Bin Laden is dead!

[Evan Thomas]

Originally Posted by Mike Irwin

Vanya, the concept of the rules of war have changes dramatically over the past 150 years. They haven't changed fluidly, they've changed situationally, and often more in the face of progressing technology than anything else.

I think we're more in agreement than not. My point is very much that these things are driven by technology.

I seem to recall, for example, that during the Revolutionary War, the British found it absolutely heinous and cowardly that the "revolting" colonists fired at them from cover, rather than coming out "onto the battlefield" in the usual ranks-of-three infantry formation, and standing up to be shot at.

Their indignation might've had something to do with the fact that many of the colonists had Kentucky rifles, and the British infantry was stuck with Brown Bess.

And as to strategic bombing, it's fascinating that it went on being used right through the Vietnam war and beyond, in the face of mounting evidence that it didn't work...

[Glenn E. Meyer]

That's a classic analysis of the effect on Great Britain and the Germans. However, the invasion of Japan didn't occur, now did it?

It is argued that the Russians entering the war had an equal influence on the Japanese but that's another debate. But that invasion was rushed because of the bomb.

The strategic bombing of North Viet Nam probably allowed us to make a deal with them to get to the peace table so we could leave in relative peace and haste.

Now that isn't strategic bombing for a win but it did work to achieve an objective but in a twisted fashion.

[GM1967]

Kudos to Seal Team 6 for a job well done

Kudos to the CIA and other members of the intelligence community, for the information and analysis that made this possible. Those people have been dumped on a lot since 9/11, when they are generally hard-working people in a difficult job

And kudos to President Obama, who I usually disagree with, for doing the right thing in a difficult situation.

As for celebrating, we should. This is a good thing. A monster who declared war on our way of life, and is responsible for the murder of countless innocents, is dead.

Yes, he will be a martyr. Better a dead martyr than a live inspiration, and symbol of the invincible rightness of their cause. This should hurt, not help, al-Qaeda's recruitment efforts. And as for him dying in a blaze of glory -- not very glorious if he couldn't even wound a single American. Dying as an incompetent holy warrior isn't very inspiring.

Much better that he died this way than be tried and imprisoned for life. First, a trial implies the risk that he might be found not guilty. Particularly since Obama has wanted terrorists tried as ordinary criminals. Can you imagine OJ's defense team defending Bin Ladin? What a circus.

And, if he were found guilty and imprisoned, everyone guarding him would constantly be at risk. With everything else al-Qaeda has done, does anyone think they wouldn't make some attempts to free him? Attempts that would probably end in loss of life, possibly for innocents and members of our military and law enforcement.

@lawnboy - Thank you for post #137. I thought it was very well written, well thought out, and well stated. Some of it was things I knew, some things I had thought about, and some ideas that I hadn't even considered.

[HKGuns]

Good job to Glenn and Mike in holding this thread together. Mike, your posts are spot on....Keep it up.

Edited to add: Yes, as much as I may disagree with his politics, Obama gets credit for having the stones very few of us thought he had. Good job by every American involved in this effort.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Mike Irwin

The final decision was that, as an enemy combatant, Yamamoto was a legitimate target.

I can't see how anything would have changed since 1943.

Except that Japan is a country, and as an admiral, Yamamoto was a representative and agent of that county's military -- and the U.S. was in a state of war against that country.

Which country is that that the U.S. has declared war against that had Osama bin Laden as a member of its military?

"Enemy combatant" is a term that the United States dreamed up to confuse issues and "allow" us to do things we aren't allowed to do under international law. If you're not IN the military service of a sovereign nation -- you're a civilian. If you're a civilian and you engage in armed or terrorist attacks on the U.S., you're not an "enemy combatant," you're a "terrorist" and a "criminal."

The law hasn't changed, but the circumstances are different.

[Mike Irwin]

"That's a classic analysis of the effect on Great Britain and the Germans. However, the invasion of Japan didn't occur, now did it?"

Nuclear weapons have a completely different place in this discussion.

Up to the deployment of nuclear weapons in Japan, the strategic bombing campaign had been a failure at getting the Japanese to surrender.

Strategic bombing of the type employed by German in the early days of the Battle of Britain was actually winning them control of the air due to the emphasis on hitting British air fields and radar stations.

It's when Hitler switched the emphasis to bombing cities that the British were given the respite they needed to regroup and maintain tactical control of the air, making a German invasion impossible.

US and British strategic bombing in Europe was largely a failure. German military production rose steadily throughout the war years. Decentralized production largely negated the effects of strategic bombing.

What really crippled the German economy and war machine was the capture of the oil fields that Germany needed to prosecute a modern war.

In Japan, the truly effective weapon used by the United States wasn't the strategic air war, it was the strategic submarine war.

US submarines interdicted and sank Japanese merchant shipping at a rate and to an effect the Germans never could have dreamed of.

[Mike Irwin]

"Which country is that that the U.S. has declared war against that had Osama bin Laden as a member of its military?"

As with the concept of military rules and law, the concept of what constitutes a "war" has changed dramatically and are, well, old.

Virtually every nation you can name has had "wars" with a small w as opposed to Wars with a big W. (declared).

Somehow the concept that "well, we can't fight a "war" because no one has declared a "war," and we certainly can't go after X, Y, or Z because they're people/organizations and not nations" is quaint, but patently unrealistic.

Hell, the United States has been prosecuting wars since virtually the founding of the Republic.

Ever hear of the Barbary wars?

[Evan Thomas]

Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer

The strategic bombing of North Viet Nam probably allowed us to make a deal with them to get to the peace table so we could leave in relative peace and haste.

Now that isn't strategic bombing for a win but it did work to achieve an objective but in a twisted fashion.

Nah. It was more the failure of the Tet offensive that brought the North Vietnamese to negotiate. See Mark Clodfelter's book, The limits of air power: the American bombing of North Vietnam (New York, N.Y.: The Free Press, 1989), for a persuasive discussion of this.

And I'm not gonna argue Hiroshima/Nagasaki here... that's an entirely different conversation. (And Mike Irwin is correct... other factors were already ensuring the defeat of the Japanese.)

Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca

"Enemy combatant" is a term that the United States dreamed up to confuse issues and "allow" us to do things we aren't allowed to do under international law. If you're not IN the military service of a sovereign nation -- you're a civilian. If you're a civilian and you engage in armed or terrorist attacks on the U.S., you're not an "enemy combatant," you're a "terrorist" and a "criminal."

The law hasn't changed, but the circumstances are different.

Well said.

In the good old days, we used to try criminals... according to the law of the land, which includes both the Constitution and international law. The circumstances are different, but things haven't changed for the better. Nor will they, after this.

[Evan Thomas]

Originally Posted by Mike Irwin

Virtually every nation you can name has had "wars" with a small w as opposed to Wars with a big W. (declared).

Somehow the concept that "well, we can't fight a "war" because no one has declared a "war," and we certainly can't go after X, Y, or Z because they're people/organizations and not nations" is quaint, but patently unrealistic.

Hell, the United States has been prosecuting wars since virtually the founding of the Republic.

It's a sad commentary, of some sort, that those small-w "wars" tend to be fought against much weaker opponents, whether nations or not, whose populations are often much browner of hue than Europeans and European-Americans...

And that may have a bit to do with why so many of "those people" dislike the U.S. so much... and turn to the terrorism thing in the first place.

Ever hear of the Barbary wars?

Wasn't one of those made into a swell movie, with Candice Bergen?

[bamiller]

Naturally our president and the rest of the poiticians are taking credit. Realistically great job CIA, military commanders and especially the SEALS as the ones who actually put their lives on the line!

[NWPilgrim]

Since when does a FOREIGN TERRORIST deserve protection under US criminal law? Maybe in the eyes of liberal progressives, but common sense says that is ridiculous. A FOREIGN TERRORIST is someone waging war against our country, thus a combatant. Osama bin Laden was a FOREIGN TERRORIST waging war on the USA.

[egor20]

"It's great -- Osama was expecting his 72 virgins, instead he got 24 Virginians!" (The Navy SEAL team that executed the mission is based in Virginia.)

http://www.tmz.com/2011/05/02/navy-s...in-laden-dead/

A Great Day to be retired USN

[jhgreasemonkey]

"It's great -- Osama was expecting his 72 virgins, instead he got 24 Virginians!" (The Navy SEAL team that executed the mission is based in Virginia.)

[Glenn Dee]

I for one am glad he's gone. Gone by American hands just makes it that much sweeter.

Osama didnt play by the rules... why should we?

At some point the entire world MUSK know. The US may forgive... but we NEVER forget.

Surprised, but happer n crap to see some masculinity come from the current administration. The way I see it... The Intelligence community found the mutt, they and the military were allowed to put a plan together. The adminstration signed off on it... issued a hunting license, and loosed the dogs of war. In fact the finest kind. Under the American flag they went into a foreign country without permission, killed a monster, (and a few friends and wives.. oh well) stole his body, and dumped it in the drink. This was done in complete secrecy, and without fanfare. Being old or infirm didnt make any difference. He got popped. the USA pais it's debts.

Today is a good day... yesterday was better.

Glenn!

His friends have every right to be nervous at this point.

[shortwave]

Maybe obl had a speech impediment and couldn't pray clearly for virgins.

A U.S. Intel. commander stated on CNN that there was alot of computor info./inteligence gathered at the scene. Along with a martyr tape made by obl for when he was killed. Hope we destroy this tape and its never seen.

[Nitesites]

Since when does a FOREIGN TERRORIST deserve protection under US criminal law? Maybe in the eyes of liberal progressives, but common sense says that is ridiculous. A FOREIGN TERRORIST is someone waging war against our country, thus a combatant. Osama bin Laden was a FOREIGN TERRORIST waging war on the USA.

This is basically my sentiment. bin Laden was a figurehead for a aggressive military styled fundamentalist faction. He held no quarter past being placed atop of the the most wanted list. His fate was well deserved.

[Micropterus]

I can imagine two crabs at the bottom of the sea looking at Bin Laden. One says to the other, "Can we eat that?" The other replies, "No, brother, it's unclean." Man, them crabs are a sophisticated bunch.

[HKGuns]

I can imagine two crabs at the bottom of the sea looking at Bin Laden. One says to the other, "Can we eat that?" The other replies, "No, brother, it's unclean." Man, them crabs are a sophisticated bunch.

Now "that" is funny. Good job!

[SPUSCG]

Someone should tell obama "pics or it didn't happen." I think Bin ladens dead but whats with the secrecy?

[jhgreasemonkey]

Someone should tell obama "pics or it didn't happen." I think Bin ladens dead but whats with the secrecy?

I think being discreet about this is smart. Handling his body respectfuly and to Muslim tradition probably includes not posting obscene gunshot dead body photos. I wish people would stop with the conspirecy nonsense and get off Obamas case. You don't have to like the Presidents politics but in this situation only a delusional person would deny that he did things well. We killed Bin Laden! Celebrate! Go USA!

[SPUSCG]

Saddam uday and qusay were as "muslim" as osama, (who pretty much only pererted the religion and twisted it to his ends, i wouldnt exactly call any of them a "muslim.") and we got photo proof.

[jhgreasemonkey]

Saddam uday and qusay were as "muslim" as osama, (who pretty much only pererted the religion and twisted it to his ends, i wouldnt exactly call any of them a "muslim.") and we got photo proof.

I completely agree with you there about them twisting the muslim religion to suit their needs. And they were all extremists not real muslims. But Bin Laden is a much more sensitive situation. Sadam wasn't the head of alkida.

[highvel]

I hope they were kind enough to cleanse the body before committing it to the sea!

The proper way of handling Osama's body would be to thoroughly scrub with plenty of fresh pig's blood, then throw it in a chopper and drop it in the drink from the highest altitude the chopper could fly, followed by the U.S. urinating team paying tribute!

[jhgreasemonkey]

Lol

[lawnboy]

I don't see why we can't give President Obama his share of credit for this successful operation. I'm happy to recognize that whatever rhetoric he had to spout on the campaign trail in order to appease his base, his actions have largely been to continue Bush era policy. Gitmo is still open, the war is still being prosecuted with success.

It is the job of the individual combat soldier to kill the enemy. He is responsible to be receptive to his training and willing to employ what he is taught and the weapons he is provided to achieve the goal of killing the enemy.

It is the responsiblility of the combat commander to provide this training as well as the logistics, supply and direction required to put the individual combat soldiers in contact with the enemy so that those soldiers can achieve the goal of killing the enemy.

It is the responsibility of the political leadership to identify who the enemy is and pay the bills required for combat commanders to put the individual combat soldiers in contact with that enemy so that those soldiers can achieve the goal of killing the enemy.

All phases of this process worked here. Kudos, in appropriate measure, to all involved.

Fight on.

I'll be happy to vote against Barack Obama in 18 months or so. The fact that he did a fine job in his part of this operation won't change that.