• 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's end isn't THE end

D

Dea

New member
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
15
Reaction score
8
Location
Earth
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Roots of terror untouched by bin Laden's death - CNN.com

While Osama's death is a great justice to the world, it isn't the end of terror. In fact one may argue that now we face the possibility of others who have idolized him trying to take his place as the next biggest threat. Also let's take into account that the idea of vengeance is probably a strong one within his ranks.

Question is, now that the US has killed the one responsible for the attacks on their country should and would they continue their efforts to fight terror? or should they fall back?
 
At the end of the day OBL's death did nothing for us in Afghanistan. The Taliban will continue to fight against coalition forces and the war will continue. Personally, I think we should get out of Afghanistan. Our main goal was to defeat AQ, there are only about 150 AQ members left in Afghanistan and we killed OBL.
 
Agreed, Osama's death doesn't really change much regarding the threat by al Qaida. He hadn't been much more than a mere figurehead anyway in the past years.

So yes, the fight against terrorist groups should continue. But preferable not like it has been handled in the past decade. I'd rather take a slightly higher risk of becoming victim of a terrorist act, than giving up civil rights, giving the executive excessive power and imprisoning people without a fair trial, which results in many innocent people getting crushed by the government.

What net benefit do I have, when on one side, the risk of becoming victim of terrorists is decreased a little, but the risk of becoming crushed by an excessive government that has the right to detain me and deny me a fair trial in case I am in the wrong place at the wrong time, increases even more?
 
I would think it would be nice to hear Obama say: We got Osama, now who wants to be next?
 
Wow it's like if he said what you wanted him to he'd lose an election or something.
 
Agreed, Osama's death doesn't really change much regarding the threat by al Qaida. He hadn't been much more than a mere figurehead anyway in the past years.
Click to expand...

Latest news has Osama's house as...

Command Center
Directing actions in Afghan and Somalia
Micromanaging plans
Authorizing attacks

Presumably, finances were routed through this command center.


People should stop the "Osama was isolated and useless anyway" narrative. It appears that is not the case.
 
Last edited:
Deuce said:
Or maybe "bring it on?"
Click to expand...


That is one of the changes that Obama made that I am most appreciative of, that we no longer have a president that says stupid **** like that! :sun
 
Bin Laden died ten years ago. They keep him alive because they need a false flag enemy to maintain the "war on terror". Now US economy can't support them for such an expensive war. To finish it, they need fulfil their last step - war on Iran. So they push out such a soap drama, it is a "provocative action", sychronized with "Quran burning" in Florida and "veil ban" law passed in French, to justify a coming "dirty bomb attack" which will lead to war on Iran like what 911 leading to war on Afghanistan and Iraq.

This is an cheating operation done by the Feds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom