Bin Laden is actually a gremlin. By throwing him in the ocean, the US is actually just creating millions of Bin Ladens

From what I've heard Donald Trump killed him and as he gave him one last shot he screamed YOUR FIRED

From what I read they weren't specifically told to kill him. There objective was simply to get Bin Laden. Obviously dead or alive. They where told not to expect him to let them take him alive. Which he didn't.



When it comes to the middle east no it doesn't. I hate to say it but I agree withQueenSindel(TheBitch). The reason why so many people have joined Bin Laden's cause, and continue to fight us is becuase they view us as weak. We look at compassion & mercy as as dignified traits that our enemies lack, but they simply see the opposite, and that is what gives them motivation to continue fighting us.

Take the Iraqi war. I know people who served as MP's. Dealing with detainees. We think it is compassionate to give them food and bottled water because there in the desert. Yet these shit bags will go and empty the bottles of water, urinate in them, and throw them at our soldiers on a daily basis. These soldiers are stationed there 6 months minimum, a year, maybe even longer. They can't desert the army becuase they'll get court marshaled, and be put in jail. There forced to deal with this kind of crap from our enemies. And then people get all high and might when stuff like Abu Ghraib happens. This is the kind of crap that our enemies need to see IMO to deter them from fighting against us.

I don't take most things personally. I'd rather enjoy the content of the conversation for better or worse so long as it doesn't get silly. No worries...

Anywho,

I didn't ask for that information. I asked what you WOULD have done. Not what you wouldn't have....

What I want to try and do here is subject your difference of opinion on decision making, to similar conditions as Barack Obama's. It's improbable... but, if you don't like the result of something, you must have a different result in mind....and if that is so, you must consider the steps it takes to get to a different result.

Hence: What would you have done differently? [meaning...] How would you have handled the facts on the ground about GB differently? What about popular opinion, and what people wanted you to do with GB regardless of the facts? [and then...] How would you have made different choices, and made someone like yourself happy about the choices you made concerning Guantanamo Bay?

Not to mention, that camp is a shitty military P.O.W. (prisoners of war) clusterfuck of a mess to begin with. You can't kill them all because you're America, and we don't do that...., you can't deport them to where ever you want to because hell, you don't even know where alot of those bastards came from....and if you send them to the wrong place (which is anywhere) you could be sending them right back into the arms of the people we're at odds with. How many countries is that?

So what do you do with them?

Now add in there, 1+ million people like yourself, with their strong opinions of what they wanted to have happen with that place and those people.

Barack Obama did it right...or, as right as he probably could have. His leadership was effective... it worked.



That makes me more curious actually...as to what else exactly you expect the president to effectively be doing? Would you be satisfied if he toted a gun around, and was the actual soldier who shot Osama?

The president is the guy who signs very strong, popular, and sensible fact or opinion into law, he represents and manages global relationships, their view/image of our country on countless subjects and tends to extremely broad business matters, and addresses protection issues when necessary. I don't understand what you want from him. A guy who for the most part, what I feel is the most important part of his job, is to receive the best information from the best resources and, either delegate properly, or make the best call on whatever the issue happens to be at the moment.

I don't think he's doing every single little thing right but, I do believe Barack Obama is no doubt the right guy in the seat right now. No doubt. I wouldn't rather have any other personality in there right now because, Barack has been completing the objectives he set out to, and weathered whatever other storms that have come his way very well thus far.

This. I don't buy it

When chasing monsters, it's important to never become them.

Well-deserved punishment brings fairness and balance. There's nothing monstrous about doing that.

"Treat others as you want to be treated."

"Reap what you sow."

"What goes around comes around."

....balance.

He should have suffered. He should have suffered bigtime.

What about opinion polls? There was overwhelming public support for a public option, not bailing out the financial industry, ending the Bush tax cuts and not cutting funding for Social Security, and the exact opposite of those things happened. Opinion polls mean all of nothing. I would've closed it and I'll elaborate on that in the next paragraph.







Who said "kill them"? A lot of remaining detainees haven't even had a trial yet and have been denied legal status, which is in violation of the bloody Geneva Conventions and our own Supreme Court rulings. We don't know who's guilty or not, and shit, at least 150 of them--were in fact--innocent. I'd give them the god damned right to habeas corpus that is granted to them per international law.

Who said "deport them where ever you want"? If a guilty detainee's original residence doesn't want them back, you can just as easily imprison them here in the states. We don't have revolving doors peppered through out our prison walls. And yes, you and I don't specifically know where every single one of these detainees *come from, but our government does: They knew enough to release 200 to them to their home countries back between when this shit started and '05. Your entire reasoning hangs on the notion that international diplomacy is a myth and that our government doesn't keep track of anything related to GB.
*There actually are a decent amount of sources that could show us the specific nationality of fair amount of detainees.
What did he do right? What was stopping him from doing it completely correct?

He's dead, he will NEVER live again or hurt another human being again, what else do you want? Death is the ultimate punishment.

Shiver thy timbers, speak ye bones.
Look to La Luna.. and find the real 'stones'.

Find Opium wars, and you will know all.
Who chases a dragon, and who sends it out?

What reflects sun's ray of light?
What built up Romdon, not British might?

A german, a greek, a frog and a horse..
a marriage arranged.. and one yet more strange.

It's always the timing, but this timing.. evil.

Their gaze now focussed, on a released emporer of state,
part provision for students, and false relief..

Their explanation will be.. earth shaking,
released seeds that should not have been planted.
Taken by the wind, to it's city.. until the four angels merge,
their snakes burning the sun..

'sun' and 'moon' in a final embrace,
give birth, one last season..
and luck runs out,
while the clock becomes freedom,
for the modest and seaworthy.

All the while, shadow-play to distract,
inquisitive children who hear too many colours,
and wait for ripples in the water.

The silent german woman panics, gets agitated, runs away.
They burn the money for 'heat'.

Petty ecuses to justify one's own desire for vengeance.

If we had to resort to the methods they use, then we are worth obliteration.

Well, I've been saying the human race deserves to be extinct for many years now.

But that's mostly because we live in a modern age where people still believe in fairy tales and foolishly expect people who don't to respect that.

This is fake right? Fox news can't be this bad.

http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6497884/fox-news-obama-announces-obamas-death

As I said before Pred151, Obama does deserve some credit. Definitely not full Credit. As a president he did what he was suppose to do. He made the right call and I praise him for that. But do you agree with me that Bush should deserve some if not more credit as well?

How bout another analogy? Someone twists on a jar lid with all there strength but doesn't get it open. That person hands the jar to someone else and with one twist, pop, it's open.

Or how bout a football analogy since you got me started? Jimmy Johnson(Bush) is hired on as the Head football coach for the Cowboys and takes a team from 1-15 one year to the Superbowl twice. Barry Switzer(Obama) takes over as Head Coach and wins a Superbowl with basically the same team. Does he deserve all the credit? Not the greatest analogy but you get my point.

What's your interpretation of "completely correct?" ...

GITMO What would you have done differently?

==

Here's what I'm able to understand of your position. It seems like you're not articulating your position well... and so, it also seems like you're only posting factoids perpetually (smoke screens). Or in other words, expressing your emotional disdain for something without offering an alternative solution.

Basically just saying; You don't like it, you don't like it, you don't like it...because of x amount of reasons. That's fine but, that information doesn't move me towards anything. It helps me understand why you don't like the result but, it doesn't help me understand what you would do to get to your different result.

More clear, because coming off condescending isn't my angle here:

If the GITMO situation were a plate of chopped fruit...an apple for example. In this analogy, you're complaining about how the apple was cut. Whereas, I like how it has been cut. I just want you to explain how you would cut it differently, since you don't like how the other guy did it.

Instead of giving me that information, you're expressing more disdain about other kinds of fruit (health care, bailouts, tax cuts = oranges, bananas, pears) that the other guy has cut.

Tell me how you would cut the apple (GITMO) differently.

GITMO What would you have done differently? [meaning...] How would you have handled the facts on the ground about GB differently? What about popular opinion, and what people wanted you to do with GB regardless of the facts? [and then...] How would you have made different choices, and made someone like yourself happy about the choices you made concerning Guantanamo Bay?

What are you talking about? You specifically asked me about public opinion. I gave you examples of things that the U.S. public favored but still didn't come to pass, despite popular opinion. This is what you asked me:





My thought on popular opinion is that if it didn't matter enough for those issues, what does it matter for something like GB? I wasn't even looking to debate all that other stuff. But, I guess I owe some humbleness since I made the same mistake with your original question to me.

Anyway, you say, despite overwhelming public opinion to the contrary, if we let Goldman and the banking industry sink it would've been devastating: Fine, I've always agreed with that. But then how does your question to me about public opinion of Gitmo matter in the slightest?






...



Okay, so you either haven't been reading my posts or apparently don't know what I'm talking about, or, much about the president you're defending. I really don't mean this as an insult, but I figured you knew enough about this--hence why you were arguing with me--and understood what I meant by giving them fair trials in accordance to these rulings and laws.

I'm going to sum this up for you:

1.Gitmo was a naval base that was converted into a prison in 2002 as an attempt to subvert jurisdiction of U.S. courts due to the base being outside of the U.S.

2. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld(2006) says that military commissions used to try detainees violates UCMJ laws and the Geneva Conventions.

3. in response to Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, the Bush administration signed in the military commissions Act of 2006 which once again, denies detainees those rights afforded to them through the Geneva Conventions.

4. Boumediene v. Bush(2008) finds that MCA unconstitutionally denies detainees the right to habeas corpus and, once again, have the right to a full hearing and legal defense--NOT just a military commission.

5. The Obama administration signs 2010 National Defense Authorization Act and amends some of MCA(2006) and is called the military commissions Act of 2009. Some of it's okay, but then there's shit like the following:

"Conspiracy" is still considered a war crime even though the Supreme Court determined that "Conspiracy" is NOT a war crime.

People that "support" hostile combatants against the U.S. can be tryed in the same way as people who physically engaged in hostile combat, ergo, a family harboring a hostile could be tryed like said hostile by military commission.

The use of military commission to try those who were children when they committed their alleged crime.

MCA(2009) only covers aliens for military commission, which violates Equal Protection Clause of our constitution.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So in summary (even though I told you this already): I want to/would've closed Gitmo because it exists only to attempt to subvert U.S. jurisdiction and I'd have given those remaining detainees a fair trial per the Supreme Court's rulings, international law, and U.S. law and kept them in the states and would've told Congress to take their stipulation in NDAA(2009) that doesn't allow for detainees to be shipped to the U.S. and shove it, and actually try to veto it and attempt to move the Dems into solidly voting with me; none of which did the Obama administration even attempt. I wouldn't have adhered to MCA, and actually would have rewritten it to fit the previously stated SC and constitutional standards. I wouldn't consider "conspiracy" a war crime. I wouldn't have implemented any of those points in MCA(2009) I showed you above, which all fall on the Obama administration shoulders. And mind you, I'm speaking strictly about the points I've brought up above, and nothing else.









Actual bloody facts aren't smoke screens: They're facts. Your "factoids" line is bullshit, and I'd expect you to uphold your own stranded after what you posted about the status of Gitmo detainee's countries of origin, Social Security's solvency and the PPACA, but again, those last two are not what I wanted to debate in the first place. The first time was me misreading your question, and the second time was you misinterpreting my post, but whatever. Anyway, once more, I'm not insulting you but I figured you knew about this shit before you started arguing with me. I'll hook you up with some sources if you really can't be bothered to Google any of my points, but I gave you my solution before and now.




Again, no offense intended, but how do you not understand my post? There being 150 innocent people that were falsely imprisoned illustrates the dangers of denying people the right to the same legal system U.S. citizens are given and what is stated in the 14th amendment and the bloody Geneva Conventions. I specifically said I'd give detainees those rights. Yes, "X amount of reasons," backed by the SC's rulings, our Constitution, and general facts should move you to a different conclusion that doesn't rely on, what I think is, your own personal intuition, or at least make you understand my previously stated solution that you seemed to have missed. Now, If I didn't make that clear enough, I'm genuinely sorry, but I don't what else I can do for you.






The way I cut fruit isn't in violation of the constitution, the SC's rulings and intentional law.







Aaaaanyway, I'm sure this will help Obama's reelection campaign a lot.

I also agree that the Bush administration should at least get some credit for starting the manhunt, it's only fair. Either way, Osama-Lama-Ding-Dong is dead and that's all that matters to me. Now, who wants some pizza rolls?

Obama personally killed Osama with a Stone-Cold Stunner.

That's how it happened!

Okay, fair enough. Still serious about those pizza rolls. :P

I had a 40-bag of pizza rolls yesterday, but I ate them :(

My mom is bringing me home a pizza in a bit though :D

Your mom is the most awesome mom in the world.
And damn, a 40 by yourself? You're my idol. :D

I fully agree with you and Penn. Besides, this could even lead to the same situation where Liu Kang beat Shao Kahn but soon the enemy grew even stronger. Quite funny to mix Mortal Kombat with world politics though.

Oh shit, if Osama was Kahn, than who's Quan Chi?!! We're doomed!!
lol