Bush, five months after 9/11. “I just don’t spend that much time on him [bin Laden]”.
In July 2008, Larry King asked Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), “If you were president and knew that bin Laden was in Pakistan, you know where, would you have U.S. forces go in after him?”
McCain said he would not.
“Larry, I’m not going to go there and here’s why: because Pakistan is a sovereign nation.”
Obama said if elected in November 2008 he would be willing to attack inside Pakistan with or without approval from the Pakistani government, a move that would likely cause anxiety in the already troubled region.
“If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will,” Obama said.
Keep that McCain quote in mind the next time he’s on Meet the Press.
(via Slog)
Ash Can
This can’t be emphasized enough.
Dave
Nor should it be forgotten that Bush shut down the CIA bin Laden unit in 2006. He had dick-all to do with OBL finally going down.
KXB
Are you kidding? McCain throws great BBQs – David Gregory is not going to give that up.
geg6
Much as I despise Grampy McGrumpypants, he was quite gracious in his remarks congratulating the president today.
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/158527-mccain-comments-obama-for-bin-laden-death
In fact (and correct me if I’m wrong), that might be the first time he’s ever been gracious toward Obama since November 2008.
mikefromArlington
No doubt McCain will be double and even triple booked. I can’t wait for all the exclusive McCain interviews.
Lets hope Gregory can take enough time away from fixing his make-up and slobbering all over him self long enough to read this blog entry and ask McCain who will no-doubtingly be on the Sunday shows.
Obama, focused like a laser.
beltane
Isn’t it funny how those with the smallest sticks tend to speak the loudest? I know it’s wrong to use the P-word but I have to admit it has been flying around my house a lot today with regards to the tough-talking Republicans with their little cowboy suits and cap guns, all bluster until mommy tells them to come inside and wash their hands because supper’s on the table.
The Dangerman
Now, I hate McCain with a passion (mostly for choosing Palin), but I vaguely recall that episode and I think his comment about “not going there” was a “no comment”, not a definitive statement on what his tactics would be.
samson
I dislike McCain, but the quote you provide doesn’t say that he wouldn’t authorize a strike in Pakistan; it merely says that he is unwilling to address the question publically. Unless there is more to the interview, I think you are stretching things here.
cmorenc
This event has so broadly gobsmacked the GOP and wingers from such a complete spectrum of different angles that all but the relatively most extremely stupid/insane among them immediately realized they are completely without any plausibly acceptable grounds to respond with negative criticism. It’s been more delicious than annoying (though that too a bit) to watch the GOP forced to adopt a tack richly praising Obama for doing the right thing, competently, and try to mitigate the damage by painting it as a vindication/extension of the Bush efforts and policies. Even Rush Limbaugh is lavishing untarnished praise on Obama today (well, tarnished a bit by praising him for allegedly stiffing his liberal pacifist base in following in the path of the neocon way of doing things in Gitmo etc).
The most delicious, though genuine comment by a conservative came from Peggy Noonan this morning (yes, Peggy Noonan!) who gushed effusively this morning on TV that one of the most significant things yesterday’s events signified was “the return of (American) competence” (!!)
Brian R.
Don’t forget — Mittens laughed at Obama for making that promise too.
mistermix
Here’s the whole McCain quote:
I think it’s pretty clear that “go there” refers to Pakistan, especially since it was a campaign issue and Obama had said that he would “go there” if necessary.
Sentient Puddle
Not sure I agree with the interpretation that McCain was just punting on the question. Here’s the full question and answer:
If he meant to say “no comment,” then it strikes me as rather odd that he’d continue and say that bin Laden is Pakistan’s problem.
danimal
Yeah, right. Like they’ll ever invite McGrumpyPants on again after he was shown to be so wrong on AfPak policy. They care about competence and want to preserve their credibility, right.
/snark
beltane
Oh my, I just read in the Guardian that Rush Limabugh has been effusive in his praise of President Obama. Maybe it’s a good day to buy a lottery ticket.
All the soap in the word would not be enough to wash the stain of failure off the hands of the George W.Bush administration.
Martin
@beltane:
Sarcasm, they know not what it is.
Culture of Truth
Obama just gave the Medal of Honor to family of Pfc. Anthony Kaho’ohanohano.
He just can’t stop with the exotic unamerican names can he
Redshift
@Martin: I bet they’re working from the transcript. It’s the classic Internet problem; sarcasm can be very hard to detect from text alone (though that one sentence should be a giveaway.)
Still, I think it’s hilarious that there are multiple news reports that Rush Limbaugh effusively praised President Obama about this. The lack of a /sarcasm tag couldn’t bite a better target.
Hill Dweller
McCain claiming the Pakistanis want OBL out of their hair is even more damning, IMO. The ISI has been protecting him(and several other terrorists) for years.
Hell, the compound where Osama was staying is located in a neighborhood full of retired, high-ranking military officials.
The Dangerman
@Sentient Puddle:
After the fact, it’s likely McCain was wrong in that analysis (surely, some in the ISI, if not the Pakistan military or government, knew OBL was there).
I still think it was a “no comment”, but YMMV.
Redshift
@Sentient Puddle: Not to mention that even if he meant “no comment,” if the roles were reversed, this would be running on Fox 24/7. Considering what an asshole McCain is, I have no problem if it’s generally interpreted that way, even if it’s unfair. And as Steve Benen points out, the more salient fact is that this was used by multiple Republican candidates as evidence of Obama’s inexperience and naivete.
Mike Kay (Team America)
BUSH SHUT DOWN THE CIA’S BIN LADEN UNIT IN 2006.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/04/washington/04intel.html
President Obama had to start from scratch.
jon
Sovereignty is a pretty funny thing to bring up, considering his stated policy choices regarding Syria, Libya, Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, and I’m sure I’m forgetting a few others. Which reminds me: even Poland was probably on that list at one time.
Redshift
@The Dangerman: Yeah, it’s really striking in retrospect. The point was used far and wide by the Right as illustrating that Obama didn’t have the experience or judgment to handle national security matters, and it’s now painfully obvious that it actually illustrates that McCain doesn’t. (And more generally, as his public statements have repeatedly demonstrated, that McCain really doesn’t have any useful understanding to contribute to discussions of military or foreign policy matters.)
Hawes
Apparently, bin Laden used one of his wives as a shield.
Stay classy, Osama.
JCT
@Redshift:
Can you imagine how pissed off Limbaugh is over being misinterpreted all over the place when he was clearly making fun of Obama’s decision-making? Sweet!
The Dangerman
@Hill Dweller:
Yup. What this means in terms of a future relationship with Pakistan should be one helluva problem; McCain would have fucked it up, but I’m confident Obama’s team will get to the bottom of this mess.
Warren Terra
McCain is a sad, bitter old man whose one and only policy idea is “fuck ’em, they didn’t vote for me – and fuck ’em twice if they have anything to do with Obama”. I have no time for him.
That said, I think it is at least plausible that when he said he “wasn’t going to go there” he meant that he wasn’t going to enter into that discussion, he wasn’t going to announce his intention to violate another country’s sovereignty. It seems to me that violating another country’s sovereignty is one of those things you do when it’s worth it, but it’s not one of those things that you announce your willingness to do. Why antagonize them needlessly by saying you intend to disrespect them?
I’m not saying that McCain was upholding some high principle here – this is the guy who sang about bombing Iran, and has called for ground troops in Libya; he’s a warmonger whose only true guiding principle is his latest whim – but I don’t think his statement on that occasion should be criticized.
Heck, as long as I’m feeling generous, Bush’s statement was probably an attempt to regurgitate something his advisors had been trying to feed into his tiny mind, that while finding Osama would be nice the important issues were about the wider terrorist network and counterinsurgency. Because Dubya’s not all that terribly bright, and because he’s a narcissist, the only part of it that he really retained, and that he so poorly expressed, was that his failure to catch Osama wasn’t a critical personal failure on his part.
New Yorker
Yes, they want bin Laden out of their hair so much that they built him a massive compound in one of their military towns. FAIL!
Poopyman
What’s the point if[1] the talking heads bury it?
.
.
[1]”If” in this case means that they absolutely certainly will.
patrick II
Given the opportunity, would anyone here have attempted to capture bin Laden and bring him to trial? While it can’t be known from the few facts we have now, it seems probable that the sole intent of this raid was a straight-forward assassination. Is everyone ok with that? Would a trial be too much to handle? What is different between trying bin Laden now and Nazi and Japanese war criminals after WW II?
Seebach
@patrick II: The difference is the state of US politics now. The Republicans would have killed Obama had he tried to give Osama a trial.
bkny
recalling obama’s 2007 comment — it’s not like the pakistanis didn’t have fair warning.
i mean, really, putting the guy up next to the country’s leading military academy. gonna be interesting seeing how this plays out there.
Ash Can
@Mike Kay (Team America): I’m willing to bet that there were still folks floating around the intelligence system who held onto at least some of the information this division had gathered before being shut down, so I personally doubt that Obama had to start entirely from scratch. Having said that, though, it’s pretty obvious that this was yet another mess of W’s that Obama did an admirable job of cleaning up (to say the least), and to say that Bush deserves some credit for this is like saying Al Downing deserves some of the credit for Hank Aaron’s 714th because he was the one who threw him the gopher ball.
Seebach
@patrick II: Just imagine if half of the SEAL squad had been killed getting Osama back alive for a trial.
The fucking butthurt and whining would never end. We might as well cede the US to the Republicans for eternity.
Villago Delenda Est
This is all pointless, as there is absolutely no action Obama can take that will change his skin color.
So why bother to present the wingtard garbage with facts, or arguments, or anything else?
Obama will ALWAYS be near. Everything he does is wrong…by definition. Nothing that the deserting sack of shit every did, ever does, or ever will do will NOT be right, according to the wingtard 27%.
Midnight Marauder
@geg6:
Hooray for broken clocks being right!
Loneoak
I read ‘go there’ as ‘discuss that here in detail,’ as in ‘go to that discussion.’ I don’t see how you can square the ‘won’t go to Pakistan’ interpretation with the subsequent ‘we will do everything to get Osama.’
I’m perfectly happy hanging the least charitable interpretation on McCain, however. Walnuts deserves it.
Dennis SGMM
@patrick II:
If the intent was a straightforward assassination then it would have been easy enough to reduce the compound to rubble from a distance. It would have been a great coup to capture bin Laden alive and return him to the US for trial. My understanding is that Laden was firing at the SEALs which pretty much left them no choice.
Redshift
Apparently Lindsey Graham has become the first high-profile Republican to choose the conspiracy theory response. I don’t have the stomach to follow a Daily Caller link to find out the details, but apparently he’s expressing doubts that we “really” knew it was bin Laden before he was buried at sea.
Don
@The Dangerman: I concur, if by ‘get to the bottom of this mess’ you mean ‘make some vague grumbling and then let everything on on as usual.’ I suppose I should take some solace that I’ve been well prepared for disappointment by our country’s long tolerating of China jackholery so long as it’s working out better for us than not. I see no reason to believe Pakistan is going to be any less disappointing.
A L
Assuming McCain were to 100% stick by his implication that he would not do anything to Pakistan in pursuit of Boogeyman No. 1, that would mean he would have killed less Pakistanis than Obama by a metric ton. Loo you can’t write irony like this.
Chris
@The Dangerman:
Which is interesting: I’m no expert, but my understanding of Pakistani politics was always that the ISI was the more pro-al-Qaeda organization and the military less so.
Questions about Pakistani involvement in this will go on for weeks, months, probably years: it’s one of the parts of this that I’m most interested in hearing about.
batgirl
I can’t speak for anyone else, but hell yes, I’m okay with a straight-forward assassination of OBL.
Mike Kay (Team America)
President Obama’s decision to send operatives after Osama bin Laden in a compound in Pakistan on Sunday was “what I believe was one of the most gutsiest calls of any president in recent memory,” White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan said today.
“There was nothing that confirmed that bin Laden was at that compound,” Brennan said at a White House press briefing.
The president relied on strong — but not bulletproof — evidence that the al Qaeda leader was at a residence in Abbotabad, Pakistan.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20058916-503544.html
Warren Terra
@Villago Delenda Est:
It took me a moment to get the reference.
A L
Why is that considered controversial? We do raids like this all the time. It’s conceivable that this was one such slapdash “Why not?” raid that finally hit jackpot.
Reminder that this IS the United States military we’re talking about.
Cacti
I’m loving how completely this news surprised the right. Nobody had even the faintest of hints that this was coming, so there was no time to coordinate a response.
And now today, we see them all stumbling about without their Frank Luntz talking points, and generally sounding like petulant losers.
MikeJ
@A L: They built a replica of the place they were raiding and rehearsed it. This was not a spur of the moment, got lucky kind of raid.
And Obama is still black. Suck it.
eemom
@Redshift:
Obama had to know this buried at sea thing was gonna spawn conspiracy theories from here to literal eternity, but he did it anyway, apparently for no other reason than that it was the right thing to do.
No wonder Graham Cracker’s head is a-splodin’.
Uloborus
@New Yorker:
It’s really, really important to remember that Pakistan is a heavily divided nation with a corrupt and bickering government infrastructure. It hovers eternally on the edge of civil war, and some of the outer fringes are only nominally part of the country at all. So while someone must have liked OBL, it’s hard to be certain who!
Loneoak
I don’t get the hand wringing. The man was a monster. He murdered many thousands of innocents in the name of a terrifying ideology. No matter how many critiques of American empire or demands for rule of law we can generate, there is no way you are going convince me that cold-blooded murder isn’t what OBL had coming to him and we were right to do it.
It’s necessary to articulate a critique of empire, but it’s also necessary to just kill some motherfuckers sometimes. Maybe if we didn’t have an empire, OBL wouldn’t have existed. But he existed, and it’s a good thing he doesn’t anymore. Anyway, if the other option was dropping a huge bomb on the compound, this was the better choice.
Dennis SGMM
@A L:
The stakes (Violating Pakistan’s sovereignty with troops) seem a bit high for the raid to have been based on a wild guess. Moreover, intelligence agencies worked for years to ID the courier who led them to bin Laden.
Cacti
@Dennis SGMM:
And was reportedly using his wife as a human shield.
That could, of course, be propaganda, but if it is true, I think we can safely say that he wasn’t going to be taken alive.
Bender
By Associated Press, Updated: Monday, May 2, 10:26 AM
“WASHINGTON — Officials say CIA interrogators in secret overseas prisons developed the first strands of information that ultimately led to the killing of Osama bin Laden.
Current and former U.S. officials say that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, provided the nom de guerre of one of bin Laden’s most trusted aides. The CIA got similar information from Mohammed’s successor, Abu Faraj al-Libi. Both were subjected to harsh interrogation tactics inside CIA prisons in Poland and Romania.”
Thank you, President Obama, for using the special anti-terror hit teams (the lefty-despised “Cheney’s assassination squad”) that he told his supporters he’d disassemble, having first gleaned the necessary intelligence from captives at a special military prison camp he assured his supporters he’d close, using enhanced techniques that said he’d discontinue and his supporters swear never worked to get good intel.
You tricked them all! GBA! GBO!
A L
@Loneoak: You’re right, adolescent poster “Loneoak,” having a conscience is for twerps and losers. Oorah
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
@Seebach:
Worse yet, imagine the Fox orchestrated demands that a live-and-in-our-custody OBL be tortured with a capital-T, without even the euphemism of “enhanced interrogation” as a fig-leaf.
Brachiator
@patrick II:
You have absolutely no credible evidence for your assertion. If they just wanted bin Laden dead, they could have used drones instead of dropping down a SEAL team.
A trial would have been good, but I can’t say that I am unhappy with this outcome.
cmorenc
@Redshift:
After hearing of this, I watched a short clip of Rush’s show today (sorry I don’t have the link handy) and…though there is some possibility of a bit of snark in Limbaugh’s approach in his repeated mention that the idea to get Bin Laden via a small special forces team was Obama’s alone, the military and rest of his council advocated an obliterative bombing…NEVERTHELESS clearly for once, there was an undeniable tone of genuine envious admiration bordering on wonderment that Obama had proven to have the necessary brass balls to pull something like this off, and with such complete apparent success. The best Rush could do today was to try to reinforce the conservative GOP message-of-the-day that Obama’s accomplishment was the continuation and culmination of the efforts and policies implemented by the Bush Administration, and give praise to Obama for supposedly recognizing that. Good luck selling that to anyone but your hard-core base Rush.
Nevertheless, the fact that Rush was genuinely impressed with Obama today was something even his nastily partisan personality couldn’t suppress. At least for today, and maybe even the rest of this week.
patrick II
@Dennis SGMM:
The reason for the raid, as opposed to just bombing the house, was so that there would be absolute proof of death which isn’t always possible after a bombing.
Since at this time we don’t really know of the additional risks and details of the actual raid, my question is meant as more of a hypothetical. If we could have taken bin Laden alive and tried him — should we have? I would have said yes, that the priority of law over vengeance or sometimes practicality has been part of what made this a great country. I think I am in a small minority.
Part of Osama bi Laden’s goal for 9/11 was the corruption of our own society by fear — and by his own death perhaps he demonstrated his success.
Legalize
@Bender:
Uh no. That these fellas were tortured does not mean that information was “first gleaned” by torture. KSM’s interrogators testified that, and the documents reveal, that KSM was talking, but that he shutdown when they started waterboarding him.
So, fuck off.
Villago Delenda Est
@Warren Terra:
“‘Scuse me, while I whip this out…”
Chris
@Cacti:
Yeah, I’m sorry if my partisanship’s riding high, but I fucking love it.
At least four years we’ve been putting up with this smug, smarmy back-seat driver’s “he’s a Muslim sympathizing pansy appeaser who’s either working with our enemies or too weak to handle them” bullshit. Payback’s a bitch, ain’t it? How’s that “Obama’s a Muslim sympathizer” narrative going? LOL. How about “he’s the next Jimmy Carter?” LOL.
Enjoy the egg (hell, the several dozen Spanish omlets) on your faces, fellers.
Tsulagi
One of the reasons I voted for him. Well, that and the alternative was a cranky grandpa pandering to the idiots in his base along with his winking airhead wingwoman.
Warren Terra
Bender, please prove to me that the same information would not have been extracted without torture. Heck, just prove to me that it was more believable because of the torture, and that we weren’t sent chasing down lots and lots of false leads extracted under torture. Thanks in advance.
PS We had the nom de guerre before 9/11 and before the arrest of KSM, according to at least some news stories. And you don’t claim that the tortured sources advanced our knowledge beyond possibly confirming the nom de guerre – which might have been worthless, as people will agree to anything under torture.
freelancer
@Chris:
The ISI has been dirty for decades. Questions arose wrt the Tora Bora escape into Pakistan, and the film 9/11 Press for Truth gets circumstantial, but it’s hard not to come to the conclusion that the ISI leaned on NATO to clear airspace as they evacuated OBL from Afghanistan.
It’s probably that they also were involved in various financial aspects of the 9/11 operation.
(It’s not a truther movie, a profile of four widows and their activism to get the WHOLE story out. The commission report is detailed, but it still obfuscates a lot of things. The film was also an instrument to castigate the media for not holding the Administration to the fire. Bush and Cheney not under oath, testifying together, etc. Worth watching, IMHO)
Uloborus
@Bender:
…how odd. You’re aware that none of what you’re saying he did he actually did, right? This was a pretty standard special forces (as much as those words can make sense together) operation and the information in question was obtained long before Obama was president and dismissed for years because the torture thing meant that nobody knew if it was true or a lie? That we had to get information from more reliable sources later to make us revisit it at all? That Obama has tortured exactly nobody?
I’ll grant you that Guantanamo is still open, but if anybody knows that the president can do about that when the Senate votes 92-8 to override his order to close it, I’m all ears.
Loneoak
@A L:
What is adolescent in my comment and why is my name in quotes? I called no one a name or insulted anyone for having a conscience. My conscience tells me that OBL was a monster and I don’t care if the purpose of the raid was to kill him. Is that not clear?
geg6
@patrick II:
Ummmm, have you read anything about Brennan’s presser where he discusses the raid and how it happened that bin Laden died? There was a fire fight. Are you saying the SEALs shouldn’t have shot back so that you and Glenn Greenwald could soothe your consciences over a mass murderer’s right to a trial in which he would undoubtedly be convicted and given a death sentence? That is, in the unlikely event that they could have arrested him, detained him, and gotten him out without all them getting killed since, dog forbid, we wouldn’t want our SEALs shooting back, amirite?
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/05/white-house-osama-bin-laden-used-woman-as-human-shield.php?ref=fpa
Dennis SGMM
@A L:
You’re talking about a man, bin Laden, who coldbloodedly engineered the massacre of a few thousand unsuspecting civilians. If bin Laden had made his bones in the field with an AK47 then you might have a point. As it stands, you come off like a sanctimonious jerk.
MikeJ
@patrick II:
So you insist that no attempt was made to capture him and then decide that we’ll never know enough about what actually happened to shoot down the theory you pulled out of your ass?
Chris
@patrick II:
I believe there’s also less risk of collateral damage that way. Don’t know if it was a major consideration but it’s a nice thing too.
Mike Kay (Team America)
Look guys, Franklin Delano Roosevelt assassinated Admiral Yamamoto and SS Chief Reinhard Heydrich.
Do you want to toss your dimes away?
Joe Beese
Indeed. The secret prison, the torture, the violation of another country’s sovereignty, and the executive kill order are all straight from Bush’s playbook.
Obama’s supporters have spent his term angrily denying this. But today they cheer its results.
bkny
@Redshift: wow… senator huckleberry questioning the integrity of uber navy seals.
that is unbelievably fucked up. you think there’s an absolute bottom they’ve reached in assholery, but then, someone always steps up digging deeper.
Martin
@patrick II:
What part of “A second U.S. official says the president’s order was always to capture or kill bin Laden.” can people not process?
Not only would people here have attempted to arrest OBL, but Obama did as well. But once bullets start flying, you put that option aside. For some reason people seem to be of the interpretation that because we sent in a SEAL team and not Sgt. Joe Friday that the only possible outcome was a kill. Do you really think that the US should have sent in a couple of federal marshalls to knock on the door and present an arrest warrant or something?
Chris
@freelancer:
Oh, indeed. But it was my understanding that the military wasn’t, or at least not nearly to the same extent (in terms of relations with al-Qaeda and the like).
kansi
@mistermix: Seems I remember Obama taking a lot of heat for making “reckless” statements WRT to going into Pakistan. He was characterized as not really understanding how the game was supposed to be played.
Villago Delenda Est
@patrick II:
That is the FALLBACK from capturing him and bringing him back for trial.
However, I have little doubt that the operation was planned on the assumption that the odds of succeeding with a live capture were very low, and that a confirmed kill was probably the high probability outcome they expected to get.
Either way, it had to be up close and personal to confirm the outcome. Bombing with drones simply would not do in this case. Highest possible profile operation there is. Confirmation is mandatory.
Despite all this, the wingtards are claiming now, predictably as the sun rising in the east each morning, that it wasn’t Osama. Hell, just to give you an example, WoW trade chat on my server was dominated by wingtard fuckwits claiming that Osama wasn’t killed at all, that it was someone else. There’s nothing that Sheriff Bart can do that they will approve of.
Midnight Marauder
@patrick II:
Come on. He accomplished his goal thanks to the hysterical reaction facilitated by the Bush Administration in the aftermath of the September 11th attacks; not by being taken out under the watchful eye of competent government officials.
The Left is picking a pretty poor figure to use as a platform for the American Empire outrage. This is just all kinds of dumb.
Mike in NC
You know what’s next, don’t you? Jim DeMented will surface and declare that killing the terrorist behind 9/11 is “Obama’s (Latest) Waterloo”!
Mike Kay (Team America)
you just knew the firebaggers would be butthurt over bin laden’s death.
obama derangement syndrome is a sad and powerful affliction.
A L
@Loneoak: Your post was in reference to “hand-wringing” over the ethics of straight-up killing a person. Hand-wringing is usually a code word for “actling like a pussy,” so you were implying that anyone who even questioned the ethical validity of this was a weakling, and statements don’t get much more adolescent than that.
OBL was not a “monster.” He was a human being. His deserving of death does not make reflexively screeching in joy over the matter any less reprehensible or, again, adolescent.
Loneoak
@Dennis SGMM:
More than a few thousand, if you add up all the death squads, civil wars, and bombings around southwest Asia and the Middle East that were directly ordered or inspired by the AQ leadership.
Why is it that we as a country, especially we on the left in this country, lack the rhetorical and moral space to recognize the utter depravity of many of the opponents of the US empire that we also oppose? It’s rather frustrating.
geg6
@Loneoak:
A L is obviously a Glenn Greenwald loving troll. Please don’t feed the trolls. Same goes for all those thinking they can talk sense to Bender.
Cacti
@Mike Kay (Team America):
I’m okay with Osama meeting a violent end for the reason that he committed numerous acts of war against the United States, its citizens, its armed forces, and its economy. He considered himself to be at war with the USA, and he met the fate common to those who choose to start wars.
If he wanted to avail himself of a trial, he could have negotiated his surrender at any time during the last 10 years.
Midnight Marauder
I’m disappointed Joe Beese decided to take a different route than mentioning something about President Obama shaking hands with a WNBA team.
A L
@Dennis SGMM: ??? Obama killed more civilians in one year than OBL did over his entire lifespan, so I can only wonder what on earth you’re trying to prove with this point.
The lack of self-awareness by the American left no longer astounds me. These people have no idea what they sound like and they get infuriated when nobody gives them any credit for their “accomplishments” because they are ideological cowards.
Earl Butz
@patrick II: Troll bait (and man have you guys been coming out from under your bridges today!). Nonetheless, I’ll take it. No, I would not have tried. It would have killed a huge number of innocents, and granted him martyrdom at the hands of America, the one thing he wanted above all else and that he was counting on us to provide.
Oh, it is known. It has been confirmed by the White House. This was not to be a “dead or alive” operation, but a “dead only” operation, and Obama’s wording in the statement he gave was very specific: Bin Laden was killed AFTER the firefight. On my planet they call that an execution.
Yes. It’s a shame about Osama’s wife, who he used as a human shield and got killed in the process, but allowing anyone he can to get slaughtered just to save his own skin seems pretty much in keeping with his character and actions over the last decade or so.
I feel pretty OK about the morality of this action.
gex
@The Dangerman: Maybe. But it seems weird.
It seems weird to say “no comment”, then remark about the sovereign status of another nation.
Villago Delenda Est
Do not forget that the deserting coward actually went along with some of Osama’s demands in the wake of 9/11. Particularly the withdrawal of US forces from Saudi Arabia.
The real scandal of 9/11 was not the “inside job” of the truthers, which is based on “facts” that are questionable at best. It was the malassministration knowing something was going to happen and planning on how to exploit that. They didn’t know the scope of it, but no matter, they used it in the same way that the Reichstag fire was exploited. As a pretense to implement the agenda they had planned all along.
Calouste
@Mike Kay (Team America):
Fast work that. Those British trained Czech agents were dropped back into their country only 3 weeks after the US entered the war. What a foresight by FDR!
The Allies would have continued assassinating Nazi leaders except for that the Nazis murderded thousands of innocent civilians in gruesome revenge.
Midnight Marauder
@A L:
Or, you know, an explicit acknowledgment of overwrought guilt or concern. This is some pretty abysmal logic on display.
Right. A monstrous human being. I mean, what are you even arguing here? Are you really trying to imbue a deeper sense of humanity in a man who may have used one of his wives as a human shield?
This is absurdity.
Suffern ACE
@Midnight Marauder: Yep. This is one of the times I have to admit that its good that the left isn’t invited on TV very often.
Anyone who is happy today is obviously not thinking clearly. Today, I’m wearing black, mourning for our lily white souls that died with Osama.
Tsulagi
@eemom:
Well, maybe that and one other reason. According to a Stars and Stripes piece…
That’s cold. Wonder if Saudi Arabia was called and they said “Nah, you keep the dead fucker.” Can’t say I blame them.
Cacti
The real crime against humanity was that Obama didn’t get a public option.
9/11 was a minor tragedy that happened 10 long years ago.
stuckinred
@A L: Save your lectures, nobody gives a fuck what you think.
geg6
@A L:
Okay, just broke my own rule.
You are an ass. Of course bin Laden was a monster. All monsters are human beings, unless you actually believe that Godzilla and Mothra are real creatures. The monsters we conjure as fictions are simply our human way of dealing with the fear of the real monsters, other human beings.
And I really don’t see anyone here screeching with joy. Relief, a sense of closure, hope that the families will finally see justice has been done, regret and anger that Bush/Cheney didn’t do this when they had the chance at Tora Bora, pride in the president and our intelligence and special forces…all those things. But no one here has been screeching in adolescent joy that I’ve noticed.
Loneoak
@A L:
Right, got it. Adolescent = using big mean code words, adult = willfully misreading and distorting comments to troll a group of people you already know disagree with your criteria for ideological purity and maturity.
And lol about the screeching. Where did I screech? Maybe you couldn’t see my argument from under your bridge.
goblue72
@Chris: They are having trouble talking while choking down on the POT-POTUS in their faces.
Cacti
@Tsulagi:
Considering he’d been stripped of his Saudi citizenship years ago, I’m certain they wouldn’t want to plant his corpse in their soil.
Joe Beese
@A L:
Oh, you noticed that.
But it’s apples and oranges. Unlike terrorists, who are Evil, the American president, who is Good, is entitled to kill civilians to advance his political agenda.
Especially since he never means to kill them. They’re purely collateral damage. Deeply tragic, of course. Each and every time. But you can’t make Freedom omelettes without breaking a few eggs, etc.
soonergrunt
There are a LOT of pie-eating motherfuckers in here today.
AkaDad
Obama deserves credit for getting Bin Laden yesterday, but what has he done today?
Dennis SGMM
@A L:
The difference, because you seem unable to appreciate it, is that Obama didn’t sit there with his confederates and plot to kill civilians, and civilians only – did he? The point, although you won’t get this one either, is that there are some people (Stalin, Pol Pot) without whom the world is a better place. As for ideological cowardice, I don’t know what you’re referencing but I’m confident that you’re full of shit on that score as well.
taylormattd
@patrick II: Difference: the Japanese surrendered and the war was over? Put on your thinking cap dumbass.
taylormattd
@Mike Kay (Team America): IKR?
They are utterly deranged. Absolutely crazy fucks.
A L
@Loneoak: @geg6: Are you also proud of all the non-OBL Pakistanis blown to smithereens in pursuing OBL, under Obama’s direction? Are you? I hope you are because then you can walk around with your head held high that if only you were as smart, well-connected and craven as OBL, you too could be just like him.
@Loneoak: As someone who participated in the frenzied heydays following 9/11, I know adolescent manly talk when I see it, and you sir are showing it off in spades (as is the rest of the anti-war left who have swept all the atrocities committed in Iraq and Afghanistan under the rug).
Mike Kay (Team America)
@soonergrunt: obama could personally discover the cure for cancer and the same butthurt firebaggers would be screaming.
Loneoak
@soonergrunt:
The pie filters of the world are littered with the ideologically brave.
Comrade Scrutinizer
@patrick II: Considering that the IMT trials themselves were of dubious legality, and that Allied war crimes of similar magnitude (the Katyn Forest Massacre, the partition of Poland, the firebombing of Japanese cities) were ignored or hushed up, I don’t have a favorable view of those particular war crimes trials.
The death of bin Laden has been publicly stated US policy since 1998. It’s kinda late to have a debate on the topic.
Sly
Leftist sanctimony abhors progress like nature abhors a vacuum.
@A L, Joe Beese: Who’s a good boy? Who’s a good boy? You are! That’s right, you are! You’re soooo good! Yes, you are!
A L
@Dennis SGMM: I’m sure all the dead folks in the afterworld are glad to know that their extermination was not personal (although actually it was in quite a few cases).
Similarly, I’m sure all the families of the victims of 9/11 are glad to know that OBL really didn’t mean to kill everyone in the Twin Towers/Pentagon/elsewhere, he just wanted to kill the imperialists. See? Nothing personal you guys.
“I only meant to kill the bad guys” is what every shithead monster of history says when they get called out. Obama is certainly no different and neither, of course, are you.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
@Loneoak:
You have to break a few berries to make a pie. Don’t even ask about where the crust comes from.
Loneoak
@A L:
LOL, I marched against the war in Afghanistan weeks after 9/11. As an 8-year-old I marched against the first Gulf War, dragging my father to the federal building downtown. I have a conscientious-objector file built and ready to go. I’ve been arrested at the School of the Americas at Fort Benning for trespassing on a military base. I’ve taught violence prevention to middle and high school students. I founded a male anti-rape organization. I’m already against the next war. I sure as hell ain’t a warblogger moron.
You don’t know me. You don’t know shit. What the fuck does it mean to participate in frenzied heydays? Did you punch a Sikh in the face before you became ideologically brave?
Seebach
@Joe Beese: It’s almost like you don’t understand the alternative is the Republicans, not Jesus Buddha Kucinich.
Midnight Marauder
@A L:
Okay, DougJ. You win.
taylormattd
And so the symbiotic relationship between PUMA firebaggers and lunatic wingnuts like Dick Cheney continues:
(1) Cheney and other warmongering neocon psychopaths allege OBL is dead because of information gained via torture;
(2) Joe Beese and other firebaggers accept the premise as true, flog it, and point to a single balloon juice comment as evidence of the perfidy of those who don’t sufficiently seek to have Obama impeached.
Turns out, of course, Dick Cheney is a liar: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/05/02/972387/-Republicans-say-torture-led-US-to-bin-Laden-Facts-say-otherwise?detail=hide
Mike Kay (Team America)
Rahm was right, the far left is retarded. Exhibit A: their crying over a mass murderer who declared war on a country and refused to surrender.
JohnR
Oy! This poisonous ideology crap is a bit too much to take. “The Left” is just as accurate a group definition as “The Right” is. (*)In other words, just another stupid stereotype that lets blowhards talk big without having to run the risk of thinking. I agree that it would have been nice to bring bin Laden back for trial, but given the shrieks of terror that greeted the prospect of trying one of the Gitmo guys, what are the odds that would have come off? The tough talkers would as usual have soiled their thongs at anything so upsetting; the only thing they could go for would be to have him tortured to death for their entertainment on live TV(*) (see above – I like my footnotes up as high as possible). Personally, I think this is about the best possible outcome – it allows the professional nutters to mutter darkly about fake bin Ladens and long-form death certificates while the rest of us can accept that our national honor and need for revenge has been satisfied.
I don’t see this changing anything much, though. The USA is still being enthusiastically buggered by the banksters and the same guys who talk about “The Left” and sneer at Glenn Greenwald and Paul Krugman, and the fundamental assumptions of the media clowns and our Galtian Overlords are that Democrats are pussies and tough talk is more tough than tough walk. In a month or less, this episode will be long forgotten because it doesn’t fit the world as they know it has to be.
beltane
@AkaDad: OK, you win. I’m going back in my hole for a few more weeks.
A L
@Loneoak: I had you pegged as an adolescent and now it’s confirmed. Sorry kid, you can’t beat your biology. You have a few years to go yet before you can legit say you’re anti-war. Until then, keep your mouth shut when it comes to matters like this because you make it too easy for other people to tell that you got a mean streak simmering under all that conscientious objection.
geg6
@A L:
LOL! So you’re the adolescent, I guess, if you were that young when 9/11 happened. Too young to be lecturing me, pal. And, no, I’m not proud of innocents killed in drone strikes. But I also am old and mature enough to know that innocents die in wars all the time. And we’ve been at war with AQ and the Taliban for almost ten years. And the person entirely responsible for all of that death and destruction is gone. That is a good thing. Now go and play over at Glenn’s place where you belong.
Sly
@A L:
Can I touch your halo? It’s soooo shiny!
Dennis SGMM
@A L:
I’d say that an actual shithead monster is someone who demands
perfection from everyone but himself. I’d add that a blind shithead monster is someone who fails to recognize that there are people in this world who, no matter what our foreign policy, really do want to kill us.
I’d be a lot happier if the troops were already home. Lamentably, that would cause Obama to be a one term president. If you’re willing to have that happen just so that you can feel pure then you are an irredeemable, self-centered asshole.
Mike Kay (Team America)
@taylormattd: McJoan clearly must be an Obot by debunking Dick.
MCA
@A L: As a third party not Loneoak, I humbly submit that you might be letting some emotional reading cloud your interpretation of said poster’s initial message. I had a completely different reaction. Loneoak’s first post was measured and calm and did not imply to me even a hint of “anyone who didn’t want to cap bin Laden in cold blood is a pussy” to me. Perhaps you’ve gotten a bit of a hairtrigger built in based on the last 10 years of unadulterated bloodlust emanating from some quarters on the right, which would be more than understandable. All Loneoak seemed to me to be saying (in response to a question about whether anyone supported capture only [which I think was physically impossible, anyway]) is that in this particular case, he/she was in favor of state-sanctioned assassination, and not that worried about the moral lines. My sense was that in most cases, Loneoak would feel differently. That just didn’t come off as written by some keyboard commando to this reader.
I thought about the concept of capturing bin Laden and putting him on trial here last night, but I think the continuing martydom that would have been born of that would have been a no-win for the U.S.
Joe Beese
@Seebach:
I understand that every Obama supporter, when confronted with the naked evil of his policies, eventually falls back on “The Republicans are worse”.
Which they may be. But that sales pitch didn’t get Kerry elected. And it won’t get Obama re-elected if real unemployemnt remains 20% – regardless of what trophy stag he drapes over the hood of his presidential limousine.
A L
@geg6: Ah, so you’re a baby boomer. Old enough to run away from Vietnam but not old enough to remember the Nuremburg trials.
Hint: According to the standard we used against the Nazis and Imperial Japanese, those who invade other countries are responsible for everything that happens to them afterwards, including atrocities. So no, the people responsible for the lion’s share of casualties in Afghanistan are not only still alive, but are celebrated members of American society.
Joe Beese
@A L:
Didn’t you know?
The Nuremberg Laws making the invasion of non-belligerent countries and the killing of their civilians grant an exemption to American presidents belonging to the Democratic Party.
Loneoak
@A L:
Kid? I’m 31. I was eight during the FIRST Gulf War, you know, the one we call the Gulf War. I’d say that puts me down for 23 years of anti-war activism.
Anyway, go back to your bridge. I’m done with you.
A L
@Dennis SGMM: bin Laden would say, and it’s difficult to argue against him on this point, that everything he did was in response to American aggression in the Middle East, particularly against Islam. So no, OBL did not start out as a bloodthirsty cretin who only craves human death, but a product of a number of forces around him that he took to incorrect ends.
On the other hand, you have no excuse for your behavior, because you are a sheltered, privileged person and apparently the only thing you give a shit about is Obama’s popularity. You are more than willing to excuse the deaths of thousands of innocent people to achieve this goal as evidenced by your pathetic defense of American armed intervention that was literally indistinguishable from OBL’s similarly pathetic claim that he was faultless for 9/11 because he only meant to kill the bad Americans.
AkaDad
@beltane:
Yay! I never win anything. Certainly not any personality contests.
taylormattd
@Mike Kay (Team America): Apparently Marcy Wheeler at Joe Beese’s site is too.
But hey Joe, keep fuckin’ that chicken!
Dennis SGMM
@A L:
Supposition not in evidence.
I’m a baby boomer, asshole, I volunteered to serve with the Navy’s riverine forces and I spent a year in CTF-116 at NSAD Binh Thuy in the (then) Republic of Vietnam. The experience left me anti-war and with a concise knowledge of the ineffectiveness of ordnance in establishing democracy.
You are one of those people who seems never to have had your high flown principles tested by a real world situation. It will happen sooner or later and by esteeming yourself as a paragon of virtue you’ll have so much farther to fall.
A L
@Joe Beese: Good to know. We wouldn’t want stupid dead civilians getting in the way of Obama’s re-election now would we?
Earl Butz
@Mike Kay (Team America): That is for STARTERS. The only person in WWII who outdid FDR’s wartime assassination count was Stalin.
I still find the Yamamoto tale both fascinating and tragic after all these years. Of all the Japanese fighting in the war, he was the one guy who REALLY thought it was a bad idea, that they shouldn’t have done it, and were going to get creamed in the end. All of which ended up being true. He knew this from having been educated in the US, and he tried desperately, and failed utterly, to convey the reality of America to his comrades.
That being done, he suited up and went out and fought like a motherfucker. Damn near took us out, at least WRT our naval power. If we hadn’t broken their codes, he would have lived through the war, done us a LOT more damage, and written some great memoirs. In that respect, it’s too bad we forced him down into the jungles of Bougainville.
On the other hand, he would have ended up killing a lot more Americans if we hadn’t.
I’d have liked to get OBL’s story just as much as Yamamoto’s, but the cost in lives would not have been worth it.
Bob Loblaw
@taylormattd:
You do know who the source is for that DKos article, right?
Marcy Wheeler, posting as emptywheel on…drumroll…firedoglake. Oh. Details.
Damn that PUMA firebagger!
Tonybrown74
@Joe Beese:
And what is it that you propose? I’m very curious, because it seems to me that your only purpose here is to wallow in the grief of your own making and to drag as many people down with you.
You prefer to work with your absolute ideal, and any politician that fails to meet that is an absolute failure/monster/whatever.
You are boring and childish.
Politics, as well as life, is all about compromises. You is best to recognize that your choice is ALWAYS going to be the lesser or least of a number of evils, and that you are never going to be the only one with a say.
Unless you have the money and resources to move to your own island and live the utopian life your so desperately crave, you need to grow the fuck up and deal.
Seriously.
Seebach
@Joe Beese: WTF is this “the Republicans may be worse” bullshit.
I’m sure if Obama comes out for socialism, the American people will stop being right wing, ignorant assholes and vote for it, am I right?
A L
@Dennis SGMM: Hmmm, and yet here you are saying that it’s okay to kill innocent people if you eventually kill The Monster.
So the untested guy pretty clearly understands that killing innocent people is wrong under any circumstances, and killing a shitload of innocent people to achieve one objective is completely unacceptable. So what’s your excuse for disagreeing?
taylormattd
@Bob Loblaw: scroll up.
Comrade Luke
This is hilarious.
Loneoak
@Dennis SGMM:
Hey did you know that you have the blood of innocents on your hand for supporting Obama, but Osama bin Laden is merely the product of circumstances?
Hoocoodanode, indeed.
Bob Loblaw
@taylormattd:
I just thought it was funny that you would rely on Marcy Wheeler in a post saying how much you hated firebaggers. No biggie.
Dennis SGMM
If you actually read my posts instead of making things up you will note that none of them states that it’s okay to kill innocent people. You, however, would seem to prefer that any number of innocents all over the world be killed rather than killing one individual. Interesting little belief system you there – just don’t take it out of the garage lest it get all dented and fucked up.
geg6
@A L:
Well, technically I’m a Generation Jones. Too young and the wrong sex to serve in Vietnam, though I have a brother and two cousins who did. So when and where did you serve?
cat48
John Brennan just said at the WH Briefing that the Order was CAPTURE OR KILL. I’ve noticed in the blogosphere that’s ALWAYS read as Assassinate, when it is not. It’s either/or.
taylormattd
@Bob Loblaw: No, what’s funny is that the balloon juice firebagger trolls don’t even read their own site.
Dennis SGMM
@Loneoak:
Yeah, I cry myself to sleep every night over that. Bin Laden launched the 9/11 attacks with the direct intention of provoking the US to invade so that he could be the new Saladin, leading his heroic troops against the Crusaders. But hey, a few months of making belts and wallets in the prison hobby shop would have probably turned him into the Islamic Mother Theresa, right?
Joe Beese
@Tonybrown74:
Yes, BJ-ers frequently inform me of how beneath a response my comments are as they respond to them. They’re amusing that way.
I concede that it’s churlish of me to harp upon the thousands of civilians Obama has killed on a day when he has such a magnificent political triumph to celebrate. I know it’s the last thing you want to be reminded of.
Joe Beese
@Seebach:
I often find them difficult to distinguish from Democrats.
A L
@Dennis SGMM: Fun fact: OBL wasn’t even considered a significant player in al Qaeda when he was deep-sixed. If this happened about seven or eight years ago, you might have a point. At this time though all we did was kill an old guy in retribution.
Which would have been fine. But to act as if the U.S. pulled this off in one crack shot, and that it is not coming after a pair of failed invasions and thousands dead by our hands, is absolutely pathetic.
A L
@Joe Beese: Concern for human life, particularly those of the innocent, is indeed something fit only for children.
Tonybrown74
@Joe Beese:
Yep!
Boring and childish.
Completely ignore any of the good things the President does and continuously harp on the bad. Don’t propose anything new to resolve any of the issues, noting the current political environment you live in, but continue to bitch and moan about anything, ANYTHING that is a positive. Ignore all evidence that life, and people, are complicated and don’t exist in your fantasy worlds of good and evil.
How it must hurt when any of your heroes disappoint you.
Those of us in the real world don’t get the luxury of waiting for Superman to fly in and save the day. We look at the good, and the bad, determine what we can live with and make a decision, hoping that it gets just a bit better.
Bobby Thomson
@Ash Can:
Actually, it’s more like saying the starting pitcher deserves the win after leaving the mound three runs down with the bases loaded.
Emma
The stink of moral superiority is heavy around here today. “I have my conscientious objector file ready to go.” Is that like the Vietnam deferments or like the British guys in WWI who would serve as unarmed ambulance crews in the battlefields?
A L
@Tonybrown74: I’m sorry, do you think the killing of thousands of innocent people abroad (just citing one rotten thing he’s responsible for) is outweighed by the Lily Ledbetter act?
I suppose trashing Mao for the Great Leap Forward is bullshit too because, c’mon, all the good things he did.
Amir_Khalid
@geg6:
Ahem. Mike Kay (Team America), for one. Those who fantasized about desecrating Osama’s body with pig parts, or dumping it into the sea with the US Navy ship’s trash, for another.
The latter group were particularly mystifying to me. Even in the catharsis of the moment, learning of Osama’s death, Americans should remember: desecrating his body is unworthy of America. Just as bad, it hands Al Qa’idah the opportunity to characterize the American reaction as an expression of hatred towards Islam and Muslims.
Sasha
@geg6:
He was also quite gracious to Obama after the president’s remarks in the wake of the Tuscon shooting.
agrippa
I often find them difficult to distinguish from Democrats.
Beese:
Your ability to discriminate intelligently runs the gamut from “A” to “B”
agrippa
@Joe Beese:
Yes, BJ-ers frequently inform me of how beneath a response my comments are as they respond to them. They’re amusing that way.
Beese, you are boring and childish.
You have trolled yourself again.
New Yorker
I expected to read about the howls of rage from the wingnut right that the Kenyan anti-colonialst succeeded where Bush failed, but instead, I got to see all the weeping and pearl-clutching over the death of a mass-murdering religious fanatic from the idiotic left.
But I guess that’s just the Obamabot in me. I can’t wait to see Ralph Nader run for President because Obama didn’t have the SEALs read bin Laden his Miranda rights….and idiots like Joe Beese supporting ol’ Ralph.
Tonybrown74
@A L:
Childish.
Do I ignore it? Hardly.
But did the people under the regime have a choice? What I see here is moral superiority at its ugliest.
It’s easy to hold your nose when you aren’t the one wallowing in the shit.
srv
I for one am starting to doubt the official storyline – the wurlitzer on how this was only possible because we waterboarded KSM has started already.
Funny how national technical means is so sacred, but now we’re being fed lots of juicy details, like torture works!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110502/ap_on_re_us/us_bin_laden_hunt_for_bin_laden
General Stuck
@A L:
One persons retribution is another mans justice. And I sure hope you are a ratfucking republican typing out this nonsense. While it is true that AQ has branched out, and is much more diffuse and franchised. ALL of the experts say that OBL is much more than just some old guy nonplayer. He was a living icon of inspiration that cannot be replaced for his followers.
And it is far from certain he wasn’t involved in helping to facilitate attacks, if for no other reason to bless them, or whatever. His death is potentially a game changer in many ways, from our activities to those of AQ at large.
I think his untimely demise is nothing but good news for world peace in the long run. Shot in the head and dumped at sea, by Americans, no less. Not exactly the stuff of martyrs. With any luck, him and Cheney will bunk together in Hell, when it’s time.
:you won’t see him around no more:
Joe Beese
@Emma:
I understand your irritation. To the apologist, it must seem that we have it so unfairly easy.
We get to say nice sounding things about condemning war and torture. We never have to point out that things are “complicated” and insist on the need for “hard choices”.
And worst of all, we never have to worry about what any of it means to the crucially important matter of Barack Obama’s re-election.
Judas Escargot
@A L:
It’s not your “concern for the innocent” that’s the issue here. It’s the (rather convenient) timing of your concern.
I remember who was sincerely and honestly against intervention in Libya a few weeks back. People I did (and still do) respectfully disagree with. You weren’t one of them.
If you’d been here bleating for peace-at-any-cost every day for the past month, your big-heartedness might get you a little more credibility.
(BTW folks, sorry I missed the OBL party– between the cold-from-hell, wedding planning and jury duty running on three weeks now, I’m hardly getting to visit anymore. Figures this happens when the thread-count here’s been so high, and so much of note happening).
Stefan
Look guys, Franklin Delano Roosevelt assassinated Admiral Yamamoto and SS Chief Reinhard Heydrich. Do you want to toss your dimes away?
A. You can’t “assasinate” a uniformed enemy commander in wartime. Yamamoto was on a hostile enemy aircraft and was shot down by a US Navy war plane. Under the rules of engagement, had the Navy Mustangs come across Yamamoto’s plane without knowing who was inside they would still have been perfectly justified in engaging and shooting it down. C’est la guerre.
B. Heydrich was killed by a Czech hit squad trained and equipped by the British Special Operations Executive. The US had nothing to do with it.
soonergrunt
@Mike Kay (Team America): @Loneoak:
Yep to both.
stuckinred
@Stefan: All the whining in the world won’t bring his murderin ass back. Fuck him.
Chuck Butcher
Who exactly thought that OBL would let himself be taken without resistance – and I don’t mean a wrestling match? I have no knowledge of the directives issued and guess work is a big leap. OBL was killed and there was firing going on. The result of shooting is that people shoot and even touching a gun when you’re a known combatant means shooting.
I don’t think there was any way, outside of something extraordinary, that OBL would be taken alive. These soldiers aren’t city cop shooters – they just plain kill efficiently, it what they’re supposed to do and a lot of money and time is spent ensuring they do. Even city cops tend to kill people in such situations.
As for collateral damage (killing innocents, breaking unintended things) in combat; it is the outcome of engaging in combat. Trying to minimize it is one thing, but believing it won’t happen is stupid – it will, every time warfare gets going. Either warfare is off the table entirely or you accept that collateral damage is an outcome. Playing at holier than thou if you in any way support warfare is …
ah hell
New Yorker
@Joe Beese:
Yup, you live in a fantasy world, but then you get all whiny when sane people don’t pay you any attention.
@A L:
Yup. So I’m sure you were howling with righteous indignation over the 2nd Congo War and the 5 million who died in that (mostly civilians).
stuckinred
@A L: You know what asshole? I’m getting really tired of reading your fucking bullhsit. Just fuck off.
lou
geez, where did these lefty trolls come from? you’re making the right wing trolls look reasonable and that’s a pretty low bar.
certainty of the purity of your cause does not win others.
Sentient Puddle
Ah, I was wondering if the firebaggers would be out in force acting effectively as bin Laden apologists. I’m feeling incredibly amused and profoundly depressed at the same time.
horse dave
The chamber of commerce must be paying overtime for all these trolls today. I enjoy John’s site, his comments and the other FP’ers but this blog needs to be blog-dipped. The thugs and firebaggers just can’t handle O’s competence.
Canadian Observer
The bloodthirsty celebrations of the American Imperialists is disgusting.
Canadian Observer
Bin Laden may be dead, but the spirit he represented–resistance to the Empire–will live on, and a million bin Ladens you have created will rise in his place!
He will be recognized someday as the greatest national hero of the Arab world.
dmsilev
Fun fact: The first debate in the GOP Clown Show 2012 is in just a few days. May 5th. One imagines that even the fluffers at Fox (who is hosting the thing) will ask about it.
Should be amusing.
stuckinred
@Canadian Observer: USA USA USA USA
stuckinred
@Canadian Observer: National leader of the Arab world. Are you really that stupid?
Chuck Butcher
@Canadian Observer:
And Canadian forces were in Afghanistan because? The Maple Leaf Empire…
edit
I’m also sure Muslims are enthralled by OBL’s murder of Muslims
Joe Beese
@stuckinred:
Yes, Team Obama gave us to understand some time ago that this was their operating philosophy.
I trust then that you won’t come whining to us for support in 2012?
Canadian Observer
@stuckinred
As a billionaire he could have had a comfortable life, but instead chose to take on the American Empire. His bravery for doing this necessary task is unmatched.
The Empire is the most bloodthirsty, genocidal organization on the face of the planet and anyone who strikes a blow against it should be cheered. The 11 September attacks were a direct result of your Imperialist foreign policy and the crimes you have committed against the world that pale in comparison to 11 September.
FlipYrWhig
@lou:
Oh, they’re around. It’s the same 3% of the electorate that likes to call itself “the base” for the specific purposes of complaining that Obama is “losing the base.”
trollhattan
@Stefan:
“Navy Mustangs”?!? Double fail. Army P-38 Lightnings. The Navy/Marines had Corsairs and Hellcats, which didn’t have sufficient range for the mission.
/pedant
FlipYrWhig
@Canadian Observer: Hey, another example of the phenomenon I noted this morning!
Poopyman
@Canadian Observer:
Unclear on the meaning of “national”, are we?
Poopyman
@Canadian Observer: This blog used to have half-decent trolls, who knew how to get a rise out of regulars. Man, you’re not even trying.
Canadian Observer
Question:
Why didn’t George W. Bush accept the deal the Taliban gave him in 2001–that they would send bin Laden to be tried by a fair party if Bush could produce proof he was behind 9/11?
soonergrunt
@Stefan:
Very small nit–Yamamoto’s group was attacked by the 3347th Fighter Group, US Army Air Corps. Other than that, right on.
stuckinred
@Joe Beese: Tell me all about Mr Base.
trollhattan
@Canadian Observer:
Greater than Ronald al-McDonald and Walt al-Disney? I think not!
Joe Beese
@FlipYrWhig:
Which is the same 3% that gets blamed for Democratic losses because they wrote mean things about Obama on their blogs.
See: Mr. Cole’s ranting about Jane Hamsher before Andrew Sullivan replaced her as the Goldstein Du Jour.
Emma
Joe: Joe, when I was twelve I was made to stand up in a classroom and my fellow students and my teachers screamed at me for an hour for being a “gusano” because my family was leaving Cuba. Let me tell you something, my dear man, you have the same effect now as they did then.
Screw you.
Adults see the world is shades of gray. We have to. You children keep on playing “it’s not faaaaaaiiiiir! Look at me, I’m so moral, so superior, so perfect!” The thing is, Joe, what sacrifices have you made to make your world come true? Other than gripe in blog comments?
And until your superiority fairy grants you your wish to change the American electoral system to something else altogether, yes, it’s important to re-elect Obama. Because, sweet pea, the other side will REALLY disabuse you of your superiority.
stuckinred
@Joe Beese: FDL is just where you belong.
The Sheriff's A Ni-
@Joe Beese: Obama will win in 2012 without you, Joe. And where will that leave you?
Tonybrown74
@stuckinred:
He’s a child.
He’s screaming for the cookie and the ice cream and the cupcake and the soda and the M & Ms and the cotton candy.
He gets the cookie and the ice cream, but is mad that he was forced to have broccoli. Now he goes and calls child services.
I wish him luck with the new foster parents …
stuckinred
@The Sheriff’s A Ni-: With his head dead up his ass where it always is.
Joe Beese
@The Sheriff’s A Ni-:
If more people have jobs then, yes, he will win.
If they don’t, he won’t.
But I’ll be in the same place either way. As will you.
The only difference will be that I won’t have spent my time cheerleading for the guy screwing us over.
patroclus
I agree with those who are pointing out the Admiral Yamamoto example as perhaps the best analogy to taking out OBL. He was the architect of the Pearl Harbor bombing and was very important in the Japanese navy thereafter. He was not a monster but an avowed (despite private doubts) enemy of the U.S., responsible for the deaths of thousands.
It’s a tough call and I can sympathize with those who disagree, but I believe that a state of war justifies these types of targeted killings. But as someone up thread pointed out, the Heydrich killing by Czech patriots trained by the Brits resulted in widespread Nazi killings of innocents. The blowback might be bad here too. We’ll see.
Tonybrown74
Shorter Joe Beese and A L:
“I wanna live in the Star Trek: TNG Universe with it’s Prime Directive and Risa and Vulcan Logic. Why Can’t I haz it?? Obama needs to make it happen NAAAOOOOW!”
Omnes Omnibus
Wow, the troll population must have gotten some rest over the weekend. They sure are energetic today; dumb as ever, but energetic.
bk
@Ash Can: Hank Aaron hit #715 off of Downing, not #714.
TheYankeeApologist
Come on, Beese. Deft quips and witty one-liners aside, what would YOU do if you were President, and had the information about Bin Laden’s whereabouts?
Put your ideological money where your mouth is. I’m dying to know. Are you intellectually more than the molotov-tossing troll everyone’s telling you that you are?
Absolutely zero snark here, for once. I really desperately want to know what you WOULD HAVE DONE.
The Sheriff's A Ni-
@patroclus:
Like the blowback after we chased Al Qaeda out of Afghanistan? They’re not dead, no, but they’re far from the threat they were a decade ago. Yesterday we crossed the Rhine.
SFAW
I’m torn between “Yeah, 714 was off of Tracy Stallard” and “Those are all cricketers, Bruce!”
FormerSwingVoter
Did FDL link to this place? Its a Trollstravaganza!
TheYankeeApologist
@The Sheriff’s A Ni-:
I half-agree, Sheriff. The threat from al-Qaeda is seriously reduced, and I can’t believe they have the resources to do something on a 9/11 level again, now that the element of surprise is gone. That said, pushing into Germany effectively destroyed a conventional war machine, mostly made up of citizen soldiers that had really lost faith in the ideology of their fallen leader. Their taste for war wasn’t religious in nature.
Extremism is by nature fueled by extreme acts. They will sure as shit try something in reprisal. I just have to wonder if they have the wherewithal to do something that will get by vigilant law-enforcement and military.
The Sheriff's A Ni-
@TheYankeeApologist: Yeah, that was a bad analogy. But I seriously think Zawahiri and his fellow planners are going to be too busy shitting their pants, rotating the ciphers, packing their bags, and looking for new caves to be much of any threat in the near-term. The CIA and the Navy SEALS just gave them an abrupt lesson in hubris and complacency.
Gus
Your liberal media. I just heard Candi Crowley say about Obama “criticized as naive and weak in foreign policy, blah blah.”
Omnes Omnibus
@TheYankeeApologist: I think terrorism is a fact of life that we will have to live with now. It does not, however, mean that we need to fundamental reorganize society. Good law enforcement, good intelligence work, judicious applications of military force, and a little common sense for ordinary Americans would go a long way towards dealing with the problem.
Joe Beese
@TheYankeeApologist:
Upon learning that Pakistan was harboring bin Laden, I would have told them “No more military aid until you cough him up.” Maybe I’d even give the money to Indian agriculture relief projects to rub their noses in it.
To paraphrase Johnson, there’s nothing like the prospect of losing billions in graft to focus a man’s mind.
Not as sexy as SEAL Team Six spraying the room with automatic fire from their Heckler & Kochs. But it might be worth a try.
The Sheriff's A Ni-
@Joe Beese:
At which point the Pakistanis go ‘Osama Bin Who?’ and show a recently vacated compound as proof he was never there. But hey, no mass murderers were harmed as a result of your sternly-worded letter, so at least you have that going for you.
Canadian Observer
What SHOULD have been done was take the deal offered by the Taliban in 2001 that they would turn bin Laden over to a third party where he would be tried as soon as the Bush/Cheney Junta provided proof he was behind 9/11.
But, no, the yankee bloodlust demanded dead brown people.
Omnes Omnibus
@Joe Beese: And what if you knew that such a prospect could fracture the the government of Pakistan and cause it collapse into civil war and anarchy? Would you risk having the Pakistani nukes floating around? What about the reaction of India to the prospect of civil war on their border and the possibility of one of the more extreme groups having access to nukes?
TheYankeeApologist
@Omnes Omnibus:
Oh, Omnibus . . . you are so shockingly naive. Why would you do something so reasonable when you can can use your daddy voice and tell the bad Mooslims that you’re cutting off their aid money and giving it to their global rivals, thus quite possibly piling on to a tense, nuclear-armed situation? Starting an Indian/Pakistani proxy war is the civilized, principled way to handle not killing a war criminal. Bullets cost MONEY, you know.
Omnes Omnibus
@Canadian Observer: Great observation about what could have been done by a previous administration 10 years ago.
TheYankeeApologist
@Canadian Observer:
This is very true, also too. They clearly, by virtue of their long track record of morality and plain-dealing, would have honored such an agreement to the letter and handed over their spiritual leader to the fucking Hague.
Jesus lapdancing Christ.
Canadian Observer
I’ll also point out the Northern Alliance is as bad, if not worse, than the Taliban.
Omnes Omnibus
@TheYankeeApologist: I know. Living in England during a period of IRA bombings taught me so little. Life in Germany where the Baader-Meinhoff folks never did anything also taught me very little. I am a very naive and foolish boy.
Canadian Observer
If they aren’t willing to do it, why did they offer such an easy deal?
But I guess they wouldn’t honor it because they’re EEEVVVIIIIIIIILLLLL MUUUUSLIMS right?
Tools.
TheYankeeApologist
@Omnes Omnibus: It’s okay. How could you know any better, living in those Soshulist foreign lands? We’ll have you killing brown babies and praising Jesus in no time.
TheYankeeApologist
@Canadian Observer:
I’d love to see you say that to the scarred-up face of some woman who caught a jar full of acid courtesy of those stand-up Taliban types.
Omnes Omnibus
@TheYankeeApologist: To be fair, I was in Germany as a trained killer of brown babies and other innocent things. En masse, even, since I was an artillery officer.
The Sheriff's A Ni-
@Canadian Observer:
Something about Lucy, Charlie Brown, and footballs.
But of course you knew that.
Midnight Marauder
@Omnes Omnibus:
That was easily the dumbest comment I’ve read on this subject all day, which means we are talking about some pretty elite competition.
Canadian Observer
@YankeeApologist
Tell me more about all those Kuwaiti babies killed in incubators.
Canadian Observer
@YankeeApologist
Tell me more about all those Kuwaiti babies killed in incubators.
Omnes Omnibus
@Midnight Marauder: I am presuming you mean CO’s comment, not mine.
Joe Beese
@Omnes Omnibus:
India is going to be upset by my suspension of military aid to Pakistan? Really? Wow, this is a tough job.
Still, the Pakistanis have a lot fewer nukes than the Soviets did. And their extremists do not have popular support. More importantly, I could only strengthen those extremists by continuing to impose my imperial will on the region.
If Asia burns down on my watch and I lose re-election, I’ll just get a smaller advance on my memoirs and lower fees on the lecture circuit. I’ll manage.
On the other hand, if you’re convinced that only by our keeping an iron hand can the Homeland be kept safe, don’t be a wimp about it. Launch a war on a 6th Muslim country and annex it outright. See how that works out for you.
harlana
It’s going to be “it really wasn’t Bin Laden” all day every day from them, it has, of course, already started
Omnes Omnibus
@Joe Beese: Please read the words that you quoted.
The Sheriff's A Ni-
I bet Joe still keeps an old America First card around in a drawer somewhere.
Mandramas
By the way, burial by sea is not a muslim custom; burial in the ground is preferred. Instead, this case is interesting:
Mandramas
@>TheYankeeApologist: Could you handed over GW Bush to be judged at the Hague?
Cain
@Mike Kay (Team America):
They’d wonder how long he was sitting on that cure for cancer and why he didn’t release it earlier. It would be irresponsible not to speculate. Next, we’ll need a long form death certificate for cancer.
Joe Beese
@Mandramas:
What? An American president prosecuted under the same laws applied to the heads of state of lesser countries?
Now you’re just being silly.
Just Some Fuckhead
Stop picking at the Obots, Joe.
Midnight Marauder
@Omnes Omnibus:
Indeed.
Cain
@Omnes Omnibus:
Do you want to be spanked?
Bob Loblaw
@The Sheriff’s A Ni-:
So I guess that meme will never die, huh?
Geeno
@jon:
Don’t forget Poland!
TheYankeeApologist
So I guess the morally sound option that Obama should have purused would be to unilaterally pull all those troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq, and leave a broken vacuum to be filled by . . . oh, you know, whoever. The Taliban? So what? al-Qaeda? Sounds great!
I don’t remember Obama starting those wars. I also haven’t seen the 101st Airborne dropping into Libya to slap Qaddafi in chains. Guess that makes me a DFH O-bot.
By the way, I personally would have loved to see Bush defend his actions at the Hague, with Cheney and Rumsfield standing right next to him. I personally can’t make that happen, so I voted for Obama.
I do what I can, and don’t wish for magic ponies.
TheYankeeApologist
@Omnes Omnibus:
By the rules of Balloon-Juice trollery, that makes you entirely unsuitable to ruminate on all things military, sir.
grandpajohn
@Omnes Omnibus: In other words , this governing stuff is hard work and not all policy stuff is black and white, and sometimes they don’t listen to me when I tell them its time to just cut out the shit and do what they are told to do
xian
it’s interesting, the relentless persistent Obama-detractors, many of whom construct quasi-extreme, almost academic left positions. i’m sure they’re all real people.
stuckinred
@xian: Almost, hell they come from nowhere else but.
Mandramas
@TheYankeeApologist: That the reason because a empire don’t invade a territory that can’t annex. It is just bad tactics.
Suffern ACE
@Bob Loblaw: Nope. But he won’t have TV’s or internet, so same difference.
No one of Importance
@Tsulagi:
Yes. The US offered to ‘repatriate’ the body and the Saudis said ‘thanks, no thanks’.
No one of Importance
@AkaDad:
I’m shocked and amazed to hear this.
opie_jeanne
@JCT: But someone here heard him on the radio, I thought. Said he nearly drove off the road he was so surprised.
I haven’t listened to the tape because I like my head unexploded.
No one of Importance
@Cain:
No, they’d be screaming about him not curing HIV, malaria, TB and scrofula, also too.
Bex
@Villago Delenda Est: “Obama will ALWAYS be near.” A laurel…and hardy handshake to you for that one.
Corner Stone
@Villago Delenda Est:
People here keep saying this, but I’m in TX. How the hell’s he going to be near TX when he’s in DC?
I never realized so many commenters here lived in DC/MD/VA.
soonergrunt
@TheYankeeApologist:
That’s because you’re not pure enough.
Omnes Omnibus
@Cain: Are you an attractive woman? If not, then I would prefer to skip any spankings
@TheYankeeApologist: Yeah, ain’t that a bitch. I am not allowed to talk about the law either, but that’s another story.
@grandpajohn: Nuance is lost on some.
TheYankeeApologist
@soonergrunt:
That’s the nicest thing anyone’s ever said to me, SG.
And I’ve tried to reply to Mandramas pointing out the obvious flaws in Bush’s annexation policy like four times. FYWP.
Mandramas
@TheYankeeApologist: Just drop the link, and it works. Mostly.
TheYankeeApologist
@Omnes Omnibus:
I understand completely. I’m not allowed to date strippers anymore.
Then again, that’s more of a life lesson than adherence to blog etiquette. Moving right along . . .
TheYankeeApologist
@Mandramas:
Right on. I admire your decision to aid and abet my right to disagree. Heh.
What I was trying to say was that I agree completely that it’s bad tactics, and I think that illustrates the difference between Obama and Bush as Commander-in-Chief.
I hated the decision to turn Afghanistan from a specialized SOG mission to destroy Bin Laden and allied al-Qaeda forces into a full blown “boots on the ground” clusterfuck. I recommend the book “Horse Soldiers” if you’re interested in how we were actually going about the Afghan conflict the right way until, suddenly, we weren’t.
I went insane when we invaded Iraq for literally no good reason. As I said previously, that’s why I voted for someone who seemed less likely to engage in such ridiculous Rapture-fantasy behavior.
As a matter of course, I’m not completely against the Libya mission, though missles usually mean collateral damage. They always have, and always will, but you see these people on TV begging us to help. That’s a huge difference from George and Dickie’s Excellent Adventures in the Middle East.
Omnes Omnibus
@TheYankeeApologist: Just checking… Are you me? You pretty much summed up my positions over time on the various wars of the past decade. The one exception is that I came down as reluctantly for the Libya mission rather than not completely against it.
TheYankeeApologist
@Omnes Omnibus: :
Not at all – it’s just that reality has that crazy liberal bias.
WereBear
I remember when the Left was united; because everyone agreed George W Bush was an awful President.
Whaddaya know! He WAS a uniter!
But now, this is just endless dorm room nitpicking “if you could only save your dog or your term paper” speculation whose only purpose is to make some jerk feel morally superior because they wouldn’t try to capture a self-admitted mass murderer because then they might be responsible for someone getting hurt. And letting the mass murderer kill a lot more people?
Not, apparently, their problem.
SFAW
That shouldn’t be a problem … as long as you don’t have to date them any less.
Omnes Omnibus
@WereBear: The Kobayashi Maru test.
OzoneR
@Joe Beese:
Oh yeah that’s gonna scare them right into giving him up.
OzoneR
@Joe Beese:
No, India’s going to be upset over the Pakistani government’s collapse into an Islamic State as a result of your cutting military aid to Pakistan.
Keep Up.
TheYankeeApologist
@SFAW:
You’re a “bad influence” kind of person, aren’t you? We’d get along smashingly, and likely end up in jail.
Omnes Omnibus
@TheYankeeApologist: If you guys end up in jail, call eemom, not me.
Svensker
@Canadian Observer:
Oh, jeez. Coming from someone who’s about to reelect Harper, that’s a bit much.
Mnemosyne
@A L:
Being a pacifist and being against the Iraq War are not the same thing. At all. As the president said while he was campaigning, I’m against stupid wars, not all wars across the board.
You thought that the people around you were pacifists because they were against the Iraq War. But they never were. They were against Iraq because it was stupid and mishandled, not because it was a war.
Perhaps you should stop assuming that people who agree with you on a few things believe exactly the same things that you do. It will save you a lot of unnecessary drama in your life.
TheYankeeApologist
@Omnes Omnibus:
That’s a fantastic idea. Her handle even implies that she’d be disappointed in our behavior, but would have to bail us out for familial continuity and societal acceptance. It’s a win-win, obviously.
Mandramas
@TheYankeeApologist: Thanks for your bibliographical suggestion, I’ll look for this book.
SFAW
Drop the word “influence”, and that’ll be a better description. Jail? As long as they have free beer and chips, that might be OK.
Yeah, sure. That’s one o’ them “Y’all cain dew anything yew want, jes’ don’ trow me in de briar patch!” kind of statements, is how I read it.
Of course, I’m more than happy to have eemom join us for the free beer and chips. We’ll be kinda like the Fearsome Foursome, only small, old and (speaking for myself) weak.
Well, that feeds into Omnes’s’s’s’ need to get spanked, so it’s all good.
SFAW
Your assuming that A L doesn’t want unnecessary drama in his/her life.
joel hanes
@Omnes Omnibus:
What years?
What kind of guns?
And more important, did Grafenwoehr Hell still come in bottles with ceramic “flippy” seals held on with wire cages when you were there ?
From 73 to 75 I was an enlisted puke in HHB 1 Bn 94th FA, an eight-inch howitzer unit in Furth, just outside Nurnberg
(draftee, gave ’em an extra year to avoid ‘Nam, needlessly as it turned out)
AxelFoley
@A L:
Ok, now I know for sure you’re a Greenwald plant.
Go suck it, troll.
AxelFoley
@Canadian Observer:
Observe deez nuts, asshole.
Omnes Omnibus
@joel hanes: 89-92. Eight inch howitzers out of Bamberg… Not too far north of where you were.