quote:

ORIGINAL: firmobeisance

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife
It would seem to me that someone responsible for multiple terrorist actions does not deserve the rule of law as he ignored it repeatedly.

It would seem to me that the people who represent the civilized world would want to endorse and demonstrate the moral value of due process and the veracity of the rule of law and not respond with nihilism at the first hint of barbarism. You do realize that there has never been any sort of a trial, correct?

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Here is my best guess.

We had OBL at Tora Bora 12/01 and Bush deliberately let him pass. We needed him alive for 10 years and about $2 trillion for about a trillion in war profit$.

Finally, we as likely told the Pakistanis that we cut off our $3 billion a year that is vital to sustain what little corrupt govt. they do have. Some say their whole damn economy rests on our yearly stipend. Much of it spent where ? In the US of course. To continue being on our welfare ticket they have to finally give up OBL.

A Pakistani police officer got the license no. of the latest courier and his current car. They followed him directly to OBL's compound and soon after some planning...in come the seals.

Kinkroids, this is not about OBL, or about Al-Qeada or 'getting' the Taliban. It is all about war profits and pipeline. The drawings have long since been completed. The Caspian Sea area is said to have larger reserves than Saudi. What more do we need to know ?

And oh BTW. We went to Afghan. right away and to get OBL and remove the Taliban from power. After 10 very deadly and costly years, we have yet will remain until 2014. Why ? To negotiate a cover for the Taliban to be in on the cut (power at some level) provided they protect the pipeline.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy


The kicker is-  the blow back that is coming.  Escalation of the Holy War- the jijad.     Why be in rush for THAT?

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

The question I would ask is exactly what values are being defended by the US and the West in general (in relation to the ongoing occupations and sortees into places such as Libya)? The rule of law?

Would seem to me that defending the rule of law by undermining it (e.g. assassination), is a strange way of promoting US or Western values.

It would seem to me that someone responsible for multiple terrorist actions does not deserve the rule of law as he ignored it repeatedly.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy


The kicker is-  the blow back that is coming.  Escalation of the Holy War- the jijad.     Why be in rush for THAT?

What's your point Pahunk?

We should cower in the corner and try not to piss them off?

US forces were given permission to conduct unilateral raid inside Pakistan if they knew where Bin Laden was hiding, officials say

The US and Pakistan struck a secret deal almost a decade ago permitting a US operation against Osama bin Laden on Pakistani soil similar to last week's raid that killed the al-Qaida leader, the Guardian has learned.

The deal was struck between the military leader General Pervez Musharraf and President George Bush after Bin Laden escaped US forces in the mountains of Tora Bora in late 2001, according to serving and retired Pakistani and US officials.

Under its terms, Pakistan would allow US forces to conduct a unilateral raid inside Pakistan in search of Bin Laden, his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and the al-Qaida No3. Afterwards, both sides agreed, Pakistan would vociferously protest the incursion.

"There was an agreement between Bush and Musharraf that if we knew where Osama was, we were going to come and get him," said a former senior US official with knowledge of counterterrorism operations. "The Pakistanis would put up a hue and cry, but they wouldn't stop us."

...

A senior Pakistani official said it had been struck under Musharraf and renewed by the army during the "transition to democracy" – a six-month period from February 2008 when Musharraf was still president but a civilian government had been elected.

Referring to the assault on Bin Laden's Abbottabad compound, the official added: "As far as our American friends are concerned, they have just implemented the agreement."

The former US official said the Pakistani protests of the past week were the "public face" of the deal. "We knew they would deny this stuff."

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

FR:

Osama bin Laden mission agreed in secret 10 years ago by US and Pakistan

Declan Walsh in Islamabad
Monday 9 May 2011 19.06 BST

US forces were given permission to conduct unilateral raid inside Pakistan if they knew where Bin Laden was hiding, officials say

The US and Pakistan struck a secret deal almost a decade ago permitting a US operation against Osama bin Laden on Pakistani soil similar to last week's raid that killed the al-Qaida leader, the Guardian has learned.

The deal was struck between the military leader General Pervez Musharraf and President George Bush after Bin Laden escaped US forces in the mountains of Tora Bora in late 2001, according to serving and retired Pakistani and US officials.

Under its terms, Pakistan would allow US forces to conduct a unilateral raid inside Pakistan in search of Bin Laden, his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and the al-Qaida No3. Afterwards, both sides agreed, Pakistan would vociferously protest the incursion.

"There was an agreement between Bush and Musharraf that if we knew where Osama was, we were going to come and get him," said a former senior US official with knowledge of counterterrorism operations. "The Pakistanis would put up a hue and cry, but they wouldn't stop us."

...

A senior Pakistani official said it had been struck under Musharraf and renewed by the army during the "transition to democracy" – a six-month period from February 2008 when Musharraf was still president but a civilian government had been elected.

Referring to the assault on Bin Laden's Abbottabad compound, the official added: "As far as our American friends are concerned, they have just implemented the agreement."

The former US official said the Pakistani protests of the past week were the "public face" of the deal. "We knew they would deny this stuff."

Firm

So the deal is that we had permission but it was a secret...we know this because there is a treaty that says so but we can't show it to you because it is a secret..
I am sure that sort of logic works with four year olds but they are not allowed on this forum.

(in reply to FirmhandKY)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkestDezirez
I'd bet my lily-white arse that Usama's status as (I imagine) an "unprivileged belligerent" and a "valid target - person" in accordance with FM 27-10 and a whole bunch of other statutes and legal thingies, and what the SEALs' use of force guidelines and directives were, had all been covered six ways to Sunday. I'm also willing to bet that the SEALs acted precisely in accordance with the rules they were given. Such people aren't like the run of the mill lager louts out for a post-footie punch-up; they're professionals.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

FR:

Osama bin Laden mission agreed in secret 10 years ago by US and Pakistan

Declan Walsh in Islamabad
Monday 9 May 2011 19.06 BST

US forces were given permission to conduct unilateral raid inside Pakistan if they knew where Bin Laden was hiding, officials say

The US and Pakistan struck a secret deal almost a decade ago permitting a US operation against Osama bin Laden on Pakistani soil similar to last week's raid that killed the al-Qaida leader, the Guardian has learned.

The deal was struck between the military leader General Pervez Musharraf and President George Bush after Bin Laden escaped US forces in the mountains of Tora Bora in late 2001, according to serving and retired Pakistani and US officials.

Under its terms, Pakistan would allow US forces to conduct a unilateral raid inside Pakistan in search of Bin Laden, his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and the al-Qaida No3. Afterwards, both sides agreed, Pakistan would vociferously protest the incursion.

"There was an agreement between Bush and Musharraf that if we knew where Osama was, we were going to come and get him," said a former senior US official with knowledge of counterterrorism operations. "The Pakistanis would put up a hue and cry, but they wouldn't stop us."

...

A senior Pakistani official said it had been struck under Musharraf and renewed by the army during the "transition to democracy" – a six-month period from February 2008 when Musharraf was still president but a civilian government had been elected.

Referring to the assault on Bin Laden's Abbottabad compound, the official added: "As far as our American friends are concerned, they have just implemented the agreement."

The former US official said the Pakistani protests of the past week were the "public face" of the deal. "We knew they would deny this stuff."

Firm

So the deal is that we had permission but it was a secret...we know this because there is a treaty that says so but we can't show it to you because it is a secret..
I am sure that sort of logic works with four year olds but they are not allowed on this forum.