• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Correcting the ‘fairy tale’: A SEAL’s account of how Osama bin Laden really died

I've posted this once already, but again, let's take everything Mr. Pfarrer writes or says with a grain of salt.

Spec ops command: SEAL raid book ‘a lie’ - Marine Corps News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Marine Corps Times

“It’s just not true,” U.S. Special Operations Command spokesman Col. Tim Nye said. “It’s not how it happened.”
Click to expand...

“This is a fabrication,” Nye countered, issuing an on-the-record denial on behalf of Navy SEAL Adm. Bill McRaven, who took command of all special operations this summer.
Click to expand...

“We have never come forward and gone after an author and say, ‘that is a lie,’“ Nye said. “That tells you how far off the mark we believe this book is.”

Nye says Pfarrer had no access to any troops connected to the mission. He said there will be no investigation into whether individual SEALs spoke to Pfarrer because his account is so off-base.
Click to expand...
 
Misterveritis said:
Would you tend to believe that the Wehrmacht was prudent? They had numerous indications that their encipherment system was compromised. Yet each time they convinced themselves that everything was okay. The Japanese in WWII had the same experiences. They also convinced themselves that their systems were secure.

But an amateur tells all. We need to defeat him and send him on the rounds of liberal colleges making millions for his speeches. Just don't leave him in charge of anything important.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call either of them prudent. They weren't clandestine subnational organizations that only continue to exist by virtue of their tendecy to remain completely hidden.

Not to mention the fact that intelligence indicating that your cyphering system might be compromised is vastly different from a raid on your leaders compound which could only occur when secrecy is compromised.

That last bit is kind of important. Think about it for a minute.
 
Tucker Case said:
I wouldn't call either of them prudent. They weren't clandestine subnational organizations that only continue to exist by virtue of their tendecy to remain completely hidden.

Not to mention the fact that intelligence indicating that your cyphering system might be compromised is vastly different from a raid on your leaders compound which could only occur when secrecy is compromised.

That last bit is kind of important. Think about it for a minute.
Click to expand...
In fact I do understand. But very few would know what was captured and exploited and what was not. For our one term Marxist president Obama to announce what we got was uncalled for. It is the mark of a buffoon.
 
Misterveritis said:
In fact I do understand. But very few would know what was captured and exploited and what was not. For our one term Marxist president Obama to announce what we got was uncalled for. It is the mark of a buffoon.
Click to expand...

Perhaps he lied about what we got. You don't know. The real truth of the matter is that there is nothing Obama can do correct in your narrow little world.
 
Misterveritis said:
In fact I do understand. But very few would know what was captured and exploited and what was not.
Click to expand...

The part in bold is of absolute importance for my point. They would absolutely know that some information is definitely compromised, and they have proven themselves prudent in the past, so it is perfectly reasonable to assume that the intel was already worthless if it wasn't being acted on within a few hours of it's discovery.
 
whysoserious said:
Perhaps he lied about what we got. You don't know. The real truth of the matter is that there is nothing Obama can do correct in your narrow little world.
Click to expand...

That's a point I was making in post 67.

Tucker Case said:
What people haven't considered here is that the information was only partially retrieved. In that case, broadcasting that you have barrels and barrels of intel could hypothetically serve the purpose of causing al Qaeda to abandon plans that you did not have the intel for. What if Osama managed to wipe the computers before he was killed? Then making the claim that you have intel that you don't means that they have to start from square one on basically everything.
Click to expand...
 
whysoserious said:
Perhaps he lied about what we got. You don't know. The real truth of the matter is that there is nothing Obama can do correct in your narrow little world.
Click to expand...

A larger man would not have felt the need to tell the world. The one term Marxist president Obama is a small man.
 
Last edited:
whysoserious said:
Perhaps he lied about what we got. You don't know. The real truth of the matter is that there is nothing Obama can do correct in your narrow little world.
Click to expand...
It is true. He is unlikely to do anything I would approve of. But then my core beliefs are not driven by Marxism. I want to see a free America continue to be the shining city on the hill, a beacon to all of humanity. Under the one term Marxist president Obama we are not likely to see such a thing.
 
Tucker Case said:
The part in bold is of absolute importance for my point. They would absolutely know that some information is definitely compromised, and they have proven themselves prudent in the past, so it is perfectly reasonable to assume that the intel was already worthless if it wasn't being acted on within a few hours of it's discovery.
Click to expand...
I do not know why you are defending him. It is enough that you are.

You will not be convinced that a very small man felt the need to brag about something he did not have much of a hand in. And you will not ever be swayed by arguments that adults do not do such things. We shall have to part ways here. Your arguments do not convince me. Nor do mine convince you.
 
Misterveritis said:
It is true. He is unlikely to do anything I would approve of. But then my core beliefs are not driven by Marxism. I want to see a free America continue to be the shining city on the hill, a beacon to all of humanity. Under the one term Marxist president Obama we are not likely to see such a thing.
Click to expand...

This thread, and the actions Obama took in relation to this thread, has nothing to do with Marxism.

Even Marx didn't do everything based on Marxism. Although it would have been pretty funny if he did. "Hey Engels, wanna **** my wife? She's really good at it, and you haven't gotten laid in a while. From each according to her ability and to each according to his need and all that, right?"
 
Tucker Case said:
This thread, and the actions Obama took in relation to this thread, has nothing to do with Marxism.

Even Marx didn't do everything based on Marxism. Although it would have been pretty funny if he did. "Hey Engels, wanna **** my wife? She's really good at it, and you haven't gotten laid in a while. From each according to her ability and to each according to his need and all that, right?"
Click to expand...

:lamo :lamo :lamo :lamo

In all serious, yeah you're spot on about Marx. Even Marx wouldn't have been a Marxist had he been alive long enough to see how extreme his adherents were.
 
Misterveritis said:
I do not know why you are defending him. It is enough that you are.
Click to expand...

I'm not blinded by hatred towards him that causes me to judge every action of his negatively. I disagree with his politics, generally, but that doesn't mean every single action he takes is "The worstest thing evah!!!!".

Ultimately, I judge the action, not the man. When you say that my defense of the action is a defense of the man, it is because you operate from the opposite perspective.

You will not be convinced that a very small man felt the need to brag about something he did not have much of a hand in. And you will not ever be swayed by arguments that adults do not do such things. We shall have to part ways here. Your arguments do not convince me. Nor do mine convince you.
Click to expand...

You're right. I'm not convinced by hyperbole and arguments based on little more than hatred for the man. Ad hominem arguments are fallacious arguments. Your arguments against Obama are almost exclusively Ad hominem in this thread. Ultimately, your conclusions are based on the fact that it is Obama making the decisions, not on the decisions themselves. You're justifications for your conclusions are applied after the conclusion has already been achieved.

Like I said, you operate form the opposite perspective on this issue from me. The problem with your approach is that it almost always leads to hypocritical justifications of nearly identical actions when taken by a person that you like politically. Now, that might not be the case with you, but I've rarely seen such logic employed by someone who was consistent about the actions rather than the individuals involved. They are usually quite consistent about the individuals, though, but rarely rational about them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom