Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Osama bin Laden killed by US forces in Pakistan

1455: The BBC's Mishal Husain, in Abbottabad, has been talking to residents who lived near the Bin Laden compound: "People told us that if children hit cricket balls into that compound, they never got them back. They just got given some money instead."

:facepalm:
 
Ah OK, I see what you mean now ... ugly.

Yes it is and possibly unworkable but it is essential to understand this aspect of Pakistan defence policy in order to understand Pakistan's obsession with retaining control in Afghanistan. it's lingering support for the Taliban is not about ideology it is strategic
 
Ta for the info. I still find aspects of the 'strategic depth' from a military perspective to be very silly indeed, but I found this article which goes on about some of these issues and also non-military aspects of this whole 'strategic depth via Afghanistan' thing, which make some sense.

http://www.opendemocracy.net/opensecurity/aziz-hakimi/af-pak-what-strategic-depth

Given that its only a few decades since the USA last made the mistake of losing interest in Pakistan after they were no longer needed to counterbalance the soviets, I really wonder if they will be dumb enough to make the same mistake twice. I think not.
 
lulz. the prick's will.

In the document, Bin Laden lists the assault on New York's twin towers in a sequence beginning with the suicide bombing attack on US marines in Lebanon in 1983, the killing of 19 US marines serving as UN peacekeepers in Somalia in 1993, and the bombing of the US embassy in Nairobi in 1998.

But its most striking feature is that he orders his wives not to remarry and his children not to join al-Qaida or go to "the front". He expresses regret to his children for not having spent enough time with them because of his devotion to jihad.

Cock. One of those wives definitely won't be remarrying.
 
1455: The BBC's Mishal Husain, in Abbottabad, has been talking to residents who lived near the Bin Laden compound: "People told us that if children hit cricket balls into that compound, they never got them back. They just got given some money instead."

:facepalm:

Fuck me, if I was a kid there I'd be buying cricket balls by the bucket load! :D
 
One other thing. Wasn't OBL's stated goal to trap the US in a long-term military struggle overseas, one that would do to the US what the war in Afghanistan did to the Soviet Union? Maybe the Saudi weird beard will have the last laugh after all.

looking that way for sure . And yet again its China supplying the hardware to bleed a superpower dry just as it did against the soviets . That relationship with Pakistan is more important than US aid when push comes to shove .
 
According to this report the photos of a dead Bin Laden are "gruesome" and that's the reason being given about the decision to release them?

Interesting article - if true, I'm kinda surprised that OBL had a computer with loads of data on it at the place - would've thought he would've kept a minimum amount of data on him in case of assasination/capture etc. Maybe he felt safe enough where he was to be able to do so? And talking of kills, the article says also:

Officials described the reaction of the special operators when they were told a number of weeks ago that they had been chosen to train for the mission.

“They were told, ‘We think we found Osama bin Laden, and your job is to kill him,’” an official recalled.

Apols if this has been confirmed already by the US Govt, but have they stated their explict directive was to kill OBL, as oppose to capture?

(Just checked Obama's statement - he says it was a "kill or capture" op in this)
 
the conspiracy theorys i hear are more about him already being dead years, but still used as a propaganda tool whilst needed.

but wouldnt AQ be able to prove he died years ago and embarrass the US and dismiss the so called fake staged death last week
 
a high velocity bullet to the head at close quarters will make quite a mess plus special forces tend to use more expensive bullets to get the max effect out of short barrels so probably not that tv friendly.
 
a high velocity bullet to the head at close quarters will make quite a mess plus special forces tend to use more expensive bullets to get the max effect out of short barrels so probably not that tv friendly.

Why shoot him in the head though? Pretty stupid thing to do knowing a photo would be needed as evidence.
 
Why shoot him in the head? If he was armed, you wouldn't piss around with aesthetics.

Grizzly pics: Very possible. I once saw a leaked picture of one of the gangsters shot at close range in that range rover in Essex. The most gruesome picture I've ever seen.
 
I heard on the BBC World Service that he "was not armed but resisted arrest". Supports the idea that they never intended to take him alive IMO.
 
Back
Top Bottom