In bin Laden town, father mourns another militant.

[Icarus]

1961 was 50 years ago! And Reagan's quote has been overtaken by subsequent events, specially 9/11. It is a changed world out there, Sir.

50s Years ago indeed but during the time of a military ruler mind you. Anyway here's a more recent example.
"We are thankful to Pakistan for having the courage to take a stand against the scourge of terrorism, Pakistan has always been amongst America's most valuable allies"-President Bush

How do your support your claim that you have earned sovereignty already? An extra 100 million per month is not nearly enough to make USA accept any substantive changes to policies sought by Pakistan.

I'm not saying that we have earned sovereignty, I said that we have learnt that it is earned. As for the extra US$ 100 million, that is just the tip of the iceberg. Right now troops are short on supplies, prices in Afghanistan have sky rocketed, and the discontent among the Afghan public is growing. America may be able to sustain that US$ 100 Million of losses without much problem but the rising discontent can prove fatal to American interests in Afg.

 

[VCheng]

50s Years ago indeed but during the time of a military ruler mind you. Anyway here's a more recent example.
"We are thankful to Pakistan for having the courage to take a stand against the scourge of terrorism, Pakistan has always been amongst America's most valuable allies"-President Bush

It takes more than a political statement or two to make up the reputation of a dictatorship, wouldn't you agree?

I'm not saying that we have earned sovereignty, I said that we have learnt that it is earned.

Yes, that makes more sense to me now.

As for the extra US$ 100 million, that is just the tip of the iceberg. Right now troops are short on supplies, prices in Afghanistan have sky rocketed, and the discontent among the Afghan public is growing. America may be able to sustain that US$ 100 Million of losses without much problem but the rising discontent can prove fatal to American interests in Afg.

Afghan discontent is an important aspect, but the anger can just as easily be directed towards Pakistan for the blockade. It also provides a further opening for Indian influence among the population. The US troops are assured supplies, so that claim of shortage I do not believe.

 

[Black Widow]

@ I Baloch: but having said that I am just confused why suddenly Obama became so sentimental and didn’t release the pictures of his face? That would have allayed a lot of rumours and speculations. His excuse is that the pictures would have caused a lot of backlash from the terrorists.

They didn't show the face so that ppl like us start smoking conspiracy theories...

 

[Icarus]

It takes more than a political statement or two to make up the reputation of a dictatorship, wouldn't you agree?

I do however, I wanted to stress upon the stance of the GoUSA regarding Pakistan when a military ruler was in power. Come an elected parliament and all of a sudden we are a safe haven for terrorists and even Karazai finds the courage to threaten military action against Pakistan. All in all, a military man in power is taken much more seriously than as compared to an elected parliament.

Afghan discontent is an important aspect, but the anger can just as easily be directed towards Pakistan for the blockade. It also provides a further opening for Indian influence among the population. The US troops are assured supplies, so that claim of shortage I do not believe.

Afghans have never been very pro-Pakistan however, it is out of necessity that they live with us. India taking a central role in Afghanistan is highly unlikely without Pakistan's consent since whoever holds sway in Afghanistan is also expected to meet their demands for food and other necessities, even at the cost of their own comfort, case in point the flour prices in Afghanistan and Pakistan. If India is to export these goods to Afghanistan, they can do it through Pakistan by road or by sea to Iran and then by road to Afghanistan which will make it significantly expensive. Secondly, Indians sided with the Northern Alliance during the 90s and the Pukhtun majority have a major bone of contention with the Indians with respect to that. If any country other than Pakistan can take a central role in Afghanistan, I believe it will be Turkey.

 

[VCheng]

I do however, I wanted to stress upon the stance of the GoUSA regarding Pakistan when a military ruler was in power. Come an elected parliament and all of a sudden we are a safe haven for terrorists and even Karazai finds the courage to threaten military action against Pakistan. All in all, a military man in power is taken much more seriously than as compared to an elected parliament.

Ever wonder why? It is because it is much easier to keep one dictator toeing the line than a vibrant democracy.

Afghans have never been very pro-Pakistan however, it is out of necessity that they live with us. India taking a central role in Afghanistan is highly unlikely without Pakistan's consent since whoever holds sway in Afghanistan is also expected to meet their demands for food and other necessities, even at the cost of their own comfort, case in point the flour prices in Afghanistan and Pakistan. If India is to export these goods to Afghanistan, they can do it through Pakistan by road or by sea to Iran and then by road to Afghanistan which will make it significantly expensive. Secondly, Indians sided with the Northern Alliance during the 90s and the Pukhtun majority have a major bone of contention with the Indians with respect to that. If any country other than Pakistan can take a central role in Afghanistan, I believe it will be Turkey.

India may not take a central role given the geographical upper hand afforded to Pakistan, yes, but all it needs is enough of a role to keep Pakistan distracted from its Kashmir strategy. Chances are it will succeed in doing that in the not-so-far term.

 

[VelocuR]

Where have you been? There was a 100+ page thread on this after the raid. Everything was hashed out in great detail.

Basically, the USA wanted to take the so-called "high road" and not publish death photos. Apparently, his skull was pretty messed up. A 5.56mm to the head can do that. It would have inflamed people.

Saddam and Ghaddafi are not good parallels. The U.S. was NOT in control of those bodies. Both died at the hands of their countrymen, and those folk had no problems taking pictures of the corpses.

I said same as you mentioned.

For the last ten years of searching OBL, affected economy recession, and many wars, all we get is to receive nothing, we forced to listen to their wives instead proof of OBL body bought to International Court Justice. Unfortunately, this didn't happened.

US caught Saddam Hussein under the hidden road, it should done same to OBL, US caught and then drop him to the ocean within ten minutes after ten years WOT. We have been taught last ten years saying Osama is terrorists, many muslims confirmed it. Now we see after raid, Imam prayed in namaz to respect Osama in the US aircraft carrier before drop him on the ocean water.

Again, there is no proof. Give a fake moral to the US.

Everybody got tired of talking about OBL celebrities these days. I am curious, there will be a kid storybook in school offering "How to catch OBL"...

 

[Chogy]

I get the feeling after reading this thread that if the USA had published gruesome photos of bin Laden with half his skull blown away and an eyeball hanging by an optic nerve, etc, we'd have most of the doubtful people screaming "Photoshop! photoshop!" and doing garbage like pixel by pixel analysis.

Why didn't Pakistan preserve bin Laden's blood stains? When that bullet ripped his skull apart, huge amounts of DNA were spattered all over that room.

Whatever path the USA had taken after the raid to prove it was him would be met by conspiracy theorists. And there is no arguing with the conspiracy people.

In the end, it doesn't matter. He was primarily OUR enemy, and we took care of him in the manner we have all seen. bin Laden is fish food.

 

[VCheng]

..................
In the end, it doesn't matter. He was primarily OUR enemy, and we took care of him in the manner we have all seen. bin Laden is fish food.

Damn right!

 

[VelocuR]

I get the feeling after reading this thread that if the USA had published gruesome photos of bin Laden with half his skull blown away and an eyeball hanging by an optic nerve, etc, we'd have most of the doubtful people screaming "Photoshop! photoshop!" and doing garbage like pixel by pixel analysis.

Do you think, we haven't seen many gruesome photos of other dead people in other worlds despite, Palestines/Israel, Bosnia, Iraq wars, raped cases, Afghan citiziens and much more? People already seen gruesome photos, why not just release Osama photos to shut conspiracy theories (which I am not clearly). There are many people who are smart enough to know difference photoshop vs real pictures, come on. OBL's guards or their friends in the mansion showed many grusome pictures of blood around, where is OBL? If US Navy Seal killed OBL that showed it is failure of the plan, which is supposed to catch him alive in order to pay off ten years of searching. US Navy Seal has excellent history to bring innocent people alive and destroyed terrorists (i.e recent in Somalia).


Many Americans now disappointed without proof and tons of questions to ask. Proof it !

OBL raid revenge is related to Raymond Davis probably happened in January til May.




(VCheng, I would definitely ignore your childish posts and welcome to garbage lists.....)

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Ever wonder why? It is because it is much easier to keep one dictator toeing the line than a vibrant democracy.



India may not take a central role given the geographical upper hand afforded to Pakistan, yes, but all it needs is enough of a role to keep Pakistan distracted from its Kashmir strategy. Chances are it will succeed in doing that in the not-so-far term.

India does not need, does not seek and will not get a central role in Afghanistan. There are other stake holders too in the region, and they will need to be taken on board as well; so there will certainly not be a bilateral or even trilateral effort to resolve matters in Afghanistan. India has some part of that, and though it will increase; it will not be (and need not be) a central role in any way.

India's horizon has spread much wider. Afghanistan is only a small (though historically important) part of it. In conclusion, India need not do too much in Afghanistan. And most of it is already taken care of.

 

[VCheng]

...............
(VCheng, I would definitely ignore your childish posts and welcome to garbage lists.....)

Oh I am sorry, is this better?

India does not need, does not seek and will not get a central role in Afghanistan. There are other stake holders too in the region, and they will need to be taken on board as well; so there will certainly not be a bilateral or even trilateral effort to resolve matters in Afghanistan. India has some part of that, and though it will increase; it will not be (and need not be) a central role in any way.

India's horizon has spread much wider. Afghanistan is only a small (though historically important) part of it. In conclusion, India need not do too much in Afghanistan. And most of it is already taken care of.

I think we both agree in this aspect.

 

[AbhimanyuShrivastav]

India does not need, does not seek and will not get a central role in Afghanistan. There are other stake holders too in the region, and they will need to be taken on board as well; so there will certainly not be a bilateral or even trilateral effort to resolve matters in Afghanistan. India has some part of that, and though it will increase; it will not be (and need not be) a central role in any way.

India's horizon has spread much wider. Afghanistan is only a small (though historically important) part of it. In conclusion, India need not do too much in Afghanistan. And most of it is already taken care of.

The key here is that for Pakistan its paramount to have a central role in Afghanistan and also is paramount to disallow ANY role to India. India on the other hand just needs to have friendly relations with Afghanistan to deny Pakistan the strategic depth that it enjoyed during the few years of Taliban rule and keep it distracted from Kashmir. Its anyone's guess how this will go down, but odds are certainly favoring Indian objectives

 

[Capt.Popeye]

The key here is that for Pakistan its paramount to have a central role in Afghanistan and also is paramount to disallow ANY role to India. India on the other hand just needs to have friendly relations with Afghanistan to deny Pakistan the strategic depth that it enjoyed during the few years of Taliban rule and keep it distracted from Kashmir. Its anyone's guess how this will go down, but odds are certainly favoring Indian objectives

As I said earlier, India does not need to do much. The ground work is already done. Vis-a-vis Afghnanistan, India has to just continue its line of action. On the international platform (wrt Afghanistan), India will get a role in facilitating matters when the other regional players are to be taken on board.

 

[Chogy]

This will be my last attempt on the bin Laden thing. I am going to approach it as logically as possible.

Prior to the raid, there were exactly THREE possibilities regarding bin Laden. There are no alternatives. OBL had to be in one of these circumstances...

1) OBL was living in the Abottabad house
2) OBL was alive, but somewhere else, anywhere from Antarctica to the ISS. Where, it doesn't matter.
3) OBL was dead and buried by his companions.

The raid is launched on Abottabad. The USA annouces "We killed OBL. He's dead."

Given that the organization known as al Quaeda despises the USA and is our sworn enemy, they would want to do as much damage as possible after this announcement. They'd want to prove us liars and fools. They would want is to become dejected, forlorn, lower the morale of our troops in the field. How can they do this?

If case #2 was true, they would have filmed OBL with a newspaper in his hands, laughing at the headlines that announced his death. This would have been released within a matter of a day or two.

If case #3 was true, al Quaeda's mission would be more difficult, but they would have gathered evidence to prove that bin Laden died in 2006 (for example) of kidney disease. There would have been eyewitnesses, video evidence, perhaps even photographs of his body. There would especially have been video evidence or photographs of his funeral, showing mourners. There would have been a final statement by bin Laden exhorting his followers to fight on in his name. Nothing like that has happened. In fact, I am a bit surprised they didn't attempt some sort of fabrication along those lines.

That leaves case #1. OBL was in the house and killed by SEALs.

Further evidence:

- bin Ladens wives were there, were interrogated by Pakistan, not the USA, and confirmed the story.

- DNA evidence verified his presence. Pakistan had every opportunity to do a DNA analysis. You don't need a body for that. In fact, there's probably a blood-soaked patch of carpet still in Pakistan's possession.

- Survivors of the raid verified his death

- The USA risked a top secret helicopter. If it had been just a show, they'd not have done that. They'd have risked only a regular helicopter

- The USA would not have put on this "dog & pony show" and announced his death if there was any chance that it would be refuted as in case 2 or case 3 above. The risk of looking extraordinarily foolish was too high.

The only logical conclusion we can come to is that yes indeed, OBL was shot and killed in that house on the night in question. Any other conclusion is intentionally ignoring overwhelming evidence.