• Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.

    However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.

    We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure.
  • Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

Osama bin Laden is dead (the Mission Accomplished Thread)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Adrexus

Do it the bird way!
That's probably it.



Pedophile.

Wow dude, sorry to pry, but I was just trying to find out if your spelling of Bin Laden was due to a regional difference. I guess that's not the case it seems.
 

cantab

Well-Known Member
Is his death really a major turning point? I'm sure there are many others willing to take Osama's place.
That's exactly the problem. The possibility of internal power struggles, as others have mentioned.

Bin Laden's name is in Arabic: أسامة بن محمد بن عوض بن لادن
So as such, romanisation might legitimately vary. Spellings of Al-Qaeda vary.
 

Mister_SGG

Well-Known Member
Wow dude, sorry to pry, but I was just trying to find out if your spelling of Bin Laden was due to a regional difference. I guess that's not the case it seems.

I was just joking around, I live in Ontario, Canada. Nothing wrong with giving out the province.
 

Adrexus

Do it the bird way!
I was just joking around, I live in Ontario, Canada. Nothing wrong with giving out the province.

Oh okay, I thought you might have been trying to convey sarcasm. I guess my sarcasm meter might be a little off today.
 

SilentMemento

Lone Wolf
Intel from the compound would have been useful whether or not bin Laden had been killed. It's a consequence of the operation, not of bin Laden's death.

No, Bush panned and carried out a war in Iraq that any fool could predict would kill thousands of innocent people, just to remove one dictator from power, a dictator who had nothing to do with Al Qaeda and no means of threatening the US.

If bin Laden is to be held responsible for all deaths caused by Al Qaeda terrorists, then Bush has to be held responsible for all deaths caused by US forces during his presidency. The latter figure is rather higher.

(I know, of course, that there is the difference of intent. But manslaughter is still a crime, even if it's seen as less serious than murder.)

You've got to be kidding me. I listed only a few of the crimes that bin-Laden committed. He's on the same level as Hitler and Stalin when it comes to murdering innocent people. I hate Bush, but I can't believe that you actually compared him to a terrorist who murdered tens of thousands of innocent people just because they didn't believe in the same things that he did.

And saying that Saddam was innocent and not a threat? After what he did to the Kurds? After invading Kuwait and Iran just to get oil? I disagree. Any ruler who commits an ethnic cleansing and starts two wars purely for oil deserves to be overthrown and executed.

@Cinderdust: Um, he more ordered and directed killings than committed them.

That's still the same as committing the murders. So, according to your logic, Hitler never murdered the Jews? Stalin never killed the millions of people he sent to labor camps?
 

legendarypokemonmaster

Well-Known Member
And saying that Saddam was innocent and not a threat? After what he did to the Kurds? After invading Kuwait and Iran just to get oil? I disagree. Any ruler who commits an ethnic cleansing and starts two wars purely for oil deserves to be overthrown and executed.
He wasn't a threat to the US. There are countless other genocides that we have done nothing about.
 

cantab

Well-Known Member
He's on the same level as Hitler and Stalin when it comes to murdering innocent people.
No. Tens of thousands <<< millions.

And saying that Saddam was innocent and not a threat?
I did not say that Saddam Hussein was innocent. Only that he posed no direct threat to the USA.

In an ideal world, removing Saddam from power would have been a good thing. But in the real world, I'm deeply sceptical that the invasion of Iraq has benefited either the Iraqi people or global security.
 

ZeroKyurem

Final Smash User
I have a question. Hitler is the devil and his "brother" was Osama. Now that these 2 people are down, what about his other brother/sister? Everyone knows it'll happen in the future.
 

legendarypokemonmaster

Well-Known Member
I have a question. Hitler is the devil and his "brother" was Osama. Now that these 2 people are down, what about his other brother/sister? Everyone knows it'll happen in the future.
It's Sara Palin.

But seriously, what do you mean? Three antichrist incarnations?
 

BigLutz

Banned
I did not say that Saddam Hussein was innocent. Only that he posed no direct threat to the USA.

At the time we believed he had a huge cache of WMDs, with quickly widdling support in maintaining a blockaid. As well as signs that al Qaeda was beginning to reach out to him in the hopes of gaining weaponry.

Lets say we did leave him in power, and Iran begins to heighten its nuclear program, do you honestly think that Saddam or his sons would have allowed that to go on with out starting their own nuclear program? Or that they would not have eventually decided al Qaeda provided a secret delivery system for their weapons?

In an ideal world, removing Saddam from power would have been a good thing. But in the real world, I'm deeply sceptical that the invasion of Iraq has benefited either the Iraqi people or global security.

Right now Iraq is mainly at peace, they have a democratic government, a stable military, and civilians leaving in freedom, I can't see how that is not beneficial to the Iraqi public.
 

legendarypokemonmaster

Well-Known Member
Lets say we did leave him in power, and Iran begins to heighten its nuclear program, do you honestly think that Saddam or his sons would have allowed that to go on with out starting their own nuclear program? Or that they would not have eventually decided al Qaeda provided a secret delivery system for their weapons?
Then we should invade every country because they all have the potential to gain WMDs.
 

SilentMemento

Lone Wolf
He wasn't a threat to the US. There are countless other genocides that we have done nothing about.

Yes, he was. Kuwait was our ally. We get a lot of our oil from the Middle East. Imagine if Saddam got control of the oil fields in Kuwait and/or Iran. He wouldn't hand over any oil to the United States or any Western country. Without the majority of our oil, our military vehicles - jets, tanks, ships, etc. - can't do anything, much less protect our countries. You can piece it from there.

As to your genocide question? I will say that we should have done something about them as well. Genocide and mass murder of innocent people is sickening, and the people who do something as horrible as that should face justice.

Believe me; I wish my country would have done more in Rwanda, Serbia, Darfur, or anywhere else that was going through a mass murder/genocide. It won't bring the people who died back, but we could at least bring the murderers to justice so that the souls of the people who were killed can rest in peace and so that their families can find comfort and solace.
 

Blackjack the Titan

It’s been a while
Hhhhheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee''''''''''''ssssssssss dddddeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaddddd
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

SilentMemento

Lone Wolf
No. Tens of thousands <<< millions.

The intent was the same. Kill anyone who doesn't agree. If bin-Laden had his way, all of us would be dead.

I did not say that Saddam Hussein was innocent. Only that he posed no direct threat to the USA.

In an ideal world, removing Saddam from power would have been a good thing. But in the real world, I'm deeply sceptical that the invasion of Iraq has benefited either the Iraqi people or global security.

See my previous post. You really think that Saddam would have stopped trying to invade other countries for oil? When he had the resources, he invaded two countries. Global security was definitely at risk when you consider that all of the West's military vehicles rely on oil in some capacity. When you subtract the oil from the Middle East, you'll eventually run out.

I disagreed with making Saddam's death a public spectacle, but he was a threat.
 

KrayzieBuddha

英雄豪傑
Osama Bin Laden got to be the World Best Hide-&-Seek player around.
 

ZeroKyurem

Final Smash User
FINALLY that threat is gone, now we got to worry about retaliating terrorists...
Ture. Now to step up security AGAIN...

**** are you talking about?
That another evil person (that could be considered the devil) will rise again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top