• 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!

White House rejects Seymour Hersh 'baseless assertions' on bin Laden raid

JANFU said:
If the story is true, it would make sense to have this as a kill mission.
Either a live rallying point or a dead one, swimming with the fishes. I go with sending him off as fish bait.
Click to expand...

That's fine, but that's not the point. It was commissioned as a CAPTURE or kill. In an interview on POTUS radio, the seal that killed him said, we don't assassinate people, regardless of what people say. He said that right after he said that when he entered the room, standing was OBL's wife, standing next to her, with his hand on her shoulder was OBL, and standing in the middle of the room was his young son, frozen in shock. So, an unarmed, non threatening OBL, should have been captured. Apparently, the "capture or kill" nature of the mission was for domestic audiences, and the real order was assassination. Because the Seal that killed an unarmed non threatening OBL wasn't in any trouble for it.
 
Montecresto said:
That's fine, but that's not the point. It was commissioned as a CAPTURE or kill. In an interview on POTUS radio, the seal that killed him said, we don't assassinate people, regardless of what people say. He said that right after he said that when he entered the room, standing was OBL's wife, standing next to her, with his hand on her shoulder was OBL, and standing in the middle of the room was his young son, frozen in shock. So, an unarmed, non threatening OBL, should have been captured. Apparently, the "capture or kill" nature of the mission was for domestic audiences, and the real order was assassination. Because the Seal that killed an unarmed non threatening OBL wasn't in any trouble for it.
Click to expand...
If you were in the Presidents chair, making the decision, what decision would be the right one.
Capture or kill?
I vote for kill.
 
JANFU said:
If you were in the Presidents chair, making the decision, what decision would be the right one.
Capture or kill?
I vote for kill.
Click to expand...

I think you still miss my point. I don't care that they killed as much as I care that publicly it was a CAPTURE or kill mission that was in fact executed as a KILL mission. You do understand that a capture or kill mission means that you preferably capture if you can do so safely, and kill is the second option. By the killing Seals own words, OBL was standing with his hand on his wife's shoulder posed as though expecting them and ready for surrender.
 
Montecresto said:
I think you still miss my point. I don't care that they killed as much as I care that publicly it was a CAPTURE or kill mission that was in fact executed as a KILL mission. You do understand that a capture or kill mission means that you preferably capture if you can do so safely, and kill is the second option. By the killing Seals own words, OBL was standing with his hand on his wife's shoulder posed as though expecting them and ready for surrender.
Click to expand...

I understood the point. If I was making the decision, I would have stated publicly it was a capture or kill mission, and that was the missions intent. But an order would have been given to ensure that it was a kill mission.
And you would have done differently?
 
JANFU said:
I understood the point. If I was making the decision, I would have stated publicly it was a capture or kill mission, and that was the missions intent. But an order would have been given to ensure that it was a kill mission.
And you would have done differently?
Click to expand...

Well, if I wanted to mislead my constituency. Or avoid the scrutiny of IL that bans assassination, I suppose.
 
Montecresto said:
Well, if I wanted to mislead my constituency. Or avoid the scrutiny of IL that bans assassination, I suppose.
Click to expand...
How well would it go over if it was stated, this was a kill mission.
 
JANFU said:
I agree.
Now would you have done differently?
Click to expand...

Indubitably. Where's the mystery. In fact, my foreign policy would look nothing like anything you've seen coming out of America.
 
Jack Hays said:
No one ever believed OBL would be taken alive.
Click to expand...

Osama died of natural causes in December 2001. Even Bill O'Reilly had a news blurb about it, and his death and burial were reported in several newspapers over there. Benazir Bhutto mentioned it on TV just days or weeks before she was assassinated.

Barack announced this on 1 May 2011, and only a week or two prior, he was embarrassed (and it was recorded on video) by a friendly crowd at a $10,000 a plate dinner for his re-election campaign in San Francisco of all places, as the friendly crowd called him out on the way he was treating Bradley Manning.

But people are pretty darn gullible these days, especially when a lie is repeated frequently enough.
 
Jack Hays said:
Does that not fail the logic test? If the Pakistanis cooperated, why would we go out of our way afterward to embarrass them by saying we kept them in the dark?
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't fail the logic test because 1) Pakistanis have the ability to claim no knowledge of raid (before or during). 2) This makes Pakistani's life easier when it comes to North-West Pakistan. You know where Pakistan and US Special Operations and CIA's SAD has been fighting a war since 2004. But hey... people tend to forget about that part of the War on Terrorism..
 
austrianecon said:
No, it doesn't fail the logic test because 1) Pakistanis have the ability to claim no knowledge of raid (before or during). 2) This makes Pakistani's life easier when it comes to North-West Pakistan. You know where Pakistan and US Special Operations and CIA's SAD has been fighting a war since 2004. But hey... people tend to forget about that part of the War on Terrorism..
Click to expand...

I have many friends in NW Pak. Regardless, Hersh's story is a thorough fabrication.
 
austrianecon said:
No, it doesn't fail the logic test because 1) Pakistanis have the ability to claim no knowledge of raid (before or during). 2) This makes Pakistani's life easier when it comes to North-West Pakistan. You know where Pakistan and US Special Operations and CIA's SAD has been fighting a war since 2004. But hey... people tend to forget about that part of the War on Terrorism..
Click to expand...

If the Hersh story is true, there's no reason to believe that the Seals would be in the loop, why would they need to be. And in fact, the administration wouldn't want them to be. Remember, just because this was executed by the Seals, this was a civilian CIA operation, which is a whole other problem. I think that supporting evidence comes from the trigger man himself that said that OBL was standing, with his wife, his hand on her shoulder, unthreatening and unarmed and unsurprised to see him, as though prepared to go, and the Seal shot him in the face twice!
 
Jack Hays said:
I have many friends in NW Pak. Regardless, Hersh's story is a thorough fabrication.
Click to expand...

But you specifically claim that it doesn't pass the sniff test because why would Pakistan allow the US to embarrass them? I answered it and to the point in which you are now dismissing your concerns with it... and running with the "regardless" line.

Problem is.. it's not a thorough fabrication. NBC is now confirming with their sources that CIA was tipped off by an ISI asset, that the WHOLE story from day was has been 100% bull****. They've changed their story so many times. You have SEALs who have published books with different versions. Then there was a rush to make a Hollywood movie with unbelievable access given.. which give the WH version.

So you can't claim it to be a fabrication at all. Rather the full truth of what happen is NOT known.
 
Last edited:
Montecresto said:
If the Hersh story is true, there's no reason to believe that the Seals would be in the loop, why would they need to be. And in fact, the administration wouldn't want them to be. Remember, just because this was executed by the Seals, this was a civilian CIA operation, which is a whole other problem. I think that supporting evidence comes from the trigger man himself that said that OBL was standing, with his wife, his hand on her shoulder, unthreatening and unarmed and unsurprised to see him, as though prepared to go, and the Seal shot him in the face twice!
Click to expand...

CIA and JSOC work together.
 
austrianecon said:
But you specifically claim that it doesn't pass the sniff test because why would Pakistan allow the US to embarrass them? I answered it and to the point in which you are now dismissing your concerns with it... and running with the "regardless" line.

Problem is.. it's not a thorough fabrication. NBC is now confirming with their sources that CIA was tipped off by an ISI asset, that the WHOLE story from day was has been 100% bull****. They've changed their story so many times. You have SEALs who have published books with different versions. Then there was a rush to make a Hollywood movie with unbelievable access given.. which give the WH version.

So you can't claim it to be a fabrication at all. Rather the full truth of what happen is NOT known.
Click to expand...

It is fully a fabrication.
 
austrianecon said:
CIA and JSOC work together.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know, didn't I say that. This has been for a long time. But as I pointed out, its a whole other problem and issue, not to derail the thread.
 
Montecresto said:
If the Hersh story is true, there's no reason to believe that the Seals would be in the loop, why would they need to be. And in fact, the administration wouldn't want them to be. Remember, just because this was executed by the Seals, this was a civilian CIA operation, which is a whole other problem. I think that supporting evidence comes from the trigger man himself that said that OBL was standing, with his wife, his hand on her shoulder, unthreatening and unarmed and unsurprised to see him, as though prepared to go, and the Seal shot him in the face twice!
Click to expand...

The mission authority was a legal matter. OBL was in Pakistan, which is not a war theater, so DoD's Title 10 authority could not cover it. CIA's Title 50 authority could.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom