How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Well that's all right then   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  ]
 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Well that's all right then

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


75 posted 05-15-2011 07:53 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

The 'decision' to shoot Bin Laden was indeed no 'decision' that was made pre-meditatively


Still have more swampland for sale....

"Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. told a Senate committee Wednesday that the shooting of Osama bin Laden was “justified as an act of national self-defense.”
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


76 posted 05-15-2011 08:04 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Reb, there are more holes in your articles than in bin Laden's head...

When bin Laden refused to surrender and placed a woman in front of him as a shield (coward!) a shot to his head ended the short standoff.

First, I have read many accounts of the events there and I didn't see one which spoke of bin laden placing a woman in front of him as a shield. He wasn't even armed. Second, would a shooter go for a man's head who was using a woman as a shield? Wyatt Earp died a long time ago. I have a little experience in that, too, and I can assure you he wouldn't.

"The guy either had a weapon, was going for a weapon or was otherwise doing something he shouldn't have been doing," Wasdin said. "That's why he got shot."

He doesn't know? What does "otherwise doing something he shouldn't have been doing" mean? See anything there about using a human shield?  These articles are for CYA purposes only. I'll refer you once again to Holder's statement. At least he was honest about it.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


77 posted 05-15-2011 08:22 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

Still have more swampland for sale...



I'm frankly, not buying, that you're not buying it.  You protest too much m'deer deer...

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


78 posted 05-15-2011 08:31 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I gave clear reasons for not buying it. If you do, that's up to you. Have fun with it.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


79 posted 05-15-2011 08:42 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

No Mike, you merely pointed to an erroneous account of, what was clearly initially reported of Bin Laden's wife being used as a human shield, to attempt to discredit Sgt. French's (and my) point that CQB training is (A)a police tactic, and (B) an integral part of Seal Team Six's training, and (C)That the shoot/no shoot decision is split second choice not made consciously by the operator but as a matter of training based on reactions to the behaviors of the targets.

And, you're too smart to think that I would think that you don't get that.  
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


80 posted 05-15-2011 08:53 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I won't ping pong it, reb. Go with it any way you want. I'm satisfied with my reasoning and logic, certified by Holder's own admission. It really doesn't matter to me if you see it that way or not. Peace.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


81 posted 05-15-2011 08:59 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

If Holder's statement is an 'admission' Mike then you are giving very high marks to the Obama administration for being extremely competent in planning and executing the mission  while you are negating the training and competency of the troops on the ground.

Sure you want to take that approach Mike?

Holder's statement is only relative to the decision to take action with Seal Team Six instead of making another drone strike, or do nothing at all.  
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


82 posted 05-15-2011 09:06 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

quote:

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. told a Senate committee Wednesday that the shooting of Osama bin Laden was “justified as an act of national self-defense.”

Well, Ron, it would appear that Holder is not even carrying on the illusion that Bin Laden resisted or that the SEAL's lives were in danger. He speaks of "national self-defense", which means that the orders were to kill Bin Laden, regardless.




     Your conclusion does not follow, Mike.  It requires a wild leap.

     This does not mean that orders may not have been given to kill rather than to capture the man.  I have no idea.  I have a dislike for the mission itself, which makes the outcome a likely one, doesn't it?

     I would be against the mission either way.

     It appears that you are only against the mission and the death of Bin Laden because it makes the possibility of the reelection of President Obama more likely rather than because it is morally objectionable.  It is morally objectionable in my opinion.  It is not, as I understand it, illegal by United States law, even if  the President had specifically ordered the seals to go in and shoot the man down where he stood because he felt — as President of the United States — that the man presented a danger to the welfare of the country.  That, as I understand the present United States law, is enough to take the shooting out of the realm of murder.

     I happen to think of it as murder, personally, but then nobody consulted me about the matter; and my point of view doesn't carry any legal weight.  You don't think of it as murder, for that matter, near as I can tell. [Edited - Ron]

     Am I missing something here?

     I would not have pulled the trigger.  I am against this sort of thing.  One of the reasons I'm not very good at martial arts, despite my enjoyment of them, is that I'm unwilling to break anybody in any kind of a serious and definitive way.  The best I can do is restraining people.

[Edited - Ron]

     What am I missing here?  I feel like I loose in a world of fun-house mirrors...

     I suspect that the rage on the Right here is that President Obama has done something typical of the Republicans and is getting the sort of benefit that Republicans typically get from this sort of move, undeserved adulation and support.  The right seems to find this unbearable.  They find it so unbearable, in fact, they thety find themselves criticizing actions that they would otherwise applaud

     I think the rage is because the President has increased his electoral odds for 2012 more than anything else; and the Right has gone into a completely spastic and disorganized response;.

     I should only be so lucky as to hope that the Right would develop an aversion to unnecessary war and violence at the behest of any political party.  I may call what happened to Osama Bin Laden murder; and so may much of the rest of the world.  I haven't seen Mike specify which law in the United States says it is, though, and that The President hasn't followred legal process in having the man killed.  

     That was the purpose of Mr. Holder's statement, by the way.  It lays the justification for the legal process by a finding might be issued against Osama bin Laden, and I do believe it takes President Obama off the hook for the Charge of Murder.  I don't like it, but it is to be expected; and I don't expect that it carries actual moral weight.  For the legality, it is enough, I'm afraid.

[This message has been edited by Ron (05-15-2011 10:17 PM).]

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


83 posted 05-15-2011 09:20 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

I think the moral choices are pretty clear Bob.

Drone strike=certain death or disfigurement of any-one in the target zone -- guilty or not. (not to mention the destruction of valuable intelligence).

Doing nothing means letting the suspects go free -- which is immoral.

Sending in the Seals, while risky, SAVED lives, and gained us valuable intelligence (not to mention a nifty porn stash) to put the rest of Al Quaida on defense.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


84 posted 05-15-2011 09:35 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

even if  the President had specifically ordered the seals to go in and shoot the man down where he stood because he felt — as President of the United States — that the man presented a danger to the welfare of the country.  That, as I understand the present United States law, is enough to take the shooting out of the realm of murder.

So you feel that the only way bin laden would not have been a present danger to the United States was for him to be killed. Having him captured and imprisoned would not have achieved that same result?? As far as taking it out of the realm of murder, you don't even do that yourself, having called it murder on more than one occasion. I will give you the same message as I gave LR....peace. Enjoy whatever conclusions you wish to draw. I'm satisfied with mine.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


85 posted 05-15-2011 10:28 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


quote:

even if  the President had specifically ordered the seals to go in and shoot the man down where he stood because he felt — as President of the United States — that the man presented a danger to the welfare of the country.  That, as I understand the present United States law, is enough to take the shooting out of the realm of murder.

So you feel that the only way bin laden would not have been a present danger to the United States was for him to be killed. Having him captured and imprisoned would not have achieved that same result?? As far as taking it out of the realm of murder, you don't even do that yourself, having called it murder on more than one occasion. I will give you the same message as I gave LR....peace. Enjoy whatever conclusions you wish to draw. I'm satisfied with mine.



     Mike, if you have a quarrel with United States law, that's fine with me; I've had them on occasion myself.  I keep mentioning The Patriot Act in this regard, for example.  Don't confuse my opinions with what is apparently the Law of the land.  A Presidential Finding seems to be all the excuse that a President needs to bump off a non-citizen.  If that's not the case, and I really hope it isn't the case, I would be seriously pleased to find this out.  I would be much happier with the state of affairs in our country.

     You may be satisfied with your conclusions, and I'm glad that you are, but I don't understand them.

     I mean they make no logical sense to me, and I would welcome anybody who would be willing to lay them out for me in a way that actually makes the connections between one point and the next point clear, so I could follow the thread of what you're saying.

     I don't think that an attempt to capture Bin Laden would have been successful if it had been limited to that option only.  That's why I am against the very notion of the mission; it almost of necessity would have led to a firefight.  You shouldn't plan on going into a firefight you think you may lose.  It's unfair to the troops involved.

     Having been a trooper yourself, I can't imagine you feeling good about being tasked that way.

     Of course I think it was murder.  Haven't I made myself clear about that?

     Haven't I also made myself clear that the law says I'm on the losing side of that discussion, and that my disagreement is spitting into the wind.  If you've got a quarrel, take it up with the various laws governing intelligence operations.  You should remember, though, that you'd be putting yourself on my side when you do so, and you'd be leveling a lot of criticism against prior administrations as well. [Edited - Ron

     That's what I think.
    

    


[This message has been edited by Ron (05-15-2011 11:47 PM).]

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


86 posted 05-16-2011 10:56 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Dear L.R., I tend to agree with you broadly.  I am not certain, however, that doing something increased the liklihood of a good outcome overall.  Certainly it may have; but it's difficult to tell to what extent the death of Bin Laden under these circumstances served as a recruiting tool for the organization.

     How good was that porn collection, anyway?
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


87 posted 05-16-2011 01:04 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

So far, U.S. officials have released information about several materials the Navy SEALs found in bin Laden's Abbottabad compound, including Pepsi, Vaseline, and Avena syrup—a sexual stimulant. Today, Reuters reported that officials also found a fairly extensive and modern porn stash amidst the digital thumb drives and electronics recovered from the raid. They did not say whether bin Laden himself was privy to the videos or if they were passed around in the house. Given that the compound was not connected to the Internet or other communications networks, it's not clear how bin Laden or his couriers would have acquired the materials. One idea is that the porn came to them through thumb drives, along with other electronic messages carried by couriers to and from the al Qaeda leader.

Aside from the dirty secrets, the thumb drives promise to out a whole new class of al Qaeda operatives. Sources say bin Laden used the drives to communicate with his terror network, meaning that active al Qaeda members could soon find themselves confronted with damning evidence.

Officials are still reviewing the footage from all 25 Navy SEAL helmet cameras that recorded the 40-minute raid on bin Laden's compound, and have released new details on the videos. Bin Laden was wearing a white undershirt and tan robe when the SEALS took aim at the terror leader on the main house's third floor landing, before he fled into his bedroom. The first SEAL followed him and pushed bin Laden's daughters out of harm's way. Then a second entered and was met by bin Laden's wife, who either tried to shield her husband from his attacker or was pushed toward him. The second SEAL pushed her aside and shot bin Laden in the chest, and a third SEAL shot him in the head.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailybeast/20110513/ts_dailybeast/14062_binlade nraidontapebreakingnewsupdates_1



Difficult to gauge Bob, but if one needs porn, Avena, and vaseline?  Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


88 posted 05-16-2011 02:05 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


So he may have thrown a wife
instead of a grenade; I can understand
why they shot him . . .


.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


89 posted 05-16-2011 07:48 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Nice, John!
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


90 posted 05-16-2011 10:53 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     So, Mike, you are perhaps suggesting that Osama thought he'd pulled the pin on his wife before he threw her at the Seals; and he was surprised when she didn't go off like a grenade?  Or that he looked down and found that he still had the thumb drive in his hand and said something like, Drat!, I knew I should have put in more training with the guys!  

     In looking over the Google reports, though, a lot of folks seem to be talking about him as a martyr to the cause.  

     We can make our bad taste jokes, but they don't wipe away the perceptions of those who think the man a martyr.  We have no idea how those perceptions will affect others world wide.

     I don't know why it should come as a huge surprise that there was a stash of porn.  There's porn in lots of houses, even in places who preach against it.  All that does is make clear that Bin Laden — if the porn was his at all — was a human being, and that we've been distorting some things about him, probably unconsciously, for our own purposes.  He was a human being if the porn wasn't his as well.  We have been making him a larger evil than he was to serve our own purposes.

     I have to wonder where our search for our next enemy will take us, what form that next enemy will take, and what portion of our humanity we will decide we need to pay to keep from addressing ourselves in the process.  
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


91 posted 05-16-2011 11:24 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

We have been making him a larger evil than he was to serve our own purposes.

We made him a larger evil than he was, Bob? You mean we shouldn't call a murderer of 3000 civilians a possible porn addict because that could be unfair ??

I personally don't think evil gets much larger than him. We didn't make him a mass murderer to serve our own purposes, Bob. He made himself the mass murderer.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


92 posted 05-17-2011 12:53 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     As far as evils go, Osama was sufficient to the day.  As far as evils go, he wasn't even on a national scale.  He was not a national state.  He was a really nasty activist charismatic preacher on the very far right wing of his religion, like Pat Robertson on steroids with full time roid rage.  Robertson was always telling us to go off and bomb country X or murder leader Y because he didn't approve of their approach to things.  Osama actually pushed to get people to do the sorts of things that Robertson was talking about.  Robertson got a fair number of votes when he ran for President.

     Was Osama worth throwing out the Posse Comitatus laws?  Was he worth The PATRIOT ACT?  Was he worth the coming of the security state?  Was he worth the Iraq War with more than 3000 Americans killed and estimates in the multiples of hundreds of  thousands of Iraqis killed by Lancet?  Was he worth warrantless wiretaps?  Not as far as I'm concerned.  It took good old American ingenuity to do those things.

     I would say that our reaction to Osama was worse, in the same way that some folks are killed by their own allergic reactions to things that need not be so serious to other people.  I'm that way with Bee Stings myself; my body over-reacts.  My throat closes up.  My blood pressure goes through the roof.  Some people react that way to peanuts.

     I remind you, Mike, that you react that way to Peanut Farmers on occasion.  Heaven knows why you haven't stroked out at the thought by now.  I have an aunt whose allergic.  Some folks feel that way about the entire state of Massachusetts.

     Terrorists depend on over-reaction to demonstrate to their supporters what wretches their enemies are.  They pray for disproportionate responses.  They need them to function.

     That's one of the reasons why asymmetrical warfare works, and why insurgents use it as a tactic of choice.  It makes folks on the Right think of Jimmy Carter.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


93 posted 05-17-2011 08:07 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I'm that way with Bee Stings myself; my body over-reacts.  My throat closes up.  My blood pressure goes through the roof.  Some people react that way to peanuts.

     I remind you, Mike, that you react that way to Peanut Farmers on occasion.


Actually, Bob, that's not an accurate statement. I doubt you will find anywhere that I reacted to Carter with anger or physical suffering. I have simply stated that he was one of the worst presidents we have ever had.....not in anger but as a simple observation. Getting mad at him would be like getting mad at the bugs I'm paid to eradicate. Being alive is not their fault. They are simply in the wrong place at the wrong time...as was Carter. The Oval Office was not the right place for him. The peanut farm was.

With Obama, though, I do get angry. Although I stipulate that he is on the way to knocking Carter off the pedestal of being the worst president to occupy the position, he IS a danger, where Carter was not. Not knowing what to do, Carter simply did very little, whereas, with Obama, not knowing what to do makes him do all sorts of things and most of them wrong. Were he not backed by two degenerates more concerned with their own personal power over what is right for the country, he would have not gotten so far as to cause the damage he is causing.

Jimmy? He was simply a lightweight  

btw...as far as creating bad guys to push one's own agenda, Obama is a master of that craft, as he is proving daily.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


94 posted 05-17-2011 06:48 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     The distraction seemed to get you off on a tangent talking about Jimmy Carter.  My fault, there.

     I don't think of myself as a terrorist, yet I seem to have gotten an out of proportion response.  I mention Jimmy Carter, and you sink your teeth into President Obama.  But it was sort of that way with Osama; he attacked with World trade center,  we attacked Afghanistan — fair enough, I suppose, though we had other choices — and then we attacked an uninvolved third country and then our own constitutional civil protections.

     I wish that Osama would have acted as much against his self-interests.  Say, if we attacked Osama, then he would attack other people who agreed with him and other potential allies, alienating his friends and essentially poisoning his own wells.  I find it hard to imagine him doing so, though.

     We have different nominees for worst President.  I'd be more interested in talking about best Presidents at some point, though.  Perhaps in another thread.  Talking about worst seems a way of looking for unpleasantness.

     I still think of Washington as the best because of his understanding of the need to step down and limit his own term of power.  Cincinnatus was much on his mind; that, and the notion of service to his country.  I don't know how many presidents since have had that foremost on their minds, and how many have had instead the need to achieve and wield power for party and personal gain.  Eisenhower might have had the notion of service in mind, as might have Truman.

     It could be an interesting discussion.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


95 posted 05-18-2011 11:33 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Correct Michael. Obama is the master at 'looping': choose your target, create a negative environment surrounding the target by lying about a situation and then making false claims about the target. Then when the target protests, turn around and point to the protesting target and then frame the reaction as 'evidence' that his initial negative assertions were correct.

"What do these people want? I've just about completed the fence (uh...no you haven't), the border is more secure than it's ever been (uh...no it's not), I've given them everything they've asked for (uh...no you haven't), and still they aren't happy (correct on that score), what will they want next? A moat? A moat with alligators? hahahahaha."

So when people protest that they aren't happy with the border situation, he says, "see, I told you they are never satisfied, no matter how much I do for them".

By the way, I'd go with anything that works, either restore the funding that was stopped and really complete the border fence, place the troops on the border, enforce the current immigration laws or, yes, even build a damn moat with alligators. Throw some crocodiles in there too for good measure.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


96 posted 05-19-2011 12:02 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     How would that apply to the Bin Laden situation, Denise?  I guess I don't see that.  Could you show how your point applies to the Bin Laden situation?
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


97 posted 05-19-2011 01:56 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

It doesn't, Bob. It applies to Michael's comment about Obama being a master at his craft.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


98 posted 05-19-2011 02:57 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

....and my comment came from yours, Bob, about using overreaction as a weapon.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


99 posted 05-19-2011 09:33 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     I was talking about Bin Laden, Mike, more or less the subject of the thread.
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Well that's all right then   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors