Military given go-ahead to detain US terrorist suspects without trial

[knapplc]

I told you going into Pakistan was no problem cause the government didn't have full control of their country. Solely crediting Obama with the kill is absurd. Without of those years of Bush pursuing him Osama would be alive today and Obama wouldn't have gotten a chance to kill him. It was a symbolic kill. Killing Osama isn't going to stop terrorism. I dont really care if he was dead or alive cause there were bigger problems than him.

This is utter BS. Laughable. But whatever. You can believe what you want to believe.

You mean reality instead of fantasy based? I don't really think you kept up to knowthe inroads that the Taliban made into Pakistan.

Fantasy, as in your straw-man arguments and red herrings? Nobody said that Obama got sole credit for killing bin Laden. Straw man. Nobody is talking about whether the Taliban has sovereignty over Pakistan-held territory. Red herring.

You have no idea what I know about the Taliban. I'm as informed as you, I have the same access to google as you, and neither of us are on the ground over there. I have buddies on the ground in Afghanistan, I've kept up correspondence with a friend in an intelligence FOB over there, and I have as much knowledge of the situation as any other joker sitting on his butt in front of a monitor has. So stop with the implication that you know more than I do about the situation over there.

As Carlfense pointed out, Bush stopped pursuing bin Laden, even stated it publicly.

Let's be honest here. If Bush had killed Bin Laden he would be on the GOP version of Mt. Rushmore by now. He failed. Since Obama succeeded it's now regarded as not a big deal.

Exactly. It beggars belief that people insinuate otherwise.

husker_99 - you're a Republican, yes?

 

[husker_99]

I told you going into Pakistan was no problem cause the government didn't have full control of their country. Solely crediting Obama with the kill is absurd. Without of those years of Bush pursuing him Osama would be alive today and Obama wouldn't have gotten a chance to kill him. It was a symbolic kill. Killing Osama isn't going to stop terrorism. I dont really care if he was dead or alive cause there were bigger problems than him.

This is utter BS. Laughable. But whatever. You can believe what you want to believe.

You mean reality instead of fantasy based? I don't really think you kept up to knowthe inroads that the Taliban made into Pakistan.

Fantasy, as in your straw-man arguments and red herrings? Nobody said that Obama got sole credit for killing bin Laden. Straw man. Nobody is talking about whether the Taliban has sovereignty over Pakistan-held territory. Red herring.

You have no idea what I know about the Taliban. I'm as informed as you, I have the same access to google as you, and neither of us are on the ground over there. I have buddies on the ground in Afghanistan, I've kept up correspondence with a friend in an intelligence FOB over there, and I have as much knowledge of the situation as any other joker sitting on his butt in front of a monitor has. So stop with the implication that you know more than I do about the situation over there.

As Carlfense pointed out, Bush stopped pursuing bin Laden, even stated it publicly.

Let's be honest here. If Bush had killed Bin Laden he would be on the GOP version of Mt. Rushmore by now. He failed. Since Obama succeeded it's now regarded as not a big deal.

Exactly. It beggars belief that people insinuate otherwise.

husker_99 - you're a Republican, yes?

:facepalm:

all your posts of this subject have been strawman

 

[knapplc]

all your posts of this subject have been strawman

If by "all of" you mean "none," then I agree.

 

[carlfense]

Let's be honest here. If Bush had killed Bin Laden he would be on the GOP version of Mt. Rushmore by now. He failed. Since Obama succeeded it's now regarded as not a big deal.

Exactly. It beggars belief that people insinuate otherwise.

Yes it does. That's what I meant by a post-truth era.

Who cares about reality? I've been told by my political party that I should reject reality and give all of the credit to "our" guys.

 

[husker_99]

all your posts of this subject have been strawman

If by "all of" you mean "none," then I agree.

:bs:

 

[knapplc]

Show me where I have created straw men in my discussion with you. The floor is yours.

 

[husker_99]

Show me where I have created straw men in my discussion with you. The floor is yours.

Why you just ignore it. we will just agree to disagree that Obama doesn't have any balls.

 

[carlfense]

Show me where I have created straw men in my discussion with you. The floor is yours.

Why you just ignore it. we will just agree to disagree that Obama doesn't have any balls.

^^^^just realized that knapplc didn't use a strawman argument and wants to divert attention.

 

[knapplc]

Show me where I have created straw men in my discussion with you. The floor is yours.

Why you just ignore it. we will just agree to disagree that Obama doesn't have any balls.

^^^^just realized that knapplc didn't use a strawman argument and wants to divert attention.

DINGDINGDINGDINGDINGDINGDING!!!!!

We have a winner.

That, or someone doesn't really know what a straw man is, but has read/heard the term and threw it out there thinking it may apply. Either way.

 

[husker_99]

Show me where I have created straw men in my discussion with you. The floor is yours.

Why you just ignore it. we will just agree to disagree that Obama doesn't have any balls.

^^^^just realized that knapplc didn't use a strawman argument and wants to divert attention.

you mean some of his bullsh#t rhetoric that had nothing to do with anything? yeah whatever.

 

[carlfense]

Post his straw man arguments. That, or admit that you were wrong.

Or just run away like you appear to be doing.

 

[knapplc]

you mean some of his bullsh#t rhetoric that had nothing to do with anything? yeah whatever.

Listen, I'll be the first to admit that I'm a walking bag of BS at times. But this isn't one of those times.

I'm wrong often enough to not care if I'm wrong here. But I'm not wrong. My assertions had nothing to do with straw man arguments, they were simply assertions based on verifiable info. If you can show me where I used a straw man to make a point in our recent discussion, I'll admit I'm wrong. It's no biggie. All goofing aside, this isn't a big deal. Me and you are cool, I hope.

 

[husker_99]

Post his straw man arguments. That, or admit that you were wrong.

Or just run away like you appear to be doing.

this is what knapp said:

Killing the world's most-wanted man, and doing it in the territory of a Nuclear Power, is not a small thing. It's absurd to minimize this. You don't have to like Obama in any way to recognize the gravity of this decision, and to give him approbation for the successful accomplishment of this task. Let's not for a second pretend that the GOP/Tea Party wouldn't have trumpeted this to the heavens if a Republican president (say, George Bush) had accomplished this goal.

had nothing to do with what i said before about how the Pakistani government doesn't even have complete control of their own government. or hell even anything at all.

what i said: I told you going into Pakistan was no problem cause the government didn't have full control of their country. Solely crediting Obama with the kill is absurd. Without of those years of Bush pursuing him Osama would be alive today and Obama wouldn't have gotten a chance to kill him. It was a symbolic kill. Killing Osama isn't going to stop terrorism. I dont really care if he was dead or alive cause there were bigger problems than him.

knapps response: This is utter BS. Laughable. But whatever. You can believe what you want to believe.

I didn't know terrorism is now officially over since Osama bin Laden is dead.

I told knapp that Bush was focusing on overall terrorism and not just one guy but yet knapp failed to realize this. I haven't been running away from anything, i don't live on this board like you and knapp seem to do.

 

[carlfense]

Post his straw man arguments. That, or admit that you were wrong.

Or just run away like you appear to be doing.

this is what knapp said:

Killing the world's most-wanted man, and doing it in the territory of a Nuclear Power, is not a small thing. It's absurd to minimize this. You don't have to like Obama in any way to recognize the gravity of this decision, and to give him approbation for the successful accomplishment of this task. Let's not for a second pretend that the GOP/Tea Party wouldn't have trumpeted this to the heavens if a Republican president (say, George Bush) had accomplished this goal.

had nothing to do with what i said before about how the Pakistani government doesn't even have complete control of their own government. or hell even anything at all.

what i said: I told you going into Pakistan was no problem cause the government didn't have full control of their country. Solely crediting Obama with the kill is absurd. Without of those years of Bush pursuing him Osama would be alive today and Obama wouldn't have gotten a chance to kill him. It was a symbolic kill. Killing Osama isn't going to stop terrorism. I dont really care if he was dead or alive cause there were bigger problems than him.

knapps response: This is utter BS. Laughable. But whatever. You can believe what you want to believe.

I didn't know terrorism is now officially over since Osama bin Laden is dead.

I told knapp that Bush was focusing on overall terrorism and not just one guy but yet knapp failed to realize this. I haven't been running away from anything, i don't live on this board like you and knapp seem to do.

Bush gave up on Osama. He said so himself. Your statement in bold is factually incorrect.

 

[knapplc]

I told knapp that Bush was focusing on overall terrorism and not just one guy but yet knapp failed to realize this.

Your deflection of Bush's failure to kill Public Enemy #1 with some BS Republican talking point doesn't mean in any way that I "failed to realize" something. Let's be adults here.