

It would of been both a far more humane and far more sensible idea to capture him and try him for crimes against humanity rather than simply assassinate him. Aren't Western countries supposed to support the rule of law? I guess that's too much to expect from the country that runs Guantanamo.

My personal opinion is if you think an assassination is justice you are deluded. Celebrating over somebody's death regardless of how 'evil' you deem them to be is extremely saddening.

[Pav:3d]

^Im pretty sure he wasnt going to be taken alive, no matter how careful they are. Him being martyred is a huge mistake.

[SquigPie]

I don't think they knew it was him, didn't they first know it afterwards?

Edited by SquigPie, 02 May 2011 - 09:46.

[Chyros]

SquigPie, on 2 May 2011, 11:42, said:

I don't think they knew it was him, didn't they first know it afterwards?

They acquired intel on where he was about a week or so ago. If they didn't expect it to be him when they entered, they obviously were infinite morons.

[n5p29]

maybe this explains the increasing terrorism attack in here lately.

[Kichō]

Alias, on 2 May 2011, 10:26, said:

It would of been both a far more humane and far more sensible idea to capture him and try him for crimes against humanity rather than simply assassinate him. Aren't Western countries supposed to support the rule of law? I guess that's too much to expect from the country that runs Guantanamo.

Are you sure you ain't thinking of something else yet somewhat similar? (I think this is right?) According to international law, assassination of the Head of State is against the laws of nations, however Osama wasn't.

But yeah I understand what you mean, despite what he has done, aren't Democracies supposed to give him a right to a trial? If I remember right Saddam was given one but was hanged afterwards for his war crimes.

Just my take on things. Wasn't intending to involve politics, sorry if I did.

[Alias]

Kichō, on 2 May 2011, 22:39, said:

Alias, on 2 May 2011, 10:26, said:

It would of been both a far more humane and far more sensible idea to capture him and try him for crimes against humanity rather than simply assassinate him. Aren't Western countries supposed to support the rule of law? I guess that's too much to expect from the country that runs Guantanamo.

Are you sure you ain't thinking of something else yet somewhat similar? (I think this is right?) According to international law, assassination of the Head of State is against the laws of nations, however Osama wasn't.

But yeah I understand what you mean, despite what he has done, aren't Democracies supposed to give him a right to a trial? If I remember right Saddam was given one but was hanged afterwards for his war crimes.

Just my take on things. Wasn't intending to involve politics, sorry if I did.

I'm sure the US has found some loophole to make sure his assassination was legal, but legality doesn't matter. What matters is what the correct thing to do is.

The US acts on its moral high horse when it really isn't terribly far from the bottom of the heap.

[SquigPie]

Alias, on 2 May 2011, 14:47, said:

Kichō, on 2 May 2011, 22:39, said:

Alias, on 2 May 2011, 10:26, said:

It would of been both a far more humane and far more sensible idea to capture him and try him for crimes against humanity rather than simply assassinate him. Aren't Western countries supposed to support the rule of law? I guess that's too much to expect from the country that runs Guantanamo.

Are you sure you ain't thinking of something else yet somewhat similar? (I think this is right?) According to international law, assassination of the Head of State is against the laws of nations, however Osama wasn't.

But yeah I understand what you mean, despite what he has done, aren't Democracies supposed to give him a right to a trial? If I remember right Saddam was given one but was hanged afterwards for his war crimes.

Just my take on things. Wasn't intending to involve politics, sorry if I did.

I'm sure the US has found some loophole to make sure his assassination was legal, but legality doesn't matter. What matters is what the correct thing to do is.

The US acts on its moral high horse when it really isn't terribly far from the bottom of the heap.

Don't all countries do this? England tested Mustard gas on Indian (or Australian? Don't remember) soldiers. Denmark forced german soldiers after WW2 to take a walk through the landmine-filled beaches. All nations do wierd shit sometimes. America is no exception. It's just that they're the big man (thus their faults get noticed), and we're the little man.

[Chyros]

SquigPie, on 2 May 2011, 15:17, said:

Alias, on 2 May 2011, 14:47, said:

Kichō, on 2 May 2011, 22:39, said:

Alias, on 2 May 2011, 10:26, said:

It would of been both a far more humane and far more sensible idea to capture him and try him for crimes against humanity rather than simply assassinate him. Aren't Western countries supposed to support the rule of law? I guess that's too much to expect from the country that runs Guantanamo.

Are you sure you ain't thinking of something else yet somewhat similar? (I think this is right?) According to international law, assassination of the Head of State is against the laws of nations, however Osama wasn't.

But yeah I understand what you mean, despite what he has done, aren't Democracies supposed to give him a right to a trial? If I remember right Saddam was given one but was hanged afterwards for his war crimes.

Just my take on things. Wasn't intending to involve politics, sorry if I did.

I'm sure the US has found some loophole to make sure his assassination was legal, but legality doesn't matter. What matters is what the correct thing to do is.

The US acts on its moral high horse when it really isn't terribly far from the bottom of the heap.

Don't all countries do this? England tested Mustard gas on Indian (or Australian? Don't remember) soldiers. Denmark forced german soldiers after WW2 to take a walk through the landmine-filled beaches. All nations do wierd shit sometimes. America is no exception. It's just that they're the big man (thus their faults get noticed), and we're the little man.

You're talking about stuff that happened fifty years ago. Hasn't the world moved on since?

[Destiny]

Chyros, on 2 May 2011, 21:22, said:

SquigPie, on 2 May 2011, 15:17, said:

Alias, on 2 May 2011, 14:47, said:

Kichō, on 2 May 2011, 22:39, said:

Alias, on 2 May 2011, 10:26, said:

It would of been both a far more humane and far more sensible idea to capture him and try him for crimes against humanity rather than simply assassinate him. Aren't Western countries supposed to support the rule of law? I guess that's too much to expect from the country that runs Guantanamo.

Are you sure you ain't thinking of something else yet somewhat similar? (I think this is right?) According to international law, assassination of the Head of State is against the laws of nations, however Osama wasn't.

But yeah I understand what you mean, despite what he has done, aren't Democracies supposed to give him a right to a trial? If I remember right Saddam was given one but was hanged afterwards for his war crimes.

Just my take on things. Wasn't intending to involve politics, sorry if I did.

I'm sure the US has found some loophole to make sure his assassination was legal, but legality doesn't matter. What matters is what the correct thing to do is.

The US acts on its moral high horse when it really isn't terribly far from the bottom of the heap.

Don't all countries do this? England tested Mustard gas on Indian (or Australian? Don't remember) soldiers. Denmark forced german soldiers after WW2 to take a walk through the landmine-filled beaches. All nations do wierd shit sometimes. America is no exception. It's just that they're the big man (thus their faults get noticed), and we're the little man.

You're talking about stuff that happened fifty years ago. Hasn't the world moved on since?

I'm certain on one thing, Chyros.

If humanity as a whole as capable of 'moving on', none of us, and I mean, none of, would be here, typing this very moment.

I hope you won't ask me to explain, because I simply have no idea what I said.

[CJ]

*Facepalms at Destiny*
*Facepalms at Alias*

[Sgt. Nuker]

n5p29, on 2 May 2011, 8:29, said:

maybe this explains the increasing terrorism attack in here lately.

There are reasons beyond this that attribute themselves to that fact, though this could very well be one of the minor reasons.

I doubt this whole event. I would more likely believe he died of kidney failure than being gunned down, defending himself. Osama's death doesn't solve anything, and to a larger extent, it probably will make things worse. How convenient that his body was buried at sea, and within a 24 hour block of time. There are too many aspects about this event that can be fabricated that cause me to seriously doubt it all.

If Osama's dead, where does this end? What's going to happen next?

I'm guessing because now that Osama's "dead", the US had just placed a target on its forehead. I say this, because this morning, a city in my state has shut down its entire lower section because of a bomb threat. Streets and businesses in the area have been closed until the threat has been investigated.

[Jok3r]

Alias, on 2 May 2011, 8:47, said:

Kichō, on 2 May 2011, 22:39, said:

Alias, on 2 May 2011, 10:26, said:

It would of been both a far more humane and far more sensible idea to capture him and try him for crimes against humanity rather than simply assassinate him. Aren't Western countries supposed to support the rule of law? I guess that's too much to expect from the country that runs Guantanamo.

Are you sure you ain't thinking of something else yet somewhat similar? (I think this is right?) According to international law, assassination of the Head of State is against the laws of nations, however Osama wasn't.

But yeah I understand what you mean, despite what he has done, aren't Democracies supposed to give him a right to a trial? If I remember right Saddam was given one but was hanged afterwards for his war crimes.

Just my take on things. Wasn't intending to involve politics, sorry if I did.

I'm sure the US has found some loophole to make sure his assassination was legal, but legality doesn't matter. What matters is what the correct thing to do is.

The US acts on its moral high horse when it really isn't terribly far from the bottom of the heap.

Well, according to everything I've read, they attempted to take him alive. He died in a firefight with DevGru operators- that's not an assassination. I'd rather you get off your high horse, and stop taking every opportunity you have to bash America, maybe do a little research instead.

Sgt. Nuker, on 2 May 2011, 9:53, said:

n5p29, on 2 May 2011, 8:29, said:

maybe this explains the increasing terrorism attack in here lately.

There are reasons beyond this that attribute themselves to that fact, though this could very well be one of the minor reasons.

I doubt this whole event. I would more likely believe he died of kidney failure than being gunned down, defending himself. Osama's death doesn't solve anything, and to a larger extent, it probably will make things worse. How convenient that his body was buried at sea, and within a 24 hour block of time. There are too many aspects about this event that can be fabricated that cause me to seriously doubt it all.

If Osama's dead, where does this end? What's going to happen next?

I'm guessing because now that Osama's "dead", the US had just placed a target on its forehead. I say this, because this morning, a city in my state has shut down its entire lower section because of a bomb threat. Streets and businesses in the area have been closed until the threat has been investigated.

I don't know where it goes from here, but I do believe he was killed by American special operators, apparently acting on intelligence from Pakistani intelligence. It certainly does open us up from retribution, but would it be better that a man responsible for the deaths of thousands lives on plotting the deaths of even more? War is a horrible thing, but, as much bad as it may bring, I do believe that removing Osama from the equation is ultimately for the better of everyone.

Edited by Jok3r, 02 May 2011 - 14:14.