Bin Laden dead.

Anyone else feel that that was a complete waste of trillions of dollars? not to mention the homeland invasion policies that are now in place.



Don't get me wrong here, I'm glad he's dead, but did it really take invading multiple countries and transforming the way America functions to right 9/11?

Yes. This singular action should have been the focus of our war on terror policy for the entirety of the last 9 1/2 years. Anything we wanted/did do after 9/11 should have been considered once and ONLY after OBL was apprehended/killed/eliminated.



We completely took our eye off the ball, so to speak, to pursue others missions, uptopian ideas of freedom and nation building.



We completely over-reacted to 9/11. Capturing/eliminating OBL and the enitre al-Qaeda leadership should have been our primary focus. There is no way to believe it was the previous 9 1/2 years.

Focusing on nothing else, I'm just glad he's dead. Sad and pathetic that he had to take down a civilian woman with him.

hawkwing wrote:
Focusing on nothing else, I'm just glad he's dead. Sad and pathetic that he had to take down a civilian woman with him.

A woman who may have been his wife (or one of them). Guy was sad and pathetic down to his bitter end.

In my humble view, Iraq was a tragic waste of life and treasure. It also was a severe distraction. I have thought our entry into Afghanistan was supportable--they were after all harboring AQ. Iraq, in part, caused us to lose our focus in Afghanistan to our detriment. Do you see it differently--that entry into both countries was wrong? In the end, it is good we finally got him. I am thankful and give tribute to our military and intelligence workers, as well as the President for making a very gutsy call, and in carrying out such a high profile, hugely important mission.

I just hope this doesn't become a "mission accomplished" moment.



Bin Laden was a huge step forward, but there is still a lot of work to be done to eliminate al Qaeda and its progeny. I hope our president and our citizens have the fortitude to realize that and keep the pedal to the metal instead of patting themselves on the back.



When you stun your opponent with a blow to the chin, you don't step back and raise your hands in victory while you wait to see if he will fall--instead, you overwhelm them with your most vicious flurry of attack and you ensure not only that they go down, but that they don't get back up.

The military (excepting special forces) in general is poorly equipped to pursue a group of 50-100 gangsters in the mountains of Afghanistan/Pakistan. Iraq and Afghanistan (including the Taliban) should have been bypassed, neither of them were a threat. Maybe it still would have taken 9.5 years, but we could have avoided 300K deaths and saved $1Trillion.



Hopefully this allows the US to remove its military presence from the middle east entirely. It has been a ridiculous 40 years of wasted life and money and has not made a single US citizen any safer.

Boise and sno,



I appreciate what you are both saying, and realize that you both aren't saying the same thing. Generally I'll agree with what jvquarterback is saying. The longer we stay in the middle east the stronger their hatred for America becomes. Sure some of the middle eastern people appreciate what the USA is trying to do, but too many citizen deaths are just fueling the hatred for our country.



We are fighting an enemy that is nearly impossible to define. We are arming AQ in some instances (Libya), and killing them at other times. I'd prefer the USA leaving the middle east completely and letting the different groups there fight amongst themselves instead of unifying against America because of our presence there.

declocoug wrote:
Boise and sno,



I appreciate what you are both saying, and realize that you both aren't saying the same thing. Generally I'll agree with what jvquarterback is saying. The longer we stay in the middle east the stronger their hatred for America becomes. Sure some of the middle eastern people appreciate what the USA is trying to do, but too many citizen deaths are just fueling the hatred for our country.



We are fighting an enemy that is nearly impossible to define. We are arming AQ in some instances (Libya), and killing them at other times. I'd prefer the USA leaving the middle east completely and letting the different groups there fight amongst themselves instead of unifying against America because of our presence there.

The problem isn't that our initial goal in entering Afghanistan wasn't good, but rather that we lost focus. Surely you aren't arguing that we should have just rolled over after 9/11 instead of going on the offensive. Killing Bin Laden wasn't the end game--eradicating the Taliban and Al Qaeda was the goal and bin Laden was just a key step in that process. No matter the cost to this point, we are where we are---we have a real opportunity to finish off AQ and the Taliban. As long as we focus on that goal without getting distracted by vendettas in other areas of the Middle East, that goal is still attainable.

No, not wasted, glad we finally did it, and the Middle East already disliked us way before we were there. It's like saying you're worried that killing Osama will make the terrorists mad, they already hate us and plot to do terrible things to us.

Suggest rolling over? No way.

But did I want to see the USA overreacting, invading too many countries and spreading ourselves too thin, losing site of what we are doing, and speding trillions needlessly? Also No.



Again, I am as happy as anyone knowing that one less true enemy of the USA is no longer living among us. Just hate seeing the USA jump headlong into wars that we will be fighting for who knows how long.



Did the USA really need to enter afghanistan with ground troops for 10 years? Or could gathering intel and performing a surgical strike at some point (like what was done yesterday) have done the job without killing numberless civilians and thousands of our own soldiers. And I don't think that you're going to get rid of Al-qaida, ever. The longer the USA fights it, the more the antaganism will grow and the more the recruits will pour in for aq. Someone will always be ready to step in for those we kill off. Again, not saying the USA should roll over, just have to be realistic about what's happening.



And Schmoe I'm also glad we got that SOB but don't agree at all with the approach the USA has taken. Why make more enemies than we already have? I never said that the middle east was our friend before, just pointing out that the longer we are there, the more civilians become terrorists as their family members are killed (some correctly identified as terrorists, and some as innocent bystanders) by this war.



I just see the whole situation in the middle east as a lost cause, especially with much more pressing concerns facing America at home.

The longer we are there, the more friends we make, as well. I see what you're saying, but if our military focus is going to be anywhere right now, I think the Middle East is the right place.

Schmoe wrote:
The longer we are there, the more friends we make, as well. I see what you're saying, but if our military focus is going to be anywhere right now, I think the Middle East is the right place.

And that's the real question, does our military "need" to be anywhere right now? Maybe I don't have all the information.

I've been out of town, and haven't had a chance to read up on this. Only hear bits and pieces.



What I want to know... Did they really toss his body into the sea?



He was on the FBI's 10 most wanted list. Why go in and kill him, then toss his body into the ocean???



I seriously have to be missing something. My 8 year old can lie better than that.

They threw his body to the sharks to prevent any burial place from becoming a shrine and his becoming a more visible martyr. That, and to respect the Islamic custom of burial within 24 hours of death.

On Iraq I have been a little torn but for two thoughts. First, we did Iraq the Bush way and Iran the U. N. way. Which is closer to having a nuke? Second, our entering Iraq was a huge assist to change the focus of terrorism. They were flocking there to fight our soldiers which I think resulted in our soldiers fighting them and not our police and civilians. So, even though I hate that many of our young men have died over there, I believe we have "escaped" the main focus of foreign terrorists coming to our shores and causing more blood and death here. I like the odds of our soldiers surviving the fight than I do our civilians.



And I don't buy the argument that our being over there has led to even more terrorists. The feeble minded that are endoctrinated by Islamic leaders to seek martyrdom would do so regardless of anything that we do. They bombed the embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, the Cole, the WTC twice, Lebanon baracks, were all before Iraq and Afganastan. We even helped support Bin Laden (not intentionally as he was just there fighting) and the Mujahadeen in Afganastan against the Russians and yet they still wage holy war against us.



Monday was a great day and the intelligence that will be garnered from the prisoners and the computers will be invaluable in fighting and destroying Al Qaeda and other terror orgs. Congratulations for our brave men and women in this victory over evil.

The more I think about it the more I believe that burial at sea is literally the best choice they could have made for Osama's remains.



No site to become a shrine.

Follows Muslim burial law (mostly).

Feeds the fishes.

LOL



I'm all for feeding the sharks and fishes AND leaving no place for a shrine.



But Muslims believe in an eye for an eye. I'm not for respecting him in his beliefs. Wait for 25 hours before they toss him. Not 24 hours. Hell... Tie a cement block around his neck so he sinks faster. Tie a Bible to his hands. I don't care, just don't respect the bastard in his beliefs since he didn't respect ours.



A guy who deserves respect, has to earn it.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

And thats exactly why we're better than he was. And I like it that way.

imuakahuku,

Are you really arguing that the US military presence in the middle east has nothing to do with inciting terrorism? Talk about rolling over and sticking your head in the sand. All evidence points to an increase in attacks when a country has a foreign military encamped there. That is the only thing for which the evidence bears out a correlation. That comes from CIA/pentagon reports but should be evident to anyone willing to look. So if OBLs death leads to a withdrawal of US troops from the middle east it will help, otherwise it just doesn't matter one bit.



The thing that puzzles me the most is that a delta/seal squad was facing only four armed men and a woman and they simply killed them. They should have been trained well enough to take him alive. Wouldn't that have been the better option? They could have gotten more information in the field even if they weren't able to extract him.