• 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!

Osama Bin Laden is dead

It's amazing how the right wing fails to recognize this basic fact: if he had the intelligence, why didn't act?

There are only two possible explanations:

1) He did not have sufficient intelligence on OBL's whereabouts, because, in fact, the "enhanced interrogation techniques" failed to live up to what he was told.

2) KSM and the other terrorists did break and tell all, but bush ignored it and just sat there.

Take your pick :)

or:

3) you have very little understanding of intelligence beyond what you've seen in the movies.
 
More than one way of skinning...

More than one way of skinning...

I)
US CODE: Title 18,2340. Definitions
(1) "torture" means an act committed by a person acting under color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control;

(2) "severe mental pain or suffering" means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting
from—
(A) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering;
(B) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality;
(C) the threat of imminent death; or
(D) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality; and
(3) "United States" means the several States of the United States, die District of Columbia, and the commonwealths, territories, and possessions of the United States,​

II)
The Bush Admin "understanding" of torture that requires an act to rise "to the level of death, organ failure, or the permanent impairment of a significant body function" before it can be called torture

Many acts were no longer considered torture in the Bush Admin's understanding of torture since they didn't rise "to the level of death, organ failure, or the permanent impairment of a significant body function."

Electrodes on the genitals- does not rise "to the level of death, organ failure, or the permanent impairment of a significant body function" and therefore was not torture
Bamboo under the fingernails- does not rise "to the level of death, organ failure, or the permanent impairment of a significant body function" and therefore was not torture
Thumbscrews- do not rise "to the level of death, organ failure, or the permanent impairment of a significant body function" and therefore were not torture
Electrical shocks- do not rise "to the level of death, organ failure, or the permanent impairment of a significant body function" and therefore were not torture
Red-hot irons- do not rise "to the level of death, organ failure, or the permanent impairment of a significant body function" and therefore were not torture
Beatings- do not rise "to the level of death, organ failure, or the permanent impairment of a significant body function" and therefore were not torture​
 
or:

3) you have very little understanding of intelligence beyond what you've seen in the movies.

The actions of the bush administration do sound like fiction. . .

"We got valuable information from a seasoned terrorist becaused we waterboarded him, and that's why 10 years later someone else acted on it."
 
It's amazing how the right wing fails to recognize this basic fact: if he had the intelligence, why didn't act?

There are only two possible explanations:

1) He did not have sufficient intelligence on OBL's whereabouts, because, in fact, the "enhanced interrogation techniques" failed to live up to what he was told.

2) KSM and the other terrorists did break and tell all, but bush ignored it and just sat there.

Take your pick :)
Or one of the many excluded middles. Maybe the info that these folks had was not enough on its own.
Or one of a gajillion other possibilities.

Just because you construct a false dilemma doesn't mean that your debate opponent has to choose one of the horns.
 
From what I have seen, it's not that it "doesn't work" so much as it's not as reliable or as useful as other methods.

To me, it's not about whether we got info from these sorts of techniques, but whether or not those are the best choice.

I can get beer from a bottle using a hammer. It works. But that doesn't mean it's a good idea to get beer from a bottle with a hammer.

The appropriate analogy in this case is whether it's OK to use the hammer if it causes the beer to pour out 10 years later.
 
or:

3) you have very little understanding of intelligence beyond what you've seen in the movies.

So, you're the expert then, eh?
 
Or one of the many excluded middles. Maybe the info that these folks had was not enough on its own.
Or one of a gajillion other possibilities.

Just because you construct a false dilemma doesn't mean that your debate opponent has to choose one of the horns.

The facts are not disputed: the Wikileaks docs state that the CIA obtained the information leading to bin Laden from interrogating one of his couriers caught in 2005 and traced his network of couriers. . .

The document says: "In July 2003, detainee received a letter from [Bin Laden's] designated courier, Maulawi Abd al-Khaliq Jan, requesting detainee take on the responsibility of collecting donations, organising travel and distributing funds for families in Pakistan. [Bin Laden] stated detainee would be the official messenger between [Bin Laden] and others in Pakistan. In mid-2003, detainee moved his family to Abbottabad (Pakistan) and worked between Abbottabad and Peshawar."

Libi was captured in Pakistan in 2005. The CIA says it tracked Bin Laden by tracing the network of couriers, in particular one especially trusted by the al-Qaida leader and who died with himin the US raid on Sunday. The US has not yet named the courier.

US may have got Osama bin Laden's Abbottabad clue in 2008

That document is dated 2008. So there it is, and if it's true, then bush could've killed bin Laden in 2008. Why didn't he do so?

Either he was lazy, stupid, or sufficient intelligence was not available, i. e. the trace of the network by the CIA was inadequate.

Bottom line: if anyone wants to show that waterboarding is effective, then there must be evidence demonstrating its efficiency in capturing and killing dangerous criminals and terrorists.

But it's difficult to make a case for torture by stating that the information obtained from it turned out to be actionable 10 years later.

If the latter is the case, then, in fact, the torture only extracted a tiny piece of the whole puzzle--a seemingly small benefit in exchange for cruelty.
 
My only complaint is that they didn't cut his head off. They should've done that.
 
My only complaint is that they didn't cut his head off. They should've done that.

What good does that really do once he is dead? You have watched too many Rambo movies.

The Navy SEALS, did a grand superb job of carying out this mission. Am glad Bin Laden was killed avoiding a circus court action for another ten years.
The computer information they found is probably going to yield 100 times the information they could have gotten from a live Bin Laden.
 
22 years in the military, working with, in and around, intelligence...you tell me.

I'll tell you....I do not believe you.
 
omg this "Bush didn't try to catch OBL" BS is getting ridiculous. I will never be Bush's #1 fan (except maybe when it comes to comedic value), but let's drop this bull**** notion that he didn't try to get Osama. He did try, he either just didn't have enough intel to act, or he screwed up (like in Tora Bora). Bush cannot be faulted for lack of trying.
 
Face palms my mistake that was the short version of the thing

Sorry, watched all your video's from start to finish. I never once heard this phrase, which you DIRECTLY attributed in quotes to George Bush:

“I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."

All I saw, time and time again, was someone asking a question about the THREAT that Bin Laden posed and Bush saying he's not concerned about him in relation to the question. Which is not only absolutely correct, but has been echoed by many liberals on the forum and in the news in the past few days who have pointed out that Osama's capture is little more than symbolism...a wonderful thing, but having little true effect on the operations of Al-Qaeda. Was Bush wanting Osama? Yes. Was he more concerned about other things when it came to the "Threat" posted to the United States...like the question asked to him suggested? Absolutely...and he should've been.

So I ask, one final time. Supply some kind of legitimate source for this quote you directly attributed to Bush:

“I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."

Or admit that you were posting a dishonest made up quote as if it was Bush's when it was not.

Your video's don't provide it, your wikiquote doesn't provide it, NOTHING you or anyone else has provided evidence of the quote other than saying "Its was said by Bush on March 13th, 2002" which isn't a reference in the least.
 
Also here is the link too the press conference in which he actually says it

Long Bush Flip-Flop List

Also I used many of the words all I could fine is the YouTube clip and a couple of list that say he is a big fat lie.

Posting a Bush attack site that simply reposts the exact same unreferenced item with the only "reference" it gives being two more liberal sites who ALSO don't give any reference isn't proving anything. It just further's the push for the exact same unverified, unrecorded, supposed quote.

If he said it at a press conference, where's the video? The transcript?

If he said it to a group of reporters, where are the news stories directly from those reporters restating it?

If he said it in a magazine interview, where's the interview in question?

There is none. There's some obscure date and a bunch of liberal sites and activists and bloggers reposting each others work as if that somehow validates something when in reality its just all of them slapping each others backsides to spread the bull**** around.
 
omg this "Bush didn't try to catch OBL" BS is getting ridiculous. I will never be Bush's #1 fan (except maybe when it comes to comedic value), but let's drop this bull**** notion that he didn't try to get Osama. He did try, he either just didn't have enough intel to act, or he screwed up (like in Tora Bora). Bush cannot be faulted for lack of trying.

Liberals will always find something to whine and fault find. Even when a nation should be saying thanks to the people who served them so well they'll still look around to find something to complain about.

There are no more tiresome creatures anywhere in the western world than these people.
 
Liberals will always find something to whine and fault find. Even when a nation should be saying thanks to the people who served them so well they'll still look around to find something to complain about.

There are no more tiresome creatures anywhere in the western world than these people.

I'm a liberal. I'm not bashing Bush. Neither is repeter, who agreed with my post.
 
Last edited:
Just a reminder to all Bin Laden was not a shooter or even a planner. His demise is important only symbolically. Only
 
Liberals will always find something to whine and fault find. Even when a nation should be saying thanks to the people who served them so well they'll still look around to find something to complain about.

There are no more tiresome creatures anywhere in the western world than these people.

Are you sure you're independent?

And FYI, StillBallin was responding to someone else saying Bush should not get any credit for OBL's death.

That's pretty hypocritical, IMO, to say you're independent, and then to turn around and criticize the most tiresome creatures anywhere in the western world for being bipartisan.
 
Just a reminder to all Bin Laden was not a shooter or even a planner. His demise is important only symbolically. Only

I think there is some truth to this, but it's a bit of an exaggeration that he was never a planner. I do agree that he was more of a figurehead with an important image.
 
I think there is some truth to this, but it's a bit of an exaggeration that he was never a planner. I do agree that he was more of a figurehead with an important image.

1 People making, the assumption that Bin Laden was THE leader of AQ - bad assumption.

2 Operational planning in AQ was not entirely dependent on Bin Laden. So there probably wouldn't be much effect in the long run

3 Bin Laden will become a martyr, which is exactly what he and his organization would like....This is where I think the greatest impact would come - legends aren't easily replaced.
 
1 People making, the assumption that Bin Laden was THE leader of AQ - bad assumption.

2 Operational planning in AQ was not entirely dependent on Bin Laden. So there probably wouldn't be much effect in the long run

3 Bin Laden will become a martyr, which is exactly what he and his organization would like....This is where I think the greatest impact would come - legends aren't easily replaced.

so you would have left him alone?
 
so you would have left him alone?

Bin Laden is dead...

This is a worldview we combat, not just some politically motivated insurgency. To ignore that fact is to do so at our peril. The search for truth and therefore the reason the Taliban exists, is not something you can eliminate. Our target is Islam and the validity of that belief system. Anything less will leave us with a false sense of security. Islam itself breeds the mindset you see in the likes of the Taliban, Al Qaeda, Hamas, etc. We cannot afford to ignore that.

To some people, their religion is the most real thing there is. Don't make the classic analyst's mistake of looking at the enemy's situation with your own eyes.
 
I'm a liberal. I'm not bashing Bush. Neither is repeter, who agreed with my post.

Yes, i know you weren't bashing Bush. My point was directed towards those who were.

Perhaps you're less 'liberal' than you think, and that's a compliment.
 
Yes, i know you weren't bashing Bush. My point was directed towards those who were.

Perhaps you're less 'liberal' than you think, and that's a compliment.

Nah, I wear my liberality like a badge. I'm just not an idiot or a hack. I have my own biases, but generally I am pretty fair and open-minded when I approach political issues.

Bush cannot be blamed for not trying hard enough to kill/capture Osama. The man had many flaws, but he cannot be criticized for this.
 
Back
Top Bottom