RIH Osama Bin Laden

[Snaxx]

I went to check out today's front pages and found out I wasn't the only one to try that...

http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/default.asp

500 INTERNAL SERVER ERROR

The page cannot be displayed
The request cannot be processed at this time. The amount of traffic exceeds the Web site's configured capacity.

[gsabc]

Gotta be medals for those SEALs, but I'll bet it won't go public. I wonder if they'll even be allowed to wear them on their dress uniforms. I'll have to ask SIL if there's any military policy he can tell us about in that area. And kudos for the intel folks as well.

[Sir_Galahad]

While I am glad that the man behind the 911 attacks is no more, I have to wonder how many billions of dollars went into the operations to kill this one man? And, now, how many more billions are going to be necessary to beef up against retribution attacks.

[MuhammadSaidalSahhaf]

You people are so gullible to believe the lies the government of the infidels speaks to you!!

Osama bin Laden is not dead! He is right here in my bunker playing Uno with Saddam.

Lies, lies, I tell you!!! It's all a bunch of lies!!!!!!

[Vandal]

Also from Twitter:

Obviously, Obama's birth certificate was bin Laden's last horcrux.

[Bob Juch]

What's interesting is that the key to finding him was information from a Guantanamo detainee about two couriers who worked directly for Bin Laden. They followed them for a long time before determining the location of the compound.

[Jeemie]

While I am glad that the man behind the 911 attacks is no more, I have to wonder how many billions of dollars went into the operations to kill this one man? And, now, how many more billions are going to be necessary to beef up against retribution attacks.

I'm sure it's a lot less than the trillions that went into a war against a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 or terrorism, and the prosecution of which really didn't make the United States any more secure.

[SpacemanSpiff]

Two things went through my brain when I heard this news this morning (4am - needless to say, I didn't go back to sleep):

"YippiekaiyayMother[Father]"

and

"The comparisons between Obama and Jimmy Carter end here." (They won't, but this time the mission worked.)

[silverscreenselect]

While I am glad that the man behind the 911 attacks is no more, I have to wonder how many billions of dollars went into the operations to kill this one man? And, now, how many more billions are going to be necessary to beef up against retribution attacks.

I'm sure it's a lot less than the trillions that went into a war against a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 or terrorism, and the prosecution of which really didn't make the United States any more secure.

Hopefully, with Bin Laden gone, we can objectively reassess our security needs in the Middle East and just who our friends and enemies are. Bin Laden's "mansion" was really a heavily armed compound that was in a community with a lot of retired Pakistani military officers with both a police station and some type of military academy nearby. There's no doubt that the government knew he was there and kept their mouths shut for a long time. That's our nuclear armed allies, the Pakistanis.

[flockofseagulls104]

I applaud Obama for having the courage to give the go ahead to pull the trigger.

[Sir_Galahad]

While I am glad that the man behind the 911 attacks is no more, I have to wonder how many billions of dollars went into the operations to kill this one man? And, now, how many more billions are going to be necessary to beef up against retribution attacks.

I'm sure it's a lot less than the trillions that went into a war against a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 or terrorism, and the prosecution of which really didn't make the United States any more secure.

I completely agree with you on this point.

[wintergreen48]

While I am glad that the man behind the 911 attacks is no more, I have to wonder how many billions of dollars went into the operations to kill this one man? And, now, how many more billions are going to be necessary to beef up against retribution attacks.

I'm sure it's a lot less than the trillions that went into a war against a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 or terrorism, and the prosecution of which really didn't make the United States any more secure.

Hopefully, with Bin Laden gone, we can objectively reassess our security needs in the Middle East and just who our friends and enemies are. Bin Laden's "mansion" was really a heavily armed compound that was in a community with a lot of retired Pakistani military officers with both a police station and some type of military academy nearby. There's no doubt that the government knew he was there and kept their mouths shut for a long time. That's our nuclear armed allies, the Pakistanis.

For the third time this year, I agree completely with what you say. I'm getting scared...

One point that has been made repeatedly is that the US did not notify anyone-- particularly Pakistan-- about this in advance. If the US had given Pakistan advance notice about this-- we did, after all, launch a military attack within the borders of a sovereign nation which has previously objected to our doing that sort of thing-- I know, you know, we all know, 'somehow' Osama would have managed to be elsewhere when the attack began.

[christie1111]

I'm sure it's a lot less than the trillions that went into a war against a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 or terrorism, and the prosecution of which really didn't make the United States any more secure.

Hopefully, with Bin Laden gone, we can objectively reassess our security needs in the Middle East and just who our friends and enemies are. Bin Laden's "mansion" was really a heavily armed compound that was in a community with a lot of retired Pakistani military officers with both a police station and some type of military academy nearby. There's no doubt that the government knew he was there and kept their mouths shut for a long time. That's our nuclear armed allies, the Pakistanis.

For the third time this year, I agree completely with what you say. I'm getting scared...

One point that has been made repeatedly is that the US did not notify anyone-- particularly Pakistan-- about this in advance. If the US had given Pakistan advance notice about this-- we did, after all, launch a military attack within the borders of a sovereign nation which has previously objected to our doing that sort of thing-- I know, you know, we all know, 'somehow' Osama would have managed to be elsewhere when the attack began.

Since I heard it on the radio, it may or not be true, but we supposedly told Pakistan, at an earlier time period, that if we found him in their country we would launch an attack without warning.

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

Shortly after 9/11 I read Mark Bowden's Killing Pablo. I have hoped since then that it would be a blueprint to the end of OBL. Pablo Escobar also died of a gunshot to head in a similar raid.

Random thoughts.

Hannibal might have a word with OBL upon his entrance to the afterlife on the wisdom of attacking a superpower.


I like to see a spread sheet comparing OBL's compound to a American prison.

I also though about Desert One, and learning from your mistakes.

Hey OBL how's that Strong Horse think working out for you.

[wintergreen48]

One of the things I find interesting about this, from a purely intellectual standpoint, is the story of how they figured out where Osama was, and 'confirmed' it. Apparently, no one ever actually saw him, no one ever told us he was there, there were no twitter feeds or cell-phone links or anything at all of that sort: it was all based upon a lot of deductions made from very indirect evidence, drawing on an analysis of a string of data that runs back to about October 2001, with the capture of some guys who apparently gave up some information about some of Osama's most trusted associates (the two brothers who acted as his 'couriers'), and by pursuing that lead-- and noticing the anomalies surrounding the two couriers-- they deduced that Osama was in the building and launched the attack that took him out.

We hear a lot about the times intelligence analysts get things wrong (intelligence agencies from six different countries were convinced-- incorrectly-- that Saddam had WMDs; intelligence folks had the name and lots of other information about the underwear bomber last Christmas, but never managed to get him onto the 'do not fly' list, although they have over the past few years managed to prevent Ted Kennedy and a lot of other people from flying, for no good reason); it's good to see that, sometimes, they actually get it right.

[Bob Juch]

One of the things I find interesting about this, from a purely intellectual standpoint, is the story of how they figured out where Osama was, and 'confirmed' it. Apparently, no one ever actually saw him, no one ever told us he was there, there were no twitter feeds or cell-phone links or anything at all of that sort: it was all based upon a lot of deductions made from very indirect evidence, drawing on an analysis of a string of data that runs back to about October 2001, with the capture of some guys who apparently gave up some information about some of Osama's most trusted associates (the two brothers who acted as his 'couriers'), and by pursuing that lead-- and noticing the anomalies surrounding the two couriers-- they deduced that Osama was in the building and launched the attack that took him out.

We hear a lot about the times intelligence analysts get things wrong (intelligence agencies from six different countries were convinced-- incorrectly-- that Saddam had WMDs; intelligence folks had the name and lots of other information about the underwear bomber last Christmas, but never managed to get him onto the 'do not fly' list, although they have over the past few years managed to prevent Ted Kennedy and a lot of other people from flying, for no good reason); it's good to see that, sometimes, they actually get it right.

If they had ground intelligence confirming Bin Laden was in fact there do you think they'd tell us?

[silverscreenselect]

If they had ground intelligence confirming Bin Laden was in fact there do you think they'd tell us?

Unless you're the Bush Administration outing Valerie Plame, you protect your sources of information, both for their own safety and in order to continue to get valuable information from them. If our enemies know they have a weakness, whether human or technological, they will take steps to remedy that weakness.

It's not surprising to me that several of the stories I have read indicate that key information came from some of the Gitmo detainees, not about where Bin Laden himself was, but about the identities of other contacts who, once they were found, led to Bin Laden. This may be true. On the other hand, it might be something that's completely concocted by our intelligence community to (1) justify our handling of the Gitmo detainees and (2) keep people from realizing the true source of our intelligence.

When I was in law school, nearly 30 years after the end of World War II, books came out for the first time about the Enigma/Ultra decoders and other intelligence techniques we used in that war. I suspect it may be another 30 years or so before some of the real details about our current intelligence activities becomes public.

[BackInTex]

If they had ground intelligence confirming Bin Laden was in fact there do you think they'd tell us?

Unless you're the Bush Administration outing Valerie Plame, you protect your sources of information, both for their own safety and in order to continue to get valuable information from them. If our enemies know they have a weakness, whether human or technological, they will take steps to remedy that weakness.

It's not surprising to me that several of the stories I have read indicate that key information came from some of the Gitmo detainees, not about where Bin Laden himself was, but about the identities of other contacts who, once they were found, led to Bin Laden. This may be true. On the other hand, it might be something that's completely concocted by our intelligence community to (1) justify our handling of the Gitmo detainees and (2) keep people from realizing the true source of our intelligence.

When I was in law school, nearly 30 years after the end of World War II, books came out for the first time about the Enigma/Ultra decoders and other intelligence techniques we used in that war. I suspect it may be another 30 years or so before some of the real details about our current intelligence activities becomes public.

All this 'conspiracy' you talk about (along with an un-called for slam against Bush) yet you buy the fact that Bin Laden is dead, and that Vince Foster killed himself.

[flockofseagulls104]

If they had ground intelligence confirming Bin Laden was in fact there do you think they'd tell us?

Unless you're the Bush Administration outing Valerie Plame, you protect your sources of information, both for their own safety and in order to continue to get valuable information from them. If our enemies know they have a weakness, whether human or technological, they will take steps to remedy that weakness.

It's not surprising to me that several of the stories I have read indicate that key information came from some of the Gitmo detainees, not about where Bin Laden himself was, but about the identities of other contacts who, once they were found, led to Bin Laden. This may be true. On the other hand, it might be something that's completely concocted by our intelligence community to (1) justify our handling of the Gitmo detainees and (2) keep people from realizing the true source of our intelligence.

When I was in law school, nearly 30 years after the end of World War II, books came out for the first time about the Enigma/Ultra decoders and other intelligence techniques we used in that war. I suspect it may be another 30 years or so before some of the real details about our current intelligence activities becomes public.

Dealing with people like you is like banging your head against the wall. No matter what the subject is, you have to put in some smarmy comment that has nothing to do with the subject just to further your own world view. The left made a big thing of the Plame-Wilson affair, blaming everyone they disliked through whatever convoluted circumstances they could dream up. Turns out most of the mud thrown out was patently false, and that Plame and Wilson were probably just as culpable as anyone else. But facts don't matter, just the perception. So here we go again, we'll have a big argument about how bad Bush/Cheney et al were. I won't participate in it other than to point out this is how it works in Washington, and SSS and BJ participate in it here. No wonder nothing concrete can ever get done when you have to keep rehashing and defending against lies and false accusations from the past.

[silverscreenselect]

All this 'conspiracy' you talk about (along with an un-called for slam against Bush) yet you buy the fact that Bin Laden is dead, and that Vince Foster killed himself.

Omitting to reveal the sources of your intelligence and concocting plausible cover stories is not "conspiracy," it's proper intelligence gathering. Anytime that US intelligence manages a major accomplishment, whether it was against the Nazis in World War II, the Soviets in the Cold War, or Islamic extremists now, they are under no obligation to give an accurate account of how they gathered this information, especially if it's an ongoing conflict where the same assets and methods might prove valuable again.

When the British cracked the German Enigma code early in World War II, they were very careful in how they used the information they garnered and they would not use it under any circumstances under which the Germans could deduce their code had been broken. In other words, if there was no plausible alternative, they did not use the information, even when they learned about one of the biggest German bombing raids of the war, against Coventry, England. If they had stepped up their fortifications and air cover over Coventry that night, they probably could have saved a number of lives and destruction but they kept the information secret. And of course, both the British and Americans were heavily involved in creating the illusion that we planned the D-Day invasion for Calais not Normandy, including planting of phony news stories that might suggest that.

Suppose we have a high level double agent operating inside Al Qaeda who fed us this information about Bin Laden. Do you think the government would "credit" him for the intelligence we gathered or would concoct a plausible alternative to release to the press that maintained his cover?

[silverscreenselect]

Dealing with people like you is like banging your head against the wall. No matter what the subject is, you have to put in some smarmy comment that has nothing to do with the subject just to further your own world view.

Funny how often I've thought the same thing about you, Flock.

[flockofseagulls104]

Dealing with people like you is like banging your head against the wall. No matter what the subject is, you have to put in some smarmy comment that has nothing to do with the subject just to further your own world view.

Funny how often I've thought the same thing about you, Flock.

90%+ of my political posts are directly attributable to responding to one-sided propoaganda posts made here by you and several others that distribute 'information' gleened from the left wing blogosphere. What in the hell does the Plame thing have to do with this topic, other than to get in another fallacious swipe at the Bush adminstration?

[silverscreenselect]

Dealing with people like you is like banging your head against the wall. No matter what the subject is, you have to put in some smarmy comment that has nothing to do with the subject just to further your own world view.

Funny how often I've thought the same thing about you, Flock.

90%+ of my political posts are directly attributable to responding to one-sided propoaganda posts made here by you and several others that distribute 'information' gleened from the left wing blogosphere. What in the hell does the Plame thing have to do with this topic, other than to get in another fallacious swipe at the Bush adminstration?

Discussion of how we got Osama = non-revelation of any active sources = good.

Plame affair = revelation of active sources = bad.

[Bob Juch]

All this 'conspiracy' you talk about (along with an un-called for slam against Bush) yet you buy the fact that Bin Laden is dead, and that Vince Foster killed himself.

Omitting to reveal the sources of your intelligence and concocting plausible cover stories is not "conspiracy," it's proper intelligence gathering. Anytime that US intelligence manages a major accomplishment, whether it was against the Nazis in World War II, the Soviets in the Cold War, or Islamic extremists now, they are under no obligation to give an accurate account of how they gathered this information, especially if it's an ongoing conflict where the same assets and methods might prove valuable again.

When the British cracked the German Enigma code early in World War II, they were very careful in how they used the information they garnered and they would not use it under any circumstances under which the Germans could deduce their code had been broken. In other words, if there was no plausible alternative, they did not use the information, even when they learned about one of the biggest German bombing raids of the war, against Coventry, England. If they had stepped up their fortifications and air cover over Coventry that night, they probably could have saved a number of lives and destruction but they kept the information secret. And of course, both the British and Americans were heavily involved in creating the illusion that we planned the D-Day invasion for Calais not Normandy, including planting of phony news stories that might suggest that.

Suppose we have a high level double agent operating inside Al Qaeda who fed us this information about Bin Laden. Do you think the government would "credit" him for the intelligence we gathered or would concoct a plausible alternative to release to the press that maintained his cover?

Bin Laden couldn't have been living in his compound without Pakistani officials knowing about it. We probably paid one or more of them enough for them to confirm he was there.

I expect we grabbed papers, computers, etc. from the compound that will be of great intel use.

[flockofseagulls104]

Funny how often I've thought the same thing about you, Flock.

90%+ of my political posts are directly attributable to responding to one-sided propoaganda posts made here by you and several others that distribute 'information' gleened from the left wing blogosphere. What in the hell does the Plame thing have to do with this topic, other than to get in another fallacious swipe at the Bush adminstration?

Discussion of how we got Osama = non-revelation of any active sources = good.

Plame affair = revelation of active sources = bad.

Assumption that what happened was attributable to Bush and only to Bush (and by extension Reps or Conservatives) = propaganda.