Breaking News: Osama Bin Laden Is Dead! - Part 3

[Hound55]

Well, actually that had nothing to do with his opinion....so that is kinda weak evidence.

If you want to say, hey Kel you handled that poorly, fine go ahead....but don't play it as a Far Right desire to take over the thread....because it has nothing to do with that....

If all you are in here to do is gripe about the regwec thing, then I would probably just PM an admin. and complain in that manner because here is not the place.

Any other examples....and I'm being serious, I would like to see what you think is the slant of this thread...

No, it didn't have to do with his opinion. But his opinion led to him being baited and led to him getting bundled out.

And I wouldn't say "Kel, you handled that poorly." because that would single you out when I don't think you're the only one to have handled it poorly.

I also don't think it's a far right thing because I've seen people who are generally left leaning or centrist completely avoid what I've seen to be a pretty clear thought process several times for reasons I can only attribute to being ignorance.

There have been other examples in previous threads, but I'd have to dig through to find names.

 

[Hound55]

The only things that could be considered 'facepalm worthy' are the comments by some who believe Bin Laden should have been shown more respect and compassion...and those who sought to condemn those who celebrated the death of a man who committed the worst terrorist attack on american soil in history.

I don't condemn, I just question those who would celebrate death.

I don't think I have condemned it at any point in time, just pointed out that his death has satisfied a sort of primitive bloodlust.

I accept it as fact, it's the same thing which leads to the heavy push for the death penalty, I wasn't aware that I was being judgemental in the process.

Also, I'm pretty sure the other wasn't referring to me becase I never claimed he "should have been shown more respect and compassion" and have said numerous times that I'm relieved he's gone.

 

[Marx]

No, it didn't have to do with his opinion. But his opinion led to him being baited and led to him getting bundled out.

And I wouldn't say "Kel, you handled that poorly." because that would single you out when I don't think you're the only one to have handled it poorly.

I also don't think it's a far right thing because I've seen people who are generally left leaning or centrist completely avoid what I've seen to be a pretty clear thought process several times for reasons I can only attribute to being ignorance.

There have been other examples in previous threads, but I'd have to dig through to find names.

...and yet there were little to no reported posts from any of the versions of these threads.

That being said, I would take Kel's advice. If all you are here to do is take up for regwec, you should PM an admin because this is not the place for it.

 

[Paradoxium]

Personally I was (and still) more angry than celebratory. It took 10 years and a trillion, and so many troops dead and crippled... and Osama was just chilling out at Pakistan's own West Point the entire time. All the while funneling billions to Pakistan.

It is a monumental and unacceptable failure. The CIA to the Pentagon, to all levels of intelligence and diplomacy... just a gigantic cluster**** up. And here we are still going to continue in Afghanistan and ramping up crap like the Patriot Act, and the TSA. The price was far too high and long.

 

[Marx]

I don't condemn, I just question those who would celebrate death.

I don't think I have condemned it at any point in time, just pointed out that his death has satisfied a sort of primitive bloodlust.

I accept it as fact, it's the same thing which leads to the heavy push for the death penalty, I wasn't aware that I was being judgemental in the process.

I never said you were being judgemental. I said that I find any condemnation or negative feelings toward those who would celebrate the death of a terrorist to be wrong.

Also, I'm pretty sure the other wasn't referring to me becase I never claimed he "should have been shown more respect and compassion" and have said numerous times that I'm relieved he's gone.

There have been others who have suggested such things...and that to me, is laughable.

 

[Kelly]

I don't condemn, I just question those who would celebrate death.

I don't think I have condemned it at any point in time, just pointed out that his death has satisfied a sort of primitive bloodlust.

I accept it as fact, it's the same thing which leads to the heavy push for the death penalty, I wasn't aware that I was being judgemental in the process.

Also, I'm pretty sure the other wasn't referring to me becase I never claimed he "should have been shown more respect and compassion" and have said numerous times that I'm relieved he's gone.

I actually found the celebrations to be a little odd myself Hound....I believe I compared them at one point to the celebrations after 9/11 in many countries of the Middle East...

I do have to say that I'm glad he's dead, and I do believe that it is a closure for SOME.....not all, but some.

 

[Kelly]

Personally I was (and still) more angry than celebratory. It took 10 years and a trillion, and so many troops dead and crippled... and Osama was just chilling out at Pakistan's own West Point the entire time. All the while funneling billions to Pakistan.

It is a monumental and unacceptable failure. The CIA to the Pentagon, to all levels of intelligence and diplomacy... just a gigantic cluster**** up. And here we are still going to continue in Afghanistan and ramping up crap like the Patriot Act, and the TSA. The price was far too high and long.

And Dox you know me well, and you know my stand on these wars.....I'M RIGHT THERE WITH YA....


I'll be honest, and I haven't said this because I didn't want people to think that it was just another chance to slam Obama....because honestly it had nothing to do with his actions in this.....I thought he did a fantastic job...and have said so many times on this thread...

I saw the celebrations as placing Obama on a pedestal for what happened....and that was only my gut feeling at the beginning, that has slowly died away.....I cried when I heard it because the young man that is in my CT died for his country trying to do what was done that night. He was 21 years old, and a brillant, sweet, loving, kind ex-student of mine....so honesty, that was my first reaction....there was absolutely no celebration, there were tears.

 

[Hunter Rider]

No, it didn't have to do with his opinion. But his opinion led to him being baited and led to him getting bundled out.

And I wouldn't say "Kel, you handled that poorly." because that would single you out when I don't think you're the only one to have handled it poorly.

I also don't think it's a far right thing because I've seen people who are generally left leaning or centrist completely avoid what I've seen to be a pretty clear thought process several times for reasons I can only attribute to being ignorance.

There have been other examples in previous threads, but I'd have to dig through to find names.

You are wrong, plain and simple. I don't give a crap about the debate in this thread, Regwec was probated for calling a female mod a c**t, which is about the most degrading thing you can call a woman, that's all there was too it.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

Yes killing OBL, isn't going to anger them at all into furious rage. Giving him an Islamic burial is a wimpy move.

Would you prefer sodomizing the corpse on live tv and then dumping it into the East River? Proper burial is the high road, something Bin Laden and his cronies knew nothing about. If you think that's wimpy then I feel a little sorry for you.

How poorly the whole regwec thing was handled by mods here for a start...

The guy was cleary baited into his comments and then basically exiled, and he wasn't the first person here to be made to feel that their presence was unwelcome.

Please, that guy was copping one hell of an attitude. A blind man could've seen that.

The only things that could be considered 'facepalm worthy' are the comments by some who believe Bin Laden should have been shown more respect and compassion...and those who sought to condemn those who celebrated the death of a man who committed the worst terrorist attack on american soil in history.

While I feel public demonstrations and such were somewhat unnecessary I largely agree.

 

[Hound55]

I actually found the celebrations to be a little odd myself Hound....I believe I compared them at one point to the celebrations after 9/11 in many countries of the Middle East...

Understandable. One man's terrorist is another man's visionary leader.

Same thing goes there, they felt it's a righteous vengeful strike. Apeals to the same bloodlust from a different perspective.

It's why I'd hesitate to attribute the word 'justice' to any of this.

 

[JJJ's Ulcer]

It's why I'd hesitate to attribute the word 'justice' to any of this.

Explain that to someone who lost a loved one on 9/11. Then get back to us.

 

[JJJ's Ulcer]

Also, no one here cares about regwec. Like the man said, take it to PM.

 

[Hound55]

You are wrong, plain and simple. I don't give a crap about the debate in this thread, Regwec was probated for calling a female mod a c**t, which is about the most degrading thing you can call a woman, that's all there was too it.

1.) It was clear he was being baited. He was already on the receiving end of name-calling himself and merely esclated it.

Whilst that doesn't excuse him of any wrong-doing he did partake in, it does make it a lot more understandable in the situation, particularly when you consider the fact that he'd had to explain himself multile times and then had to be on the receiving end of a rather ironic "Can't you read?".

2.) It appeared on screen as c***, meaning he self-censored all but the first letter. There's multiple possibilities for what that could mean.

It's also not the most degrading thing you could call a woman in my country, or most English speaking countries outside of the US... but that's largely irrelevant to this.

Again, apologies for takig the thread off course. I'd said my piece that I don't feel that the politics forum or this thread in particular is the safest place for me to be posting and I'd just as soon let things go back to the matters at hand.

 

[Kelly]

Understandable. One man's terrorist is another man's visionary leader.

Same thing goes there, they felt it's a righteous vengeful strike. Apeals to the same bloodlust from a different perspective.

It's why I'd hesitate to attribute the word 'justice' to any of this.

This is somewhat of a tough call for me. He himself attached his name in a very prominent way to 9/11....so going after him, I found no fault in that....

But, I do not like war, I love our troops, and let them know it.....but I feel that Special Ops...and in the end happened...could have taken him out long before now without us loosing troops, and so much collateral damage...

But, again, with all of that said......I am glad he is dead....he is the one that bragged that he would not be taken alive, and so I guess that makes him a prophet.

 

[StorminNorman]

Obama opposes torture is a key difference. Another is that Obama prefers alternative means. In Libya he got real international support to be involved so the US did not bare the brunt of the costs of war and managed to prevent a land invasion which Bush was to happy to do....twice. While unfortunately Libya seems to be a stalemate, regime change was never our endgame, genocide prevention was. We have prevented major killing fields, weakened Gadhafi to the points where he has no more major allies (Turkey abandoned him this week) and most of all have avoided massive American casualties (or any as of yet, thank God) and are not involved in a decade(s) long nation building process.

The similarities between Libya and Iraq are relatively superficial. However, if you wish to say we should be involved in neither that is a fair point worth debate. I'm glad Benghazi and Mistrata are not piled high with dead children, but like Iraq the endgame seems a mystery--albeit few remember Kosovo was a year-long affair. Hopefully Libya will have a similar resolution. Not to pick a fight, I just see the comparisons between Libya and Iraq as inaccurate.

We had a larger coalition in Iraq than we did Libya, but yes - not getting involved with either is the proper move. After all, one ally we have in Libya we didn't have in Iraq? Al Qaeda.

Isn't that ignoring the circumstances a bit.

Saddam killed more civilians than Kadaffi.

It's ignoring the circumstands a lot.

You are right. One is a Republican, the other a Democrat.

Call me crazy but maybe Obama should have held off telling the world they killed OBL for a week. So they could use the intel and squash as many terrorists as quickly as possible. I could live with the delay if that was the reason. I fathom tons of people would have been be okay with it.

I thought this same thing at the time.

 

[Marx]

1.) It was clear he was being baited. He was already on the receiving end of name-calling himself and merely esclated it.

Whilst that doesn't excuse him of any wrong-doing he did partake in, it does make it a lot more understandable in the situation, particularly when you consider the fact that he'd had to explain himself multile times and then had to be on the receiving end of a rather ironic "Can't you read?".

2.) It appeared on screen as c***, meaning he self-censored all but the first letter. There's multiple possibilities for what that could mean.

It's also not the most degrading thing you could call a woman in my country, or most English speaking countries outside of the US... but that's largely irrelevant to this.

Again, apologies for takig the thread off course. I'd said my piece that I don't feel that the politics forum or this thread in particular is the safest place for me to be posting and I'd just as soon let things go back to the matters at hand.

You're better than this Hound. You really are. Kel and I have both already said this - if the only reason you are here is to 'take up for regwec', please take it to PMs with an admin. This thread has been derailed long enough.

 

[redfirebird2008]

2.) It appeared on screen as c***, meaning he self-censored all but the first letter. There's multiple possibilities for what that could mean.

 

[Kelly]

1.) It was clear he was being baited. He was already on the receiving end of name-calling himself and merely esclated it.

Whilst that doesn't excuse him of any wrong-doing he did partake in, it does make it a lot more understandable in the situation, particularly when you consider the fact that he'd had to explain himself multile times and then had to be on the receiving end of a rather ironic "Can't you read?".

2.) It appeared on screen as c***, meaning he self-censored all but the first letter. There's multiple possibilities for what that could mean.

It's also not the most degrading thing you could call a woman in my country, or most English speaking countries outside of the US... but that's largely irrelevant to this.

Again, apologies for takig the thread off course. I'd said my piece that I don't feel that the politics forum or this thread in particular is the safest place for me to be posting and I'd just as soon let things go back to the matters at hand.

Actually as far as the "Can't you read"...you need to go back and reread the tit for tat.....he asked me that in his first throw at me....I was simply repeating what he said to me in kind.

As I said to Matt when he warned him in the thread....there was no need to warn him, it was a tit for tat, and it was over.....I was happy to leave it at that. The c*** thing was a little heavy (cock maybe??? come on Hound you are smarter than that....)....but I was ok with calling it even...others were not, and it went from there.

That is all I have to say on the matter, and I will return to the discussion.

 

[Hound55]

You're better than this Hound. You really are. Kel and I have both already said this - if the only reason you are here is to 'take up for regwec', please take it to PMs with an admin. This thread has been derailed long enough.

Fair enough.

I responded here, because I was asked here rather than by PM.

I agree, it has been derailed enough.

 

[Hunter Rider]

1.) It was clear he was being baited. He was already on the receiving end of name-calling himself and merely esclated it.

Whilst that doesn't excuse him of any wrong-doing he did partake in, it does make it a lot more understandable in the situation, particularly when you consider the fact that he'd had to explain himself multile times and then had to be on the receiving end of a rather ironic "Can't you read?".

2.) It appeared on screen as c***, meaning he self-censored all but the first letter. There's multiple possibilities for what that could mean.

It's also not the most degrading thing you could call a woman in my country, or most English speaking countries outside of the US... but that's largely irrelevant to this.

Again, apologies for takig the thread off course. I'd said my piece that I don't feel that the politics forum or this thread in particular is the safest place for me to be posting and I'd just as soon let things go back to the matters at hand.

I dealt with the baiters as well.

I'm not American either, but that word is in the view of most I know as degrading as it gets for a woman. I won't even try to argue that it was meant as anything else and when I spoke to regwec he didn't deny that was what he meant.

You are perfectly safe to post here, please do not buy into some agenda, there isn't one I can assure you.

Look at it logically, 9/11 was one of the worst atrocities ever committed and the man behind it has finally gotten what he deserved, this board is largely populated by people from the US, many of whom have lost someone through this war and/or were deeply effected by that day in NYC, so when people start coming in and trying to take a stance against their country being happy about the death of a mass murderer, well it's going to touch a raw nerve.

 

[Kelly]

ok...ok....guys, I did ask Hound to specify, I actually meant to show posts where a right lean was happening on the thread....I did not think it would lead to this, I thought he would actually post something that actually showed a right leaning twist to the thread....

I don't think that people being happy about bin laden's death has anything to do with right leaning....mainly because just as many left leaning people here are happy about it as well....

As Hunter said, that hit a nerve....the thread has kind of been a "out on the white house" front lawn place for people in the beginning....

I think Marx has described very passionately why some were not happy with those comments, and it is certainly understandable.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Look at it logically, 9/11 was one of the worst atrocities ever committed and the man behind it has finally gotten what he deserved, this board is largely populated by people from the US, many of whom have lost someone through this war and/or were deeply effected by that day in NYC, so when people start coming in and trying to take a stance against their country being happy about the death of a mass murderer, well it's going to touch a raw nerve.

Thanks for understanding where we are coming from.

 

[CelticPredator]

I havent seen any weird biases here....aside from a few idiots. And I stress the word idiots, because they are. The conspiracy people.

 

[JJJ's Ulcer]

I am a pragmatic, progressive liberal.

I see no rightwing slant to this thread. I see some intelligent discussion peppered with some silliness.

What I occasionally see (from the right and from the left) are posters spouting conspiracy theories, criticizing Obama's role, judging the morality of taking Osama out, etc.

 

[Marx]

Thread manager strikes...