bin laden is dead

[billy]

and his body is i the usa or on us soil.

so is one of his sons.

my question is this. is him being dead worse for the west or better,
i have a feeling we'll see escalations in terror attacks as reprisal. i think they would have been better just killing him and saying nothing about it though maybe that would have been impossible to do. that and the fact it's a feather in obama's cap so he'll want to crow about it.

[addy]

Apparently, there have already been rumors that he was already dead years before, so if they wanted to do this deed quietly and keep it as speculation they could have. The US administration definitely wanted (and maybe needed) the kudos. There will probably be some escalation in violence, but I was under the impression that terrorist activities have moved on and evolved since the 9/11 attacks, and Bin Laden is no longer the critical figurehead he was. But yeah, it could make things worse, and at this point it certainly wouldn't make things better... it was more of a symbolic victory for America, a sort of closure.

[addy]

... oh my bad. Apparently there WAS a positive effect in some international stock markets. Even the price of oil fell. So the news did have a concrete positive effect.

[srijantje]

good riddance,now let them go after a few more top terrorists,like the Bush family,some Israeli politicians who showered cluster bombs on south Lebanon,etc.

[billy]

i thought they kept saying he's living in caves?

where he was killed seemed to be a pretty posh residence.
i just heard he was buried at sea, wtf. what about dna testing and all the other shit?
if it is true it shows pakistan was either lying or didn't have a clue about him they denied he was in pakistan.

[heslopian]

Bin Laden was a rabid dog who needed putting down, like Hitler and a million other figures of terror, but seeing people celebrate in the streets, such as in the footage from a "freedom riot" at Penn University below, exemplifies I think the vileness and stupidity which still haunts the west. I'm sure those same people partying were enraged when they saw news footage of Pakistanis waving guns and cheering as the World Trade Centre fell. Now as a result of these demonstrations those revenge attacks Billy mentioned are more likely I think, and so the endless depressing cycle of attacks and revenge, attacks and revenge continues.
"So Jimmy, a large portion of our countryman have been brutally slain, some foreigners have also died (not that we care about that) but now the mastermind behind the attacks which sparked the whole depressing bloodbath is dead. What should we do?"
"Show our respect for the dead by holding a silent vigil for them?"
"Fuck that pansy! Let's get pissed and throw beach balls around! SPRING BREA - I mean FREEDOM!"

*[youtube]PFAgg8yxkiE&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

[thethingy]

Bin Laden was a rabid dog who needed putting down

you know that's cold but I have to agree.

[srijantje]

I agree Jack,lots of rabid dogs still at large,many in government and military

[billy]

the conspiracy theorists will soon be popping up and asking such questions as to "why are there no pics of him dead"?
or "is it possible to test dna in afghanastan so quickly that they could bury the body at sea in a matter of hours"?

and yes i saw where they said what they did about not wanting a rallying point, such as a grave site and i agree, other won't the no rally point could even have an adverse effect, all they have to do is say...sorry you got the wrong man, he's still alive. after a while many would belive that were the case without a reasonable pic of the corpse., of course they could have disfigured him so much as to make a pic look too gruesome which in itself would have the wrong effect.

i think they killed him. they probably shot him that many times he'd be unrecognisable and thats why they buried him at sea. that way he can't be dug up so people could see the damage which was inflicted. plus too many people would know, such a secret of pretending to kill him would be too hard to keep.

and yeah sj. there are lots more in the east and the west who should go the way of laden .

[srijantje]

but in this day and age there will always be people who will say the photo's were tampered with,but who cares anyway,the guy is dead[or not ,which will make no difference to the world we live in anyway]

[billy]

yes, i saw haigue on cnn saying that those who don't belive he was killed, will still not believe it even if a photograph is shown them. anyone and his mother can photoshop a bin laden pic.
his death puts closure in the hearts for some. and will open wounds for others. terrorism is here to stay. his death will detract little from future bloody deaths. people will still wear the waistcoat at weddings, in mosques and hotels. people will still die. on that score sj is correct.

[srijantje]

terrorism is just a word,the deeds associated with it have always been around[genghis khan,the crusaders],the problem is,ordinairy people will always be the victims because they're not surrounded by heavy security like the people in charge,
Think of those so called taliban warriors who are actually just poor guys who get paid a pittance to shoot at nato soldiers who are also paid,although better ,to go and die in some desert,poor bastards,all of them

[billy]

i larf at how after building up the government for killing him
the media now try and tear the gov down for getting some facts wrong and admitting they got them wrong, they openly stated "he was unarmed" the trouble is; the media wants the news as it happens and because of it the facts are always screwed up. it's like asking 20 people in a bank that was robbed "what happened" you get 20 different stories, ranging from how many bank robbers they were, how many shots were fired, who got injured, what they were wearing. it should all be taken with a pinch of salt, they all want the kudos for releasing the story first. often it's the media themselves who take things out of contexts. half the reports tell it how they think it happened. we even saw them showing a tv screen of what they THINK obama and his crew were watching.

[srijantje]

if he was unarmed we could call it assasination

[billy]

and it probably was but who gives a toss really, he had a shoot to kill order out on him.
his family may mourn him but his death or life is just another story to me.
if he was unarmed we could also say they executed him for arranging the deaths of over 3000 people by his own admission.
personally i think if he was just watching tv when they went in they should cap him. saves money in the long run and probably lives. no attempts at prisoner exchange and all that crap. i think i'd have shot him dead even if he were asleep.

[addy]

Good point, Osama bin Laden was more manageable in death. If they'd captured him alive... oy. The public would've exploded. Where to keep him locked up, how to have even the appearance of a fair trial while the US people cry out for blood, etc.

It's true about the picture, the US government really won't gain much by showing it. Skeptics will still be skeptics, and there will always be doubts; even now fake, photoshopped pics are circulating. All they'll succeed in doing is worsening the level of terrorist retaliation if the pictures are gruesome/ inflammatory.

[billy]

i don't think it unfair he was killed though te fact he was doesn't give me any goose bumps etc. he did deserve to die i think.
i'm pretty sure most people believe he was killed in the attack. the biggest problem will come from the self righteous who'll say "they murdered an unarmed man" personally it's a shame they didn't wipe his whole extended family out. once he'd planned 9/11 he was destined to die a violent death, i'm sure he knew that deep down. all violent men (of his ilk) know that deep down.

[srijantje]

murder is murder no matter who commits it

[billy]

of course it is.

to then say bin laden who took part in the murder of over 3000 people in a cold blooded and planned manner is anything akin to the man in the street murderer who kills his wife or someone in a fight doesn't quite wash. to my mind some people deserve to die/be murdered he was one of them, i would have gladly been his murderer should they have asked me. most if not all societies have defined levels of murder. the same as a rapist is a rapist or a person who assaults is an assailant.

a quick question. is murder ever right? if for instance he'd killed out family, would we still say murder is murder and shouldn't be done, or would we say; it was justified.
that it was a justified homicide.

[srijantje]

he'll kill my family i'll go after him myself and murder him