Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
well 1st off you would have to want to catch em.
2nd you would have to have a plan of what to do if you find him.
so we are guna hang the brother of the prince of saudi arabia? you know direct descendant of mohammed?
I agree that the CIA doesn't want to catch him as badly as we are led to believe. I do think if we knew exactly where he was at any given moment, that we would probably take him out. I think the CIA has a pretty good idea where he is but probably not the exact spot at any moment in time. But if we try to take him out, we'd better be sure we get him, because we risk losing alot of whatever we've gained as far as inroads and intelligence, if they figure out we know what they don't think we know.
bin Laden is just a figure head at this point, so while it would be a huge moral victory for us if we got him, I'm not sure how much good it would do in the long run. So while I think the CIA would like to get him, it's probably not as important to them as they lead us to believe.
But don't misunderstand me, I still think we should take him out if we are sure beyond a reasonable doubt where he is at a given moment.
Human intelligence you say?? well yes but considering you have how many military personel and technology you have on the ground and with 3rd party (pakistanis) co-operatives. And not one of them have come up with the goods??
Time?? just how many years do you think you can occupy afghanistan just to get one man.. ONE MAN??? america is losing friends left right and center for every passing day without the capture of bin laben. Even military generals are having disdane for this war. Its gone far too long. You had you chance, you blew it.
His training has been a factor for him to be as effective in the way he has, and you say its nonsense. dig yer head out of the sun ole chum.
Sure, training didn't hurt his effort, but if you think that Bin Laden is out-CIA'ing the CIA on an intelligence basis, i'd reconcile that it is you that has your head in the sand. To assume such, would be supposing that whatever Bin Laden learned from the CIA in the 80's was the end-all, be-all of intelligence operations, with no advances in intelligence gathering procedures since that time. Bin Laden's biggest advantage is the mountainous terrain and his extraordinary persistence/patience, not that he has the upper hand on the CIA. The CIA has a vested interest in building and maintaining contacts in the region for purposes other than catching OBL. At some point in time, OBL will slip up on his own and be caught, and the CIA will still have the covert network they've built without it being compromised over one man. Think deeper "chum."
Last edited by AeroGuyDC; 11-29-2009 at 11:47 PM..
Assuming he's still alive (I believe he's probably dead by now) then he is probably in Pakistan. If that's the case, only reliable on site intel is going to lead us to him.
The soldiers in the field know what to do to get the job done. It's the people in Washington DC who don't know what to do, and yes that includes the Bush and Obama administration. If we were to go back and be a fly on the wall I bet part of the decision making came from the State Dept.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cruxan
so any of you people have a strategy on how to catch bin laden??? did you know that there is a 25 million dollar reward for his capture.
i think the u.s. military needs some fresh ideas on how to capture this illusive man in a cave somewhere in the mountains of afgh and pakistan..
this is the way i think could work, we all know them terrorist love nukes right.. they will sacrifice a thousand virgins to acquire a nuke..
so if the u.s. military flys some big azzzz remote control bombers all over afgh in a grid patern, so that every terror club in the country sees them flying them big azzz bombers that suposedly have nukes aboard, wamo!!! they will shoot some of them out of the sky and try to recover the fake nukes with gps tracking devices on them, and carry them straight to the leader of the terror band bin laden himself.. and wamo poof!!! remotly detonate the 1000 lbs of tnt and there you have it..ashes to ashes dust to dust!!!
The soldiers in the field know what to do to get the job done. It's the people in Washington DC who don't know what to do, and yes that includes the Bush and Obama administration.
How can you even make that claim? We're not even a year into his presidency and you're already wanting to mark that down in the "failure" column?
How can you even make that claim? We're not even a year into his presidency and you're already wanting to mark that down in the "failure" column?
Didn't say he failed. I said he doesn't know how to get the job done. He's never been a soldier and he doesn't seem to want to seriously listen to his commanders in the field so there's no way he could know how to get the job done.
Didn't say he failed. I said he doesn't know how to get the job done. He's never been a soldier and he doesn't seem to want to seriously listen to his commanders in the field so there's no way he could know how to get the job done.
Ok, again I ask how you can make that claim?
Never been a soldier? Neither was FDR and he got us through the most brutal war in somewhat modern times. I think a man of Obama's intelligence can handle Afghanistan.
Doesn't want to listen to commanders in the field? Then why did he revise his original 16 month withdrawl plan to 22 months after meeting with military personnel?
Never been a soldier? Neither was FDR and he got us through the most brutal war in somewhat modern times. I think a man of Obama's intelligence can handle Afghanistan.
Doesn't want to listen to commanders in the field? Then why did he revise his original 16 month withdrawl plan to 22 months after meeting with military personnel?
FDR didn't win WW2. He had great and wise generals and admirals leading the war while he handled the political side. The troops in the field in WW2 had much more freedom to do what needed to be done than troops do today. There were many times they didn't have any communications and just had to wing it until communications could be re-established. Back then, if the enemy went to point B then you went after the enemy in point B. Today you got to get permission from the upper levels of command to do anything unless you're currently underfire and even then you're restricted by strict regulations.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
