Should we have brought Bin Laden out alive? [Reader Post]

Loading

Apparently, the team going after OBL was instructed not to bring him out alive. I have already read several posts saying that it is a good thing OBL was killed, rather than captured alive. Donald Rumsfeld just said the same thing on the Greta Van Susteren show. The usual rationale is that it avoids the chaos and confusion that would necessarily have been the outcome of a trial.

I’m not so sure.

First, and possibly most important, consider the intelligence we might have gotten from him. The amount of crucial information he had must have been staggering. He was obviously not hiding away in a cave, as some of us suspected, so he was probably in close daily contact with whatever is left of the Al Qaida network. It’s not clear how much he would have talked, particularly under Obama’s interrogation rules, but interrogators have said in the past that sometimes arrogant prisoners will talk about anything, just to demonstrate how important they are. And, skilled interrogators have ways of getting information, even without waterboarding.

Also, don’t discount the symbolic benefit of having OBL in custody. OBL is now a martyr, even without a grave to visit. And he will be considered to have died a hero. If he had been captured, and pictured in chains, it would have been an enormous psychological blow to a society that puts great emphasis on symbolism.

And I don’t buy the argument that it would have been too difficult to keep him in custody, and conduct whatever kind of trial was deemed appropriate. Are people really suggesting that the United States is not capable of conducting a fair trial of someone like OBL, in a reasonable manner? Yes, it would have required special security measures, and would have been a media circus in some ways. But, OBL was clearly a war criminal, and not entitled to a civilian trial. A war crimes trial, along the lines of the Nuremburg trials, would certainly have been easily possible, if we cared to pursue it. This would have been well within our capabilities.

So, why not at least try to keep him alive? Well, I suspect the reason is very simple: Obama has no place to go with him. He has already promised to close down Guantanamo, and it would make him look very bad to have to admit that was a bad idea. Furthermore, he learned what a bad idea it would be to try someone like this in a civilian court, when he proposed the trial of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in New York City.

In short, Obama painted himself into a corner. He had nowhere else to go, except to order OBL killed. And we will never know how much that cost us.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
70 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Bring OBL back alive? Nope. The Eric Holder DOJ cannot manage to prosecute a case of that magnitude. Turning OBL over to the Hague for Trial would create a mess that the Netherlands would never forgive US for and the Geneva Conventions would most likely not cover the scope of the Offenses without taking years and compromising Classified info. I like the outcome the way it turned out.

You know, for a long time, I thought Osama was already dead, just not found.
(A lot of people thought the same.)

Osama was quiet.
At one point his spokesman in English, Adam Gadhan, read a supposedly Osama-written screed straight out of an anarchist’s handbook, complete with quotes from the now late Howard Zinn!
If you’ve read the actual writings of Osama you realize he quoted the Koran all of the time and never quoted western liberal revisionists like Zinn.

So, I had good reason to think Osama was already dead.
I was wrong.

But, during those years Osama was as good as dead.
He was marginalized completely.

Now, his writings will be spread around more than before.
He will ”live” through his followers.
The fact that there is no grave site allows followers to feel even closer to him in some ways than having to go to a physical grave could give.

I think it was good that Osama is dead.
But there will be unforeseen consequences to his death.

Capture and trial by the United States would have empowered bin Laden enormously. I think here’s no question about that. The situation was well handled, in my opinion.

@Old Trooper 2: “The Eric Holder DOJ cannot manage to prosecute a case of that magnitude.”

I agree, but that is largely due to their decision on how to handle cases like these. And that is part of what I mean by “painted themselves into a corner.” The US is perfectly capable of prosecuting a case like this, but the Obama administration is not. Maybe it’s a good thing that they realize it…

@Greg: I disagree. If he had been tried in a system something like the Nuremberg trials, he would have appeared to be weak and impotent. Now, many of his followers think of him as a hero, who went down fighting the enemy, which they believe is the best way to die.

Some progs are questioning the legality of the Osama kill. Carney the WH press secretary just stated that the decision to kill was made on the operation and not by the WH. Plausible denial. CYA. Will the WH throw the Navy Seal under the bus if things get too hot? Think about it. Yesterday Obama in his speech it was I, me, mine and moses. Today the questions are getting a little pointed (surprise that the MSM is questioning the one), and the stories are a changing. Hum.

Who cares what his followers think? He’s dead and it was handled exactly as it should have been.

Uncle Bill: Apparently, the team going after OBL was instructed not to bring him out alive.

I haven’t read this, Uncle Bill. Any links that definitively state it was a kill, as opposed to a “dead or alive” mission? In fact,

I do know that AG Eric Holder promised he wouldn’t be brought in live last year. This prompted McChrystal to come out immediately afterwards and contradict the AG.

Then again, we know the love McChrystal did *not* feel the love for this CiC.

That said, no way I’d want UBL confined in a cell or put on trial. I’ll take a short stint of legendary martrydom press for a terrorist eunuch as opposed to a long, drawn out media circus and recruitment fodder.

BTW.. somewhat off topic, but I ran into an interesting article from Jan 2008, where Dubya posits that UBL wasn’t likely to be found during his terms.

Speaking about his goals for his last year in the White House, Bush tells FOX News in an exclusive interview to air this weekend that if U.S. military and intelligence knew where bin Laden was, they would have apprehended him already.

“If we could find the cave he is in, I promise you — he would be brought to justice or wherever he’s hiding,” he tells FOX News in “George W. Bush: Fighting to the Finish,” a documentary scheduled to air Sunday, Jan. 27, at 8 p.m. ET.

The president adds: “I will have left behind a mechanism — and a structure for the next president to better protect America.”

…snip…

Bush insists that finding bin Laden, who is believed to be hiding in the Pakistan-Afghan border region, remains a priority.

“For the country, it’s a matter of closure in many ways for those who suffered under the attacks,” Bush said. “He’s hiding. He’s isolated. He’s not out there leading any parades.”

Bush says he is briefed at least once a week on bin Laden and other Al Qaeda leaders.

His former Homeland Security Adviser, Fran Townsend, who left the White House in November, told FOX News:

“The president has made perfectly clear that he wants bin Laden brought to justice before he leaves office. That’s the objective: To … bring bin Laden to justice before the end of the administration. And we have organized ourselves to try and achieve that objective.”

Bush says in the interview he’s confident bin Laden ultimately will be found.

“He’ll be gotten by a president,” Bush says.

And to critics who say he hasn’t done enough to find bin Laden, Bush is blunt:

“They don’t know what they’re talking about,” he says.

Interesting now, in retrospect, that Bush knew they had the nom de guerre and were slowly closing in on the location. He must be feeling quite gratified to know that the intel finally came together to accomplish what he so wanted to accomplish… and would be content even if another POTUS finished the task he started.

@Buffalobob:

It is starting to go beyond just the Prog’s…

“Is this what justice looks like? Al-Qaida boss Osama bin Laden was killed on Sunday in a secret military operation in Pakistan. Americans are celebrating, but there are serious doubts about whether the targeted killing was legal under international law and the laws of war.”

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,760358,00.html

If they are going to proclaim that this was an assassination, and not an attempt to capture “dead or alive”, aceofwands, this admin is opening themselves up to just such ICC scrutiny. Another irony, since Obama is an ICC supporter. Then there’s the matter of invading another country’s sovereignty to do so… and without their permission. Thus my repeated worries about how this was conducted. That’s not a judgment call on our troops, mind you. They are magnificent. But there’s sure a lot of “huhs?” on no Pakistani involvement or permission, and the press now coming out and saying this was an assassination… plain and simple.

I read somewhere there were three plans. This chopper plan, another that entailed just bombing the facility, and a third that involved the ISI. We obviously know what plan was chosen. The details around who know what, and approved of what, are still sketchy. Invading another country’s sovereignty, sans approval, for an assassination mission – followed by charges in the ICC – would be a seriously hefty price for this nation to pay for Bin Laden’s head if one weighs the ensuing results.

Uncle Bill… never mind. I got my own question answered.

Ironically, just a couple of months beefore the mission, Gates told Congress they had no contingency plans for detaining or trying UBL.

Gates admitted that, more than two years after President Obama signed an executive order directing the closure of the Guantanamo Bay facility, the chances of actually shutting it down were “very, very low.” He also told members of the Senate Armed Services Committee that capturing bin Laden or other top al Qaeda leaders outside of the Afghanistan war zone would lead to further complications. “If we capture them outside the area where we are at war and are not covered by the existing war authorizations, one possibility is for a person to be in the custody of their home government,” he said. “Another possibility is that we bring them to the United States.”

Yesterday, Reuters had a brief one liner, that said the same as you… no capture was considered. Considering that both Obama’s DOJ and and his Defense Sec’y, Gates, wanted to avoid the pesky details of legal “justice”, and the pitfalls, it’s likely that it was just an assassination mission from the onset.

McChystal obviously had a different idea. On the flip side, it seems that Petraeus was kept in the dark on the intel doin’s… In the beginning of March, he said there was no hard intel on UBL’s whereabouts yet.

Baier asked about the hunt for bin Laden.

“It is absolutely a priority. But there’s been no hard intelligence,” Petraeus replied. “You know, people occasionally ask: ‘Where is Osama bin Laden?’ And I think for all we know he could be in Las Vegas next to Elvis, given the precision of what we have.

“There’s certainly strong suspicions where he is. There’s clear knowledge about where some of his immediate, immediate subordinates are in the rugged tribal areas,” he said. “And as you well know, his number three has been killed in the past in those areas. Many others of the top 20 have been killed in recent years as well.”

Hummm… don’t you think they ought to ramp the new CIA Director up to speed?

In answer to the question posed, HELL NO.

I like Murdering unarmed old men and women and Bombing children in Libya its the American way and restores America’s honor, it proves that we are better than the terrorists.

I like you Mata Harley #8 Someone please stop my head from spinning**Obama “I” ordered him killed-no wait, “I” didn’t order him killed-a seal did it on he’s own ?? They get into his room and one of the wife’s approach the seal and get’s shot in the leg-bin doesn’t have a weapon and they shot him in the HEAD (WHY) because the would rather have his hard-drives instead of him ???? Someone on the news says that they had 2 rehearsals (first wk and third wk in April) now I find out that they built a copy-cat compound just like the one that bin was living in (for how long???) Same thing that Simon’s did for the Son Tay Raid-POW rescue, Vietnam (Yes I’m the Vietnam Vet who was asked to kill Ho Chi Minh instead of bringing him back ALIVE***ARE YOU KIDDING ME Look at obama and that sick group watching it all go down. Look at the expression’s on there faces-it’s like “They were there”. Sarah Palin had it right (Thank only the troop’s-they laid it all on the line) Obama “I gave the order” (When??) back in August 2010-when they found out that bin was living there for a couple of years) Re-write your BUCKET LIST starting today*****
JOBS-JOBS AND MORE JOBS (Do not go to sleep until your mission is accomplished-better then laying your life on the line)(9 holes while the mission was in progress-are you FU@K-IN kidding me ?????) Jan 2013 you MUST GO*****Palin/West 2012 & 2016 they will need at least 8 yrs to fix this mess

Hard Right Another Vet OT2 Greg CONCUR Good Riddance.Glad he saw it up close and personal.

@MataHarley:

Well Mata, when a professor of international law from the University of Cologne comes out in less than two days with a “smell test” problem…one can only sit back and watch the show.

ace, we can only thank Dubya for refusing to sign on to the ICC treaty, that would allow our troops to be hauled up on charges for just this type of ordered mission by a CiC and take the fall. It becomes irony upon irony when one considers Obama’s campaign stance on the ICC.

Obama’s general view of the ICC suggests that he would work closely with the Court. He has stated , “Now that it’s operational, we are learning more and more about how the ICC functions. The court has pursued charges only in cases of the most serious and systematic crimes and it is in America’s interests that these most heinous of criminals, like the perpetrators of the genocide in Darfur, are held accountable. These actions are a credit to the cause of justice and deserve full American support and cooperation.” This has led to his commitment that “the United States should cooperate with the ICC investigation in a way that reflects American sovereignty and promotes our national security interests.”

Although Obama holds this outlook on the ICC, and would have a better relationship with the Court than the current president, the probability that the U.S. would sign the Rome Treaty shortly after he takes office is slim. As his former advisor, Samantha Power remarked, “Until we’ve closed Guantanamo, gotten out of Iraq, renounced torture and rendition, and shown a different face for America, American membership in the ICC is going to make countries around the world think the ICC is a tool of American hegemony.” She concludes, “If Barack Obama ratified the ICC or announced support for it on day one, two things would happen. One, it would have the chance of discrediting the ICC in the short term, and two, he would so strain his relations with the U.S. military that it would actually be really hard to recover.” However, Obama does promise to “consult thoroughly with our military commanders and also examine the track record of the court before reaching a decision on whether the U.S. should become a party to the ICC.”

The Samantha Powers advice really made me roar. As to how this plays out via “the show”… it will be a sad day in the US to be popping the popcorn, if this went down as ill advised as what may be the case.

@MataHarley:

Mata!

With a $25 million reward for OBL since 9/11, you are correct, because they could have passed that info onto trusted civilian professionals, who would have been more than happy to enter the gates of Hell for that kind of cash…all the while maintaining the so called “plausible deniability”.

As the old saying goes…”when you lose your head, you will definitely end up losing your ass”. I guess those sliding poll numbers got the better of the man, forcing him into a “wet dream” decision of “glory for me”.

However he decided to do it…it never should have been publicized, some things are best kept secret.

No way! Would have just given him another forum in which to spout off.

Sooo, let me understand this. The socialist liberal president who screamed about Bush and the use of Water Boarding as a great evil of our time even if it saved lives and who took such pride in signed an exec order banning its use or any other enhanced interrogation techniques, sent in a team to kill and specifically not to capture this old guy and to shoot anyone in there with him? Given a choice, I would choose door A for myself, a little waterboarding over a double tap shot to the head. And just so I can gain some understanding of what our military must be going through trying to make sense of the Obama doctrine, isn’t navy seals being tried for slapping a terrorist they were sent in to capture who killed our people in Iraq? I would definetly take a slap over waterboarding and waterboarding over the double tap shot. And finally, wasn’t it the Democrats who hate war and the military who pushed for laws against assassination teams? Who does this team report to and by what laws do they operate…flaming liberals should be screaming questions at this time. But will they ask this of THE Barry???

I agree with Nan G in #2.

We are a good country surrounded for the most part by atrocious countries.

We will never earn respect by taking actions in accordance with the wishes of those who don’t like us.

There would have been many dangers and complications in keeping bin Laden alive.

This isn’t a board game or a mental exercise. Moves can’t be taken back once made.

Bin Laden is dead and that’s good. We are the strong horse today, and that’s good enough for today.

Time to move on, there is much to do. Rehashing makes us look weak. The proper question now is, “What’s next?”

@MataHarley:

MataHarley (love that name),
Sounds like you have already gotten your answer. But, here is a quote from Reuters, via Huffington:

“(Reuters) – The U.S. special forces team that hunted down Osama bin Laden was under orders to kill the al Qaeda mastermind, not capture him, a U.S. national security official told Reuters.

“This was a kill operation,” the official said, making clear there was no desire to try to capture bin Laden alive in Pakistan. (Reporting by Mark Hosenball, writing by Matt Spetalnick)”

Also, bear in mind that they are now saying Bin Laden was unarmed when they burst into the room. If that was the case, the seals could certainly have captured him alive, even if it required, say, a round in the leg.

Most of the folks disagreeing with me seem to basically be saying that he deserved to die. This is certainly true, but still does not address the intel we might have gotten, and the fact that we have turned Bin Laden into a martyr. I understand some jihadi web sites are already praising him as a martyr.

Glad you like the handle, Uncle Bill. You have probably guessed the tongue in cheek reference/association, I’d guess… LOL

Yes, I did answer my own question. I actually posted the link to the Reuter’s one liner above. But now I’m wondering about the intelligence of the WH in releasing their predetermined mission… i.e., the entry of the legality of conducting an assassination mission on foreign soil without participating and approval of that nation.

You should also find the links I posted above… McChrystal vs AG Holder… quite interesting as well. The military, under McChrystal, did indeed desire to have Bin Laden alive. Apparently the Obama WH felt that the political controversy of “legal justice” was too inconvenient and costly.

Frankly, with the NATO ROE’s these days, plus the PC nanny attitudes of this admin, we’re not left with much choice but to kill the suckers on the battle field, or spend lots of US taxpayer money giving them the spa treatment in a jail/resort, only to have them show up on US soil and claim Constitutional habeus corpus the moment they do. Given that choice, no excess baggage from the battle field is my first choice… unless we are allowed to use the enhanced interrogation techniques at holding facilities on foreign soil for enemy combatants.

This clusterf*#k is of the lib/progs making. Working under their rules, shooting over detaining is preferable.

As far as the intel, I’ve mentioned in other threads, and for quite some time, that UBL’s close knit AQ is somewhat low on the terrorist food chain these days. UBL was a legendary figurehead, but somewhat useless as an active conspirator. The net cast over him was so restrictive that he couldn’t poke his head up to breathe. Therefore this is a feel good moment for the US to get the bad guy. In the scheme of the war against the global Islamic jihad movements, t’ain’t nothing. He was a has been, replaced by younger, more active and hep, terrorist leaders of multiple independent cells that share the same quest.

Did he deserve to die? Yes. Wordsmith, myself, and I think Nan G all agreed that his death affords some pleasure. But certainly not rejoicing. You will not find me in the streets celebrating anyone’s death. ’tisn’t my nature. On the other hand, were I alone, and found myself armed, and face to face with UBL, I would have pulled the trigger myself with no regrets or hesitation. He was a cockroach. A cockroach that’s been castrated in the past years, yes. But a cockroach none the less.

There was never a moment’s question that the death of UBL would place him in martyr status… whether five years ago, days ago, or five years from now. However best for that martyrdom to be shortlived than dragged out over the lifetime of a kangeroo trial, where it could escalate and fester into something worse.

On the other hand, the global Islamic jihadis will always find *some* reason to use against the west. UBL is as good as any.

Randy: You are a man ahead of your time.

Eric Holder is asked but won’t answer whether he’d have opposed a military trial for bin Laden if bin Laden had been taken alive Via Instapundit:

“So… was bin Laden shot because he resisted — the official story — or because a live, captured bin Laden would have torn the Obama administration apart?”

Nope, pretty happy with the outcome. I can only think of one outcome I would have liked better; if he had been taken to that the top floor of that new super sky scraper in Dubai, told to either jump or be drowned in bacon grease.

Mata– Question. Will Seal Team Six get the $25 million bounty? I vote yes on that.

Ann Althouse has an interesting thread, touching on some of the same points:

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/05/eric-holder-asked-but-wont-answer.html

Dead or Alive, nutbags in the middle east are still plotting to do something to America. I not only would have shot Osama, I would have placed some C4 in his mouth and lit him up like a Christmas tree.

But only after I snapped a pic of his body for my facebook profile.

OBL had to be terminated upon contact. Last thing we need is a Beslan school mass hostage situation, (362 kids raped and murdered in Beslan, Russia during a hostage/martyrdom operation run by Chechen Islamists using explosives ) with our kids being shot, one by one live on the internet in order to obtain the release of OBL. Screw OBL and the camel he rode in on.

The threats are coming in already.

One was that America, its people visiting other countries and its interests would all be targets.

The latest is from the main imam of the al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.
He threatens to hang Obama for the crime.
Video here.
So much for Obama being able to talk the world into peace.

Oddly, however, along with these threats are many in total disbelief……

In Muslim world, many doubters say bin Laden still lives…

TALIBAN: U.S. ‘has shown no proof‘ of bin Laden’s death…

Doubters abound…

@ Uncle Bill,

Your point on the intel potential is valid, however, the Military did the right thing. No body, no shrine over it.

It matters little that many will not believe it took place and that Osama Bin Laden is gone, but given the incompetence we have witnessed from this Administration on Guantanamo and the seesaw over prisoner trials, it is very evident that Obama and Holder would have turned the whole affair into an epitome of SNAFU.

I’m also confident that the story is very far from over on this one, particularly on the role played by this W.H., . . . the W.H. that is so quick to take so much credit, while there was so much potential to recognize the amazing skills and rare dedication of the American Military “boots on the ground.”

Saddam Hussein looked so pathetic in captivity. I would like to have seen OBL that way. I agree that it would be worth it to show him the prisoner instead of the martyr. On the other hand, we can count on the military, but the BHO administration would find a way to bungle it…

They didn’t send in representatives of the US Marshals Service to serve an arrest warrant. They sent in elite shooters. They did what shooters do.

Technically, this was a combat patrol – of a particular type – that type being “a raid”. A raid can be launched as a “prisoner snatch” mission – or it can be launched as a “rescue” mission – or it can be a “search and destroy” mission – among other choices.

Too bad for OBL, this operation apparently wasn’t launched as a “prisoner snatch” or “rescue” mission.

@magnetrak, #33:

On the other hand, we can count on the military, but the BHO administration would find a way to bungle it…

The Obama administration got the job done, to whatever extent any presidential administration can ever be said to be responsible for getting such a job done.

Well this is rather interesting,,,,,a few papragraphs down finds this little bit of info??
Buried at sea because no country wanted to claim his body???

http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=60124

@Greg:

The Obama administration got the job done, to whatever extent any presidential administration can ever be said to be responsible for getting such a job done.

Yes, Greg, they did, and many of us conservatives have given him and his admin the credit they deserve. No more, and no less. For liberals to push outlandish themes regarding the result is playing politics, and the fact that they must revise their own history on the War on Terrorism shows that very well.

@rich wheeler: Hopefully the bastard didn’t die right away.

Report: Obama Nixed Bin Laden Mission, Was Forced Into It By Military, CIA

Looks like Obama is being pushed out…

This is a must read…

http://socyberty.com/issues/white-house-insider-obama-hesitated-panetta-issued-order-to-kill-osama-bin-laden/#ixzz1LLtbu1xi

ace, it’s an interesting read… but my gut says it’s a fiction at worst, or seriously liberal embellishment at best. One particular sentence caught my eye which threw a pall over it’s authenticity. Pg two:

Every time military and intelligence officials appeared to make progress in forming a position, Jarrett would intervene and the stalling would begin again. Hillary started the ball really rolling as far as pressuring Obama began, but it was Panetta and Petraeus who ultimately pushed Obama to finally act – sort of. Panetta was receiving significant reports from both his direct CIA sources, as well as Petraeus-originating Intel. Petraeus was threatening to act on his own via a bombing attack.

I’m sorry, but everything I have seen, and have learned, about Gen. David Petraeus indicates he has great respect for the chain of command – even if he disagrees. So when I see this “interview” with a “anonymous insider”, saying this General threatened to “act on his own” against a sitting POTUS, tells me this is some manufactured piece of conspiracy bullshit.. and likely for a political agenda.

That’s not all… another statement not much further down..

It was at this time that Gates indicated to certain Pentagon officials that he may resign earlier than originally indicated – he was that frustrated.

Gates announced his retirement coming up in just a month *last year*. I’m doubting he was planning on leaving any sooner. But wait.. there’s more. Last page says the Zero was literally pulled off a golf course, hauled back into the WH to be informed of a mission proceeding that was not of his order. None of that squares with the overtly on display ego of this POTUS.

And if you notice, the way this is written, it seems to emanate from the bolster-Hillary-camp.

Perhaps OT can weigh in with his own personal insight, but my gut says this doesn’t even come close to passing the smell test to me.

@MataHarley:

Yes Marta it is an interesting read…the same way Watergate started out and never knowing who Deep-throat was.

This administration must have bought all the popcorn companies on inauguration day…they sure are selling a bunch with this crew.

If the article in ace’s post is correct, appears Jarrett might be Soros’ puppet master in the WH. Also gives credence that Obama can’t think for himself or is not allowed to.

bin Laden is now a martyr. He will be given sainthood or whatever those Islamics do. They will carry his banner into battle.

If the opportunity had presented itself, bring him in, show the world that the champion was a killer of the innocent and strip him of all assumption, and pass the appropriate judgment and stick the needle. Obama strapped top a table would be neat to see, just like Sadaam on the gallows.

They could not because of the associated terrorist attacks on our own soil while the proceedings were going on.

Likely we will see those attacks now. It’s very surprising we have not over the years, and I suspect al Qaida, or whoever is in charge, will stop shooting for the stars trying to bring down more World Trade Centers and hitting small, but highly impactive targets that do not take as much planning and luck.

I have read that OBL was unarmed, but was shot after he went for a weapon. So “technically” he was “unarmed,” but that is a justifiable use of force.

The more that ”details” emerge from various sources, the more the ”official” story has to change.
It isn’t proper to expose all of the practices of special ops teams, so it makes sense that our first version was an ”official approved version,” true or not.
Then we had 2nd guessers and witnesses, like the 12-year old daughter of Osama and other survivors.
Sure, she was raised on the ”al Qaeda Manual,” so her first inclination is to lie (practice taqiyya and kitman) to make her dad look good.
But sure enough, our ”official story” keeps changing, making her ”story” seem more credible.
We’d have been better off either with video and no commentary (like Israel 1st did with that flotilla ship they had to board) or with nothing said at all.

. . . . And therein lies the problem with politicizing and “spinning” such an operation. The display of braggadocio from Obama on this operation will bite him in the ass.

He should have been much more humble on this instead of insinuating himself into the “hit,” in order to appear like Mr. Decisive.

The hypocrisy of the liberal left on this is also going to mushroom into a noxious cloud.

Before long, the CiC is going to distance himself from the very Navy Seals whose generous valour delivered the exact right outcome.

@MataHarley #27:

The military, under McChrystal, did indeed desire to have Bin Laden alive. Apparently the Obama WH felt that the political controversy of “legal justice” was too inconvenient and costly.

Frankly, with the NATO ROE’s these days, plus the PC nanny attitudes of this admin, we’re not left with much choice but to kill the suckers on the battle field, or spend lots of US taxpayer money giving them the spa treatment in a jail/resort, only to have them show up on US soil and claim Constitutional habeus corpus the moment they do. Given that choice, no excess baggage from the battle field is my first choice… unless we are allowed to use the enhanced interrogation techniques at holding facilities on foreign soil for enemy combatants.

This recalls to mind Thiessen’s criticism, claiming that we were killing more of the enemy at the expense of gathering intell by capturing and interrogating.

I have been where the seals have been-many years ago but with the same mission and mind set. Every man on my team had a camera-pictures were always taken and as many as possible. Barry doesn’t want to show any photo’s of bin death ???? then show me all or some of the photo’s that Barry has of bin the day before and all of his movements before the raid (PRE-RAID photo’s) THIS IS A “HOW DO I STOP THE SLIDE MOVE” Barry asked the 3 bitch’s for advice again (First: manufacture a BAD COLB and bitch slap TRUMP with it Second: Go kill bin-but do not show AMERICA the kill shots or cam film) WAKE_UP AMERICA you are being had !!!!! Listen to the news today-they are covering up LIE”S after LIE”S ????????

Hell no. Nada! Neyt! Nien! It would have been a nightmare. He would have stayed locked up for the rest of his life. While we the tax payers paid for his comfort. Millions would have been spent in long drawn out court battles, more tax payer monies. The liberals would donate their money and their time for the best lawyers available to advise him, and to fight the military lawyers. We were scared that he would be taken alive. Thats what is happening with al-Buhulu even as I write this. He was sentenced to life at Gitmo back in November 08 during the presidential election. We testified against him. After the verdict my first question was “can it be overturned”. I was told it could. Maybe. He now has a whole team of liberal lawyers trying to do just that. All of the victims families would have to live with that frustration and fear everyday just like we do now. And the work entailed on our part to make sure he does not get out. I would not wish that on anyone. Bin laden would have had liberal lawyers lined up across the country to help him. He would have become a living martyr! An even bigger propaganda tool for his fanatical followers. And the New and Improved Military Tribunals are nothing like the old Tribunals after WWII.
Obama and Holder did their best to weaken the Tribunals. I just wish that when the terrorists(know) are captured that they would do all of us a favor and shoot them on the spot.

@James Raider, #46:

The display of braggadocio from Obama on this operation will bite him in the ass.

What display of braggadocio was that? I’ve seen none. Because there has been none.

When you saw the Osama hovel/mansion video here the other day…..did you think you heard a DOG???
You did!

A FEARLESS four-legged recruit joined US Special Forces as they stormed Osama Bin Laden’s secret lair.

The explosive-sniffing dog was strapped to an assault team member as they took on one of their greatest challenges to date.

He was part of the operation in which the elite US Navy Seals lowered themselves down ropes from three Black Hawk helicopters into the terrorist supremo’s hideout in the town of Abbottabad, Pakistan, on Sunday.
Heavily armoured hounds — equipped with infrared night-sight cameras — have been used in the past by the top-secret unit.
The war dogs wear ballistic body armour that is said to withstand damage from single and double-edged knives, as well as protective gear which shields them from shrapnel and gunfire.

German Shepherds have been leading the way in SAS raids in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Wearing oxygen masks, the pooches have been trained to jump from aircraft at 25,000ft, before seeking out insurgents in hostile environments.
The cameras on their heads beam live TV pictures back to the troops, providing them with critical information and warning of ambushes.

Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3562677/Fearless-four-legged-war-hero.html#ixzz1LQseJMYf

i don’t believe any of this until i see evidence.

that’s why there has been no retaliation from the towel heads, they don’t believe it either. i will not be fooled by theses fools in the whit house.

@Nan G: Being an avid dog lover, it’s good to see the BEST four legged creatures in existence did their part as well!