This scare the shit out of anyone else?

[Megawat22]

snip

He used her as a human shield. I think that's how she got shot.

He didn't try to shoot anyone though. You're ignoring the part where I said he was unarmed. And he never hid behind his wife at all.

He did

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110502/pl_afp/usattacksbinladenshield

Celebrating the death of a man is barbaric and it only makes you look as bad as the enemy. That's not up for dispute.

Fuck you. You're not the final word on what's barbaric. It's not barbaric to celebrate the end of an evil reign and the death of a man who's been waging war on you. There is nothing wrong with celebrating good news and it harms nobody.

Although you're right on not giving him a grave I suppose. That wouldn't have worked out well.
Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13286312

That report is from 2 days ago and says that anyone could have put the woman there, she may have very well been trying to protect her husband. He shouldn't have let her defend him if she opted for it and he shouldn't have hid behind her in the first place. And stuff has changed since the report first came out.
And my country has hardly been unaffected by his attacks. There have been multiple bombings from his supporters in a war that wasn't ours to begin with. My country has sent our troops, special forces and gear out there to help America during a time we can't afford to. And how are we repayed? Reports of Americans celebrating in the streets and outside of the White House at the death of the biggest bargaining chip we could hope for. And he was right there. Unarmed.
And it's not the end of an evil reign at all. Quite the opposite. He was a figure-head. All that comes from his death are a few less recruits for a while and Al-Qaeda elect a new mascot.
Osama Bin Laden either gets replaced with some new blood hungry face who won't hold back or he goes down as a martyr. That's one heck of a victory!

 

[GeneralDefiance]

Saddam Hussein was captured,taken to guantanamo,interrogated,taken back to iraq and put to death all on the back of Coallition pressure to bring stability to that region of the world based on the imposed invasion brought about by the reaction to the tragedy of 9/11 (which was nothing to do with him) after the deposition of the taliban government in afghan.

Every step of the way you could turn on a tv set or go online and you couldnt possibly have gotten anymore info on what was going on, and the invasion of iraq was green lighted on the scant "intelligence" of weapons of mass distruction that were claimed to have been confirmed, we know that was not true.Saddam was found,in a hole,in the middle of nowhere, and justice was served unto him in the very essence of the democracy that was being installed in his country.

So Bin Laden manages to elude forces for a decade, is amazingly found 2 counties away in pakistan out of the blue, is merely shot and fucked into the sea with only a "yeah it was him, believe us" and a photo of a bloodstained bedroom floor for proof.

No capture for trial,No public humiliation as with saddam, no pumping for as much information as he would or wouldnt give, just tossed into the sea no less..and the photos stay classified..

I reckon bin ladens been dead for years, and this is the ultimate PR assasination to bring to an end a very unpopular war to free up the costliest hobby in world (war),a war that was founded on revenge,assumption, and very sketchy information, as pressure mounts to dethrone another dictator in control of another oil rich nation, just in time to seal the popular vote in time for another term in office.....

 

[Harrowdown]

best served cold.

and best enjoyed cold.

So it's a good thing that a world power can seek revenge against individuals for the pleasure of revenge?

Yes and if you don't want the number one world superpower to kill you don't piss it off. Pretty simple.

So you're saying that America has a right to kill anyone that they judge to have wronged them, even if it means entering a sovreign country not actively involved in the conflict and attacking unarmed men and women? what gives them such a right? Is it because Bin Laden is 'evil'? If we even accept that there is such a thing as good or evil, then how is America any better than Al Queda? The official civilian death toll since America entered the Middle East is beyond 100,000. You may argue that civilian casualties are an acceptable part of war, but then you would have to agree that human life is expendable, providing the ends are suitable, and would then not be able to denounce Bin Laden's attacks on American citizens without holding paradoxical views. Terrorist attacks themselves are in fact, acts of war, so following the inevitable path your reasoning must logically take, you must conclude that either Bin Laden has not committed evil, or that America is equally evil. Additionally, if revenge is indeed acceptable, then surely America has surpassed the point at which they are even with the enemy.

 

[Popido]

No capture for trial,No public humiliation as with saddam, no pumping for as much information as he would or wouldnt give, just tossed into the sea no less..and the photos stay classified..

I reckon bin ladens been dead for years, and this is the ultimate PR assasination to bring to an end a very unpopular war to free up the costliest hobby in world (war),a war that was founded on revenge,assumption, and very sketchy information, as pressure mounts to dethrone another dictator in control of another oil rich nation, just in time to seal the popular vote in time for another term in office.....

They found a computer thou'. It could play a part in the next strategic move. Im betting on new target.

 

[SirFuzzi]

Well, if they were pillaging and looting and getting all super-rowdy and drunk in the streets, inciting violence and whatnot, I'd take issue but seriously, this is a guy who advocated and ordered the death of thousands of innocents, causing one of the most infuriating catastrophes in recent history, and frankly I think jubilation is a pretty good answer.

I'm going to side with the, "It's worse when sports teams win," argument. And what's worse yet, it's still better than what goes on when the Westboro Baptist Church gets involved. Sure, it's a bit of a medieval and primal-bloodlust kind of move, but hey-- nobody's perfect and we've all slipped up for worse reasons than in celebration of the death of the latest great evil. I don't think it's in respect to anything but vengeance being served-- and quite honestly, had I been American and lost someone close in the two towers bombing, I believe I'd be just as quick to leap up and celebrate. Maybe not in the streets (I can't say for sure, really), but I'd definitely be drinking to it with a few friends.

It's not a response of logic or any rationale. It's a wholly primitive, emotional outburst to a vengeance that, let's face it, some people have most likely been sitting pretty on for ten years. It's well and all to sit on the high ground and say, "Hey, death is never pretty," but then you have to think-- there are people in those crowds, very likely a strong portion of each, that were impacted very personally by the bombings. You can't deny them their right to an emotional celebration of a man who had a (albeit indirect) hand in their misery and what misfortunes may have followed.

Medieval? Yes. Barbaric? Debatable. Scary? Not in the least. Scary is the Westboro Baptist Church. Scary is those whacked-out sports celebrations. This... is, well, much, MUCH better than it could be.

 

[Phoenixlight]

And with that right there you've officially invalidated anything else you may have had to say.

Why because George Bush was such a nice friendly guy that wouldn't ever do something like this? Watch Fahrenheit 9/11 (it's a film), when he was told about the attack he wasn't shocked at all and carried on like nothing had happened which suggests that he was involved with it. Because of 9/11 the government is able to take away certain freedoms from people (like the privacy of information) who are now scared of further attacks. This also ensures the continued support of conflicts around the world to "fight terroism" or "secure oil" as a more cynical person would believe.

 

[McMullen]

And this is happening all over the US, people are actively celebrating killing a guy? Does that not seem a bit medieval to anyone else? When people turn out in their thousands to celebrate something like this it justs worries me like hell.

This is quite normal for us. My fellow classmates erupted in cheers when OJ was declared not guilty. They talked through the national moment of silence for the Oklahoma City bombing victims. They were more interested in who Clinton was fucking than what he was doing as president, good or bad. This kind of thing more or less continued into adulthood.

People describe the hellish culture of Xbox Live as if it is some new phenomenon. It existed here well before the Internet became a Big Thing.

Don't be disturbed by the fact that many of us are insane misguided cavemen. Be disturbed that we are insane misguided cavemen with a permanent seat on the UN Security council and a nuclear arsenal.

Have a nice day!

I'm disturbed how quick you are to label people caveman. Because of course having closure is nothing to celebrate.

Then I imagine you must be disturbed often. I've learned that closure is nice, but the universe is not a place that grants it often, and trying to obtain it from external sources can get you in more trouble than you had to start with. Although I've not had direct experience, this seems to be especially true if your definition of closure involves the death of others. Sometimes it can get thousands of people to kill each other for decades, perhaps centuries, though the original issue needing closure may be forgotten soon after the people directly involved are all dead.

Bin Laden's death probably makes the world a better place, but after nearly ten years, it just doesn't seem like a significant enough event to celebrate. If people felt they needed it to move on with their lives, I think they were looking for closure in the wrong place, and I think they'll soon find that their problems have not gone away.

 

[ServebotFrank]

While I understand that it's considered "wrong" to celebrate someone's death (Also you guys are turning this into a anti-America thread. May I remind you guys of Hitler?) and how this guy is a human being, think about this. When you claim responsibility to orchestrating an event that killed thousands of people including women and children. Then any respect you had as a human being is gone. It's gone. I mentioned earlier about Hitler didn't I? I imagine you Europeans were quite happy when he died weren't you? Before you ***** about WW2 I'll say that Russia would've fucked you guys over if it wasn't for America. I'm saying that if you guys celebrate the death of Hitler, a man who caused mass genocide, then I think America is well justified in celebrating Osama's death.

Note that everyone volunteers for the military in America too. I won't stand for people going Anti-America just because it's America doing it that's prejudice. If you wouldn't want people doing it to you then you shouldn't say anything either. That is all.

People didn't celebrate the death of Hitler, they celebrated the fall of the Axis power, and being able to return home because the war had ended. Hitler killing himself was just another nail in the coffin; the Axis power was already collapsing in on itself.

This thread (and while that's not necessarily the case, because people tend to generalize at times) is not supposed to be "Anti-America", simply "Anti-people-who-use-bad-guy-dead-as-an-excuse-to-act-like-it's-Spring-Break". We're all thrilled he's dead, but it doesn't end the war or their organization, so we move on.

You want celebration? When couples celebrate because their significant other has returned home, and a war is at an end, then yes, by all means.
Celebrating because one person was killed? Poor form. Nevermind that it's statistically absurd. One man against tens of thousands? Bravo.

Listen. Some people in America were paranoid as shit because of this guy. Not saying I was but some people were because of 9/11 and some of these people celebrating are in fact families of victims of 9/11 or the troops that were killed by him in some way. If some people want to celebrate because they know this guy is gone, let them; if some people want to be more patriotic about all this, let them. People think it's a good thing and I wouldn't stop them for this occasion by any means.

On a side note: Our troops should be out of Afghanistan. They're not needed any more.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that.
Hell, it made me paranoid, too, to an extent. There's a staggering difference between being happy the man is dead/being patriotic/feeling elation over all those lost finally being avenged (in some way, anyway. He was just a figurehead, after all), and partying like it's your birthday. When you're in your early 20's. Over the death of a single person who, end-game, really doesn't matter all that much.

On the other hand, what I whole-heartedly agree with, is getting everyone's troops out of Afghanistan. We still have a few (even though everyone was supposed to be back, by now), and I'm told yours are supposed to be pulled out by sometime this year. Everyone should have been back home years ago. I know I definitely don't want to be out there, again.

Wait, people are honestly partying? I thought it was a quick "Run out and shout 'It's done!'" Anyway I personally don't care about the partying though I would prefer if people start shutting up some time soon. I doubt we'll reach an agreement some time soon which sucks in these types of forums unfortunately and the U.S. Government itself for that matter (Why can't anyone agree on shit?)

 

[Hainted]

I'm surprised at people.It's simple you don't want the bear to hunt you down and make you watch as it rapes your children to death and forces you to rape their corpses for it's own amusement.DON'T POKE THE BEAR.Simple.

 

[spectrenihlus]

best served cold.

and best enjoyed cold.

So it's a good thing that a world power can seek revenge against individuals for the pleasure of revenge?

Yes and if you don't want the number one world superpower to kill you don't piss it off. Pretty simple.

So you're saying that America has a right to kill anyone that they judge to have wronged them, even if it means entering a sovreign country not actively involved in the conflict and attacking unarmed men and women? what gives them such a right? Is it because Bin Laden is 'evil'? If we even accept that there is such a thing as good or evil, then how is America any better than Al Queda? The official civilian death toll since America entered the Middle East is beyond 100,000. You may argue that civilian casualties are an acceptable part of war, but then you would have to agree that human life is expendable, providing the ends are suitable, and would then not be able to denounce Bin Laden's attacks on American citizens without holding paradoxical views. Terrorist attacks themselves are in fact, acts of war, so following the inevitable path your reasoning must logically take, you must conclude that either Bin Laden has not committed evil, or that America is equally evil. Additionally, if revenge is indeed acceptable, then surely America has surpassed the point at which they are even with the enemy.

best served cold.

and best enjoyed cold.

So it's a good thing that a world power can seek revenge against individuals for the pleasure of revenge?

Yes and if you don't want the number one world superpower to kill you don't piss it off. Pretty simple.

So you're saying that America has a right to kill anyone that they judge to have wronged them, even if it means entering a sovreign country not actively involved in the conflict and attacking unarmed men and women? what gives them such a right? Is it because Bin Laden is 'evil'? If we even accept that there is such a thing as good or evil, then how is America any better than Al Queda? The official civilian death toll since America entered the Middle East is beyond 100,000. You may argue that civilian casualties are an acceptable part of war, but then you would have to agree that human life is expendable, providing the ends are suitable, and would then not be able to denounce Bin Laden's attacks on American citizens without holding paradoxical views. Terrorist attacks themselves are in fact, acts of war, so following the inevitable path your reasoning must logically take, you must conclude that either Bin Laden has not committed evil, or that America is equally evil. Additionally, if revenge is indeed acceptable, then surely America has surpassed the point at which they are even with the enemy.

We took out Bin Laden because he was a threat and to make an example out of him. If that means going into a sovereign country to do so then we do it because we can, if another country had the ability to go into a country and kill someone they would do the exact same thing (eg: Israel's capture of Adolf Eichmann in Argentina). There is no good or evil in international politics only our guys and their guys and if our guys are under threat by their guys we take their guys out. This is how it has occured throughout history and it is just naive to think otherwise. International laws are only good if both sides abide by them the moment one sides doesn't they don't hold any meaning.

 

[proctorninja2]

to give some back story my father was almost killed in 9/11 my uncle at the time was a NYC police officer and another uncle of mine worked a couple blocks away from the twin towers, Osama's death to me is worth cerebrating because of how much i could have lost and to all the people who lost family and friends. i dont think every death should be celebrated in such a manor but it brings much relief that the man who was responsible for the attack was finally brought to justice

 

[GameNeo]

And with that right there you've officially invalidated anything else you may have had to say.

Why because George Bush was such a nice friendly guy that wouldn't ever do something like this? Watch Fahrenheit 9/11 (it's a film), when he was told about the attack he wasn't shocked at all and carried on like nothing had happened which suggests that he was involved with it. Because of 9/11 the government is able to take away certain freedoms from people (like the privacy of information) who are now scared of further attacks. This also ensures the continued support of conflicts around the world to "fight terroism" or "secure oil" as a more cynical person would believe.

Are you seriously basing your argument off a film designed to be controversial to make money? You are a the biggest idiot I have seen in a few weeks.

 

[Mute52]

This war has been going on for 10 years.
The way i see it, it's just another person killed, adding to the death toll for both sides.

 

[DenSomKastade]

patriotism = nationalism
It's the same thing and the states were the only ones who keept it after ww2 for some reason. I think they should take it easy with the patriotism, because believeing that your country is the best in the world kinda offends everyone else. Just saying...

 

[JJMUG]

And this is happening all over the US, \
\

Nope, i wish i could say your ignorance of the United States was astounding but nothing typed by non United States users does anymore. The streets were not filled here in Buffalo, nor Detroit, or Cleveland (these are other cites in the U.S, which has many), but then again those don't exist as you were not bothered to look at a map of the United States. Oh hey i a sure they were celebrating in the streets in the state(the U.S consists of 50 states) of Alabama... oh wait no there was a massive tornado that hit there, or hey screw rebuilding their lives were massive devastation hit in many states. But hey your right all over the U.S. Hey your right the all over the U.S. people had Massive celebrations, because to you the US only consists of two cites New York City and Washington D.C.

Funny enough the two cites that you believe that the U.S only has that had people in the streets were New York City were the Twin Towers once stood and Washington D.C were the Pentagon was hit. The same two cites were the attacks on September the 11th left the biggest scars both mentally on the people with the collapse of the towers, the deaths of the New York City Police Department, and New York City Fire Department members (people that I am surprised that you did not mock), death of loved ones ect...

 

[YamadaJisho]

Osama bin Laden was a monster of the first degree, and it is a good thing that he was removed from the world scene. But let me make this perfectly clear. No one should be glad he's dead. I'm not glad Osama bin Laden is dead. What I am is RELIEVED. I'm relieved he can no longer do harm to the world. Don't get me wrong, I'm under NO illusions that the terrorism is going to stop or anything. But it's neve a good thing to be GLAD someone's dead. I beleive it would have been better to capture him alive, or something of the like. Not that I think that we should have wasted American lives to try to capture him alive (several other people would have been dead and Osama could have plausably escaped), but I am not glad he's dead. It's the same thing with people like adolf Hitler. I'm not glad Hitler is dead, I'm relieved he's no longer on the world scene. People might say that Hitler was worse than Osama, but that's only really because Hitler had more ability and power at his disposal, not more evil. But no one should be glad that he's dead, and the fact that even a single American is celebrating the death of another human being is scary.