What's new

Osama bin Laden getting newfound support in America

people in democracies are ultimately fully responsible for its own govts actions

it’s dishonest to only claim the good things


in dictatorships the people are only partially responsible for the bad things because they could always overthrow the govt but chose not to
Be careful with that argument, because of you want to make that direct association, I can put religion into that association as well. You do not want to go there.
 
Be careful with that argument, because of you want to make that direct association, I can put religion into that association as well. You do not want to go there.
im just saying theres a habit of people in democracies blaming their govt for all sorts of issues when they should blame themselves

these same people blame the people under autocracies for the actions of those autocratic govts

its all assbackwards and should stop


theres nothing wrong with taking responsibility as a voter

i pay taxes and vote for the american war machine and foreign policy so theres responsibility on my part
 
We shouldn’t be supporting this POS because of whom Muslims worldwide got harmed and Islam got insulted because of his stupid actions. He is a khawarij and may he rot in hell.
 
im just saying theres a habit of people in democracies blaming their govt for all sorts of issues when they should blame themselves

these same people blame the people under autocracies for the actions of those autocratic govts

its all assbackwards and should stop


theres nothing wrong with taking responsibility as a voter

i pay taxes and vote for the american war machine and foreign policy so theres responsibility on my part
The danger of what you said is clear. If you claim latitude on HOW, as in methods and paths, I am 'responsible' for my govt's policies, politics, and actions, I can claim the latitude to do the same for your citizenry. That is how Osama bin Laden effectively made all Americans targets for his war against US. That means we should toss the Geneva Convention, no such thing as a 'war crime', no distinction of a 'military' or 'civilian' target, and finally, no end to wars.

Given the current gross technological difference between the US and the West vs everyone else, I say -- go for it. I served my country once and even though I am now approaching retirement age, with this new type of unrestrained warfare, am willing to enlist again. I know my ways in an F-16 cockpit. :enjoy:
 
The danger of what you said is clear. If you claim latitude on HOW, as in methods and paths, I am 'responsible' for my govt's policies, politics, and actions, I can claim the latitude to do the same for your citizenry. That is how Osama bin Laden effectively made all Americans targets for his war against US. That means we should toss the Geneva Convention, no such thing as a 'war crime', no distinction of a 'military' or 'civilian' target, and finally, no end to wars.

Given the current gross technological difference between the US and the West vs everyone else, I say -- go for it. I served my country once and even though I am now approaching retirement age, with this new type of unrestrained warfare, am willing to enlist again. I know my ways in an F-16 cockpit. :enjoy:
geneva convention was the “solution” to this problem and to mindsets like osama

world simply agreed to spare the politicians and civilians and let only the soldiers/mercenaries die and call victory through that

its also reason why proxy war is the trend/future

otherwise u get barbarism and endless wars which is in the interest of no one, regardless of who’s responsible
 
geneva convention was the solution to this problem and to mindsets like osama
Then stay away from YOUR argument in post 60. Muslims are saying that since all Israelis must serve mandatory military time, that means no adult Israeli is protected from attacks. Now Muslims with your argument in post 60, can say that since Americans have the 2nd Amendment, whether an American adult is armed or not, all Americans are 'legitimate' military targets. I say -- bring it on.
 
OBL died in around the year 2002.

There were no family members or relatives of OBL ever living in Pakistan.
They lived and continue to live in their villas, but not in Pakistan.

It was a needed ploy and Obama opted to use it to get elected. He was too close to losing to Romney.
Your own says otherwise. He never died in 2002, you failed to get him, USA did stop making everything a bloody conspiracy. This conspiracy crap has become a huge issue and people have made it an excuse to do absolutely nothing and make conspiracy excuses.
 
No proof of the kidney failure claim.

Now OBL is a hero? Some people are really stupid or desperate to cling to any view in support of a narrative.
Proof of kidney failure comes from numerous personal physicans of bin laden.many of them have spoken openly

My take, bin laden could only survive if he had a transplant done which is very possible

It's not a tough surgery and he is very relatively young

So he probably got a kidney transplant or he died well before this op

Also this is very faulty logic saying we think it happened because Americans said so..I mean duh ....

Then stay away from YOUR argument in post 60. Muslims are saying that since all Israelis must serve mandatory military time, that means no adult Israeli is protected from attacks. Now Muslims with your argument in post 60, can say that since Americans have the 2nd Amendment, whether an American adult is armed or not, all Americans are 'legitimate' military targets. I say -- bring it on.
All empires have said that bring it on..they last for 100-200- even a 1000 years

American empire has now lasted for 80 years ..let see how long it lasts..will it last a 1000 years probably not

200 probably not..we will see

I am already seeing the ghettos ...I have seen poorest state of America, the richest state
I have seen the Arabs and the British

The beginning of demise of an empire starts from it ghettos

Today the aging population of American white collar workers who can't afford medical care is showing that..

It doesn't has money to help Americans dying in poverty but enough to send trillion out of the country

Sooner or later this will crumble
 
Last edited:
Proof of kidney failure comes from numerous personal physicans of bin laden.many of them have spoken openly

My take, bin laden could only survive if he had a transplant done which is very possible

It's not a tough surgery and he is very relatively young

So he probably got a kidney transplant or he died well before this op

Also this is very faulty logic saying we think it happened because Americans said so..I mean duh ....


All empires have said that bring it on..they last for 100-200- even a 1000 years

American empire has now lasted for 80 years ..let see how long it lasts..will it last a 1000 years probably not

200 probably not..we will see

I am already seeing the ghettos ...I have seen poorest state of America, the richest state
I have seen the Arabs and the British

The beginning of demise of an empire starts from it ghettos

Today the aging population of American white collar workers who can't afford medical care is showing that..

It doesn't has money to help Americans dying in poverty but enough to send trillion out of the country

Sooner or later this will crumble
I too heard of Osama Bin Laden having kidney disease in 2002.

Kidney failure may already have killed Bin Laden​



Oliver Burkeman in New York
@oliverburkeman
Sat 19 Jan 2002 01.30 GMT

The president of Pakistan, General Pervez Musharraf, said yesterday he thinks Osama bin Laden has probably died from an untreated kidney disease.
"I think now, frankly, he is dead, for the reason he is a patient, a kidney patient," Gen Musharraf told CNN. Contradicting US intelligence officials who say they do not know if Bin Laden has suffered from kidney problems, he said he knew the al-Qaida leader had taken two dialysis machines into Afghanistan.

"One was specifically for his own personal use. I don't know if he has been getting all that treatment in Afghanistan," Gen Musharraf said.
The general's statements provoked a swift plea for caution from the White House and US military officials. President George Bush's spokesman, Ari Fleischer, said: "I don't think the president would view that [Bin Laden's death] as an unwelcome event, but the fact of the matter is, we do not know."

General Tommy Franks, the military commander in the US campaign in Afghanistan, said he had received no intelligence to confirm or deny Gen Musharraf's claims.
The Pakistani president said video and photographic evidence supported his theory. "The photographs that have been shown of him [Bin Laden] on television show him extremely weak," he told CNN. "I would give the first priority that he is dead and the second priority that he is alive somewhere in Afghanistan."
Bin Laden has long been rumoured to suffer from kidney or heart problems but the US has no clear evidence on the matter, an intelligence official told the Associated Press.
Briefing reporters at the US central command headquarters in Tampa, Florida, Gen Franks admitted he had no idea where Bin Laden was, or whether he was still alive. "We're in the speculative sort of world," he said.
"Bin Laden could be alive, dead, or in Afghanistan, or not. Right now, I don't know where he is." But, he added, "He may hide today, he may hide tomorrow, but the world is not a large enough place for him to hide."
A plethora of reports from intelligence sources suggest the US remains confused over Bin Laden's whereabouts. One claimed he had been sighted in Afghanistan by an unmanned Predator aerial reconnaissance craft, while the CIA is believed to be following leads that suggest he is in Iran, Pakistan, on a ship on the high seas, or heading north through the former Soviet Union.
Hopes of a breakthrough now rest on the questioning of al-Qaida and Taliban prisoners, including 110 at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, and on luck.
Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, said this week he thought Bin Laden and the Taliban's leader, Mullah Omar, were both in Afghanistan, "but we are looking at some other places as well from time to time".

 
USA lied about Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq. Why should we believe the American narrative on War on Terrorism?
American WMD account is based on bad intel received from Iraqi defector(s):


American troops found hidden caches of chemical weapons in Iraq and eliminated them:


Iraqi defector(s) were partially correct.

US have provided evidence of its claims in relation to many developments throughout history, one bad claim is not sufficient to discredit American claims in connection to other developments.

US have declassified records obtained from Abbottabad compound:


Pakistan have also confirmed American account in its official report.

Why is this still an argument? Numerous terrorists fled to Pakistani cities and were retraced and caught from time to time:





Umar Patek was also found in Abbottabad:


Al-Qaeda Network was composed of former Mujahideen who found support in Pakistan for resisting Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Pakistani state had sufficient reason to trust these people until they became a liability due to bad decisions of Osama Bin Laden.
 
American WMD account is based on bad intel received from Iraqi defector(s):


American troops found hidden caches of chemical weapons in Iraq and eliminated them:


Iraqi defector(s) were partially correct.

US have provided evidence of its claims in relation to many developments throughout history, one bad claim is not sufficient to discredit American claims in connection to other developments.

US have declassified records obtained from Abbottabad compound:


Pakistan have also confirmed American account in its official report.

Why is this still an argument? Numerous terrorists fled to Pakistani cities and were retraced and caught from time to time:





Umar Patek was also found in Abbottabad:


Al-Qaeda Network was composed of former Mujahideen who found support in Pakistan for resisting Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Pakistani state had sufficient reason to trust these people until they became a liability due to bad decisions of Osama Bin Laden.
You are entitled to your opinion as I am entitled to my opinion.

I do not know all the details about the Iraq war.

All I know is that USA lied about Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq.
 
You are entitled to your opinion as I am entitled to my opinion.

I do not know all the details about the Iraq war.

All I know is that USA lied about Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq.
Well, I have provided multiple links to you to explain my point. Take your time to read them and understand what happened.
 
Who would support that moron Osama Bin Laden? Although I believe there is no proof that said he did 9/11.

I would not want to be associated with a person with such a bad reputation.
 
American WMD account is based on bad intel received from Iraqi defector(s):


American troops found hidden caches of chemical weapons in Iraq and eliminated them:


Iraqi defector(s) were partially correct.

US have provided evidence of its claims in relation to many developments throughout history, one bad claim is not sufficient to discredit American claims in connection to other developments.

US have declassified records obtained from Abbottabad compound:


Pakistan have also confirmed American account in its official report.

Why is this still an argument? Numerous terrorists fled to Pakistani cities and were retraced and caught from time to time:





Umar Patek was also found in Abbottabad:


Al-Qaeda Network was composed of former Mujahideen who found support in Pakistan for resisting Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Pakistani state had sufficient reason to trust these people until they became a liability due to bad decisions of Osama Bin Laden.
Not really
Whole purpose of Iraq war was very simple

Get a problematic neighbor out of the equation for Israel

I mean no one not even in USA administration really believe the WMD theory it was a joke all over the comedy central
 

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom