>>>>>>>>>>>But why do all that ?? Since they knew where he was, why they did not simply arrested him more quietly and alive ?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Because the man was the mastermind behind the plot that killed thousands of innocent American citizens.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>I just won a bet with myself - that you'd be the one saying something like this. People rarely change.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Conversely, you did not surprise me at all by writing this. Will not comment on this any further.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>The U.S. served notice to the world today - kill our innocent citizens and we will hunt you down like an animal, no matter how long ago it was. Remember that in 1983, we had a very good idea of who killed our boys at the Marine barracks in Beirut - and Ronald Reagan did NOTHING, for fear of retribution.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>What about if they have sent 200-300 commandoes in civilian clothes who stormed the building during the night
>>>>>>>>>>and capturing more or less everybody there alive. Then take them into military custody, interrogate, convict etc.
>>>>>>>>>>World would receive much much better message.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Message?? 300 commandos in Pakistan in civilian clothes??
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>You really are out of your depth on this. I kind of think the people with the skill to pull off what is probably one of the greatest operations of this type in history understand a little more about what the options and realities of the situation were.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>You want to tell me that CIA cannot put together unit of operatives who look pretty much like Pakistanis, dress them in civilian clothes
>>>>>>>>transport them to the town some days ahead of operation, and then do all this much more efficiently ? Why is this so far fetched ??
>>>>>>>>CIA is not Mosad, but why do you underestimate them that much {g}
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Are pages 2 and 3 of the story below the same story you are being given by the media?
>>>>>>>http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=13512344&page=1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The only piece that is questionable to me is the sea burial...the rest is a typical surgical operation...it may or may not be what actually occurred, it may or may not be all of the information or story (you can pretty much guarantee it's not), but it's a realistic (and not that different from previous similar actions) standard surgical operation...(he's probably in a brig on a ship right now or he is dead and they have the body :o)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The sea burial was my entire point. That's the part that buzzed my s**t detector.
>>>>>
>>>>>So do you think they should have been 100% literally honest about what happened to the body (and if he is still using it ) or parts thereof? Does the public have a right to know?
>>>>>
>>>>>Prescott Bush paid a lot of money to get Pancho Villa's skull for the Crypt at Yale. <s>
>>>>
>>>>Maybe not 100% literally honest but they should have revealed enough to prove bin Laden is dead. "We killed him in a surprise raid and then dropped him in the ocean" doesn't quite cut it.
>>>>
>>>>UPDATE: Lots of good stuff here. I agree completely with Sen. Lautenberg about Pakistan.
>>>>
>>>>http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/05/02/bin.laden.pakistan.knowledge/index.html?hpt=C2
>>>
>>>Prove to whom ? You? Srdjan? Donald Trump? The Arab street?
>>>
>>>Al Queda knows. ISI knows. The Saudis know. Mossad knows. SDECE knows. SIS knows.
>>>
>>>The other part is pr and background noise.
>>
>>Prove to the average person, not to the shadow world you are so fond of. Most of us do not live in that world and we expect reasonably straight answers to straight questions. The official account is in the realm of fairy tales. Maybe it's exactly how it happened, but seriously, why should we take it on faith? Going back to 9/11 itself the danger of taking it on faith has been proven.
>
>So they should compromise serious stuff so that people who are more interested in the Kardashians will be convinced? The moon landing was televised and I'm sure a portion of the public ( and an even larger portion of the Islamic world ) is convinced it was a hoax.
>
>It is a fool's errand to try to settle this stuff in public. The story holds up - as much for what it does not say as for what it said. They went in, they got him, his body is not available for public viewing. Those parts of the story are probably true.The details are just that.
>
>The public can believe whatever portion of it makes them feel however they want to feel. That is not what this is all about.
>
>This is one of those events that is particularly unfortunate in that it elicits a lot of comment from a lot of people who are clueless about the issues involved.

You can be insufferably pompous, you know that? ;-)

We are really better off sticking to football.