So Bin Laden is Dead, what now?

[Kolby Jack]

I'm pretty sure the US told Pakistan long ago "Hey, guys, we respect your rights as a nation and all that diplomatic shit, but seriously, if we know where Osama is, we're going in." And I'm pretty sure Pakistan said "Well, okay then, but we're pretty sure he's not here, though. But yea, whatever, go for it."

I may have paraphrased some of that.

 

[octafish]

The worst possible outcome for the U.S. A live detainee to be put on trial, even if it would have been a show trial, would have been better than a Matyr. Even a live fugitive was better than a dead Matyr.

Let me ask you this, did that rebellious Jewish cult stop and disband when their leader was nailed to the cross by Romans?

Assuming that the man nailed to the cross told all his followers to kill everyone that went against them?

Side note: look up words in the dictionary before you decide to use them to look smart, i.e. "matyr", because it matters.

Damn Firefox spell check is making me lazy, you're right Martyr. I hate using Explorer at work. And no the Jewish guy didn't tell his followers to kill everyone who opposed them, they just decided to do that on their own.

 

[artanis_neravar]

Hm... so does anyone know, why are US armed forces allowed to act on Pakistani territory? I mean, like, legally, how is that classified? (And is Pakistani government OK with this?)

Obviously, a natural answer would be "Fuck Pakistani government, we are stronger so we call the shots", but still, is there an answer to the above question?

They weren't acting in Pakistan. It was a drone strike that killed Osama, the Pakistanis can't control what we do with drones since they don't even have to be in their airspace to hit the targets we want to hit.

We got the body out by way of our connections in the Pakistani government.

That hardly answered my question though. First, legally, even if the drone/the facility that launched it is not in Pakistani territory, nevertheless, it is an attack on Pakistani soil. Kinda like, say, a ballistic missile would be if it hit American soil (similar argument can be made - the launcher is not in US airspace/soil). So clearly there are still some international rules governing these. What are they, is what I am trying to figure out?

"Can't control what we do with drones" - well, can't physically, or can't legally? If can't legally - see the argument above.

The "by way of our connections in the Pakistani government" statement is also kind of meaningless. What does that mean exactly? Bribed a few officials? Made an official, open and internationally legal and recognized deal? What does this mean?

Osama was killed in a fire fight by US soldiers

 

[Veylon]

Wow. This has been a hard year for Al Qaeda. They haven't done anything meaningful in a long time, street protesters have stolen their thunder on the Arab Dictator front, they've been having fallings-out, and now this?

Dark times for the organization, and hopefully better ones for everyone else.

 

[megapenguinx]

Even though he is dead, terrorism still exists.

Kind of worried if there is going to be some sort of retaliation.

 

[jyork89]

Woohoo! Dibs to you America. You finally got the a-hole.

And even though killing bin Laden isn't going to stop terrorism, it was more about bringing him to justice. 66 years on and we are still pissed that Hitler managed to avoid justice. At least with Laden we can say we gave him what was coming and he had no choice in the matter.

 

[artanis_neravar]

Hey, speaking of bin Laden, is it true that he hacked into the TV networks to tell every American that they would die on September 11th 2001?
I doubt anyone could have. I'm probably terribly misinformed.

I'm going to go with terribly misinformed

 

[Troy Vandeventer]

Bin Laden is Dead. Now what?

The man behind the Sept. 11th 2001 World Trade Center terrorist attacks is dead. What is going to happen now? Does this mean we can bring our troops home? Are we safe? Frightening questions to ask yourself.

Unfortunately it is too soon to answer many of our questions. I can speculate that we will not be bringing our troops home anytime soon. Too do so now would destabilize many of the regions that we are working in. As to weather or not we are safe, I would have to say No, we are most certainly not safe.

I expect that now that Osama bin Laden has been killed that his many followers will soon unite and bring a terror to our country that will make Sept. 11, 2001 pale in comparison. I believe that this Mans death will be the catalyst that bring War to our shores. Not just Terrorist act's but WAR, soldiers fighting in our streets and our homes.

So to answer the question of 'Now What?'. We will fight. We will fight, and we will win. We are Americans and we will not fail. We are family, and we will prevail. Let them come into our streets, let them come to our homes, for only then when they are away from their streets and their homes will they feel the full might of our righteous wrath.

This is only my opinion of what may happen.

 

[HHKelevra]

That hardly answered my question though. First, legally, even if the drone/the facility that launched it is not in Pakistani territory, nevertheless, it is an attack on Pakistani soil. Kinda like, say, a ballistic missile would be if it hit American soil (similar argument can be made - the launcher is not in US airspace/soil). So clearly there are still some international rules governing these. What are they, is what I am trying to figure out?

"Can't control what we do with drones" - well, can't physically, or can't legally? If can't legally - see the argument above.

The "by way of our connections in the Pakistani government" statement is also kind of meaningless. What does that mean exactly? Bribed a few officials? Made an official, open and internationally legal and recognized deal? What does this mean?

There was no 'UAV Strike'

The Pakistani government had full knowledge of what was going on, and cooperated with the CIA to bring Osama down.

 

[Volkov]

Hm... so does anyone know, why are US armed forces allowed to act on Pakistani territory? I mean, like, legally, how is that classified? (And is Pakistani government OK with this?)

Obviously, a natural answer would be "Fuck Pakistani government, we are stronger so we call the shots", but still, is there an answer to the above question?

They weren't acting in Pakistan. It was a drone strike that killed Osama, the Pakistanis can't control what we do with drones since they don't even have to be in their airspace to hit the targets we want to hit.

We got the body out by way of our connections in the Pakistani government.

That hardly answered my question though. First, legally, even if the drone/the facility that launched it is not in Pakistani territory, nevertheless, it is an attack on Pakistani soil. Kinda like, say, a ballistic missile would be if it hit American soil (similar argument can be made - the launcher is not in US airspace/soil). So clearly there are still some international rules governing these. What are they, is what I am trying to figure out?

"Can't control what we do with drones" - well, can't physically, or can't legally? If can't legally - see the argument above.

The "by way of our connections in the Pakistani government" statement is also kind of meaningless. What does that mean exactly? Bribed a few officials? Made an official, open and internationally legal and recognized deal? What does this mean?

Osama was killed in a fire fight by US soldiers

So the statement about drones was bullshit? Fair enough. Then back to my original question. What's the international/2-party law/agreement that lead to a US armed force acting on Pakistani soil?

 

[maturin]

Though, my mom believes that this actually might come back to bite him, because he has been pushing for less funding for the military, then the military did a great job with this using the funding he wanted to cut.

Your mom doesn't sound very bright. We didn't kill Osama with the additional engine for the F35. Didn't kill him with the Osprey either. Or the new AAV for the Marines. Or the other landing craft they haven't used in generations for that matter.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

I predict Republicans will come down with a massive case of shutting-the-fuck-up. You can't really talk shit to a President who took out the guy in, if I'm reading the sequence of events right, a day.

I highly doubt that, Obama did jack-crap. The U.S. military did all the work. Obama just sat there and said, "Hey guys is it okay if I start cutting down on the funds I'm giving you...oh, you need them, well too bad I'm going to do my best to cut them anyway."

 

[maturin]

So the statement about drones was bullshit? Fair enough. Then back to my original question. What's the international/2-party law/agreement that lead to a US armed force acting on Pakistani soil?

Sounds like Pakistan was in on this one, at least at some point.

But we have routinely carried out blatant violations of Pakistan's sovereignty, ignoring their very loud objections. Where have you been?

This is one they are not going to complain about.

 

[artanis_neravar]

Hm... so does anyone know, why are US armed forces allowed to act on Pakistani territory? I mean, like, legally, how is that classified? (And is Pakistani government OK with this?)

Obviously, a natural answer would be "Fuck Pakistani government, we are stronger so we call the shots", but still, is there an answer to the above question?

They weren't acting in Pakistan. It was a drone strike that killed Osama, the Pakistanis can't control what we do with drones since they don't even have to be in their airspace to hit the targets we want to hit.

We got the body out by way of our connections in the Pakistani government.

That hardly answered my question though. First, legally, even if the drone/the facility that launched it is not in Pakistani territory, nevertheless, it is an attack on Pakistani soil. Kinda like, say, a ballistic missile would be if it hit American soil (similar argument can be made - the launcher is not in US airspace/soil). So clearly there are still some international rules governing these. What are they, is what I am trying to figure out?

"Can't control what we do with drones" - well, can't physically, or can't legally? If can't legally - see the argument above.

The "by way of our connections in the Pakistani government" statement is also kind of meaningless. What does that mean exactly? Bribed a few officials? Made an official, open and internationally legal and recognized deal? What does this mean?

Osama was killed in a fire fight by US soldiers

So the statement about drones was bullshit? Fair enough. Then back to my original question. What's the international/2-party law/agreement that lead to a US armed force acting on Pakistani soil?

There was none, other than Pakistani intelligence help us find him, however after the fact the...president? of Pakistan supported our actions

 

[Volkov]

I predict Republicans will come down with a massive case of shutting-the-fuck-up. You can't really talk shit to a President who took out the guy in, if I'm reading the sequence of events right, a day.

I highly doubt that, Obama did jack-crap. The U.S. military did all the work. Obama just sat there and said, "Hey guys is it okay if I start cutting down on the funds I'm giving you...oh, you need them, well too bad I'm going to do my best to cut them anyway."

1. Obama is part of the US military. He is the supreme commander.
2. Vast majority of the spending targeted by his reforms is entirely unrelated to the war on terror. Most of the costly technology (although not all) that the reforms have been targeting is for war against standing military of a similar size, not the wars that the US military has been fighting for over 6 decades.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

So the statement about drones was bullshit? Fair enough. Then back to my original question. What's the international/2-party law/agreement that lead to a US armed force acting on Pakistani soil?

No it wasn't, I got done watching every cable news program that was running the stuff. All of them and their military advisors and contacts said that it was a drone attack, we have never had clearance to even enter Pakistan with troops, only drone strikes have been allowed.

 

[HHKelevra]

For anybody who may have missed it. Sorry if it was put up earlier.