TexasCHLforum.com

There's one point being missed here.

I believe that the Navy SEALS would not go along with any kind of cover-up. They have too much integrity for that.

I suspect that integrity or not, they keep their mouths shut.

EDIT: I don't intend for that to come across as rude.

Jasonw560 wrote:There's one point being missed here.

I believe that the Navy SEALS would not go along with any kind of cover-up. They have too much integrity for that.

So, you think if the military sends someone on a classified mission and the president lies about what happened, the people on the mission can just make public statements that contradict what the president says? For instance, we send a Seal team to covertly kill a terrorist hiding out in India, the Indian government complains we violated their sovereignty, and the president says categorically that the US did not kill a terrorist in India, you think the Seal team members can call the NYT and say the president lied? If not, then they're "going along" with a "cover-up." These situations have nothing to do with the integrity of the special forces people conducting such missions. Military personnel have to play by different rules than politicians do.

I know all that.

And I just don't think the CO would have issued a "go" order unless he was 100% sure about the target. And I do believe it was the SEALS and CIA and many other gov't. alphabet soup agencies who gave the order, and BO coldn't give a "no go" after it had been all set up. This president wouldn't order a Happy Meal without his handlers teling hm to.

Jasonw560 wrote:This president wouldn't order a Happy Meal without his handlers teling hm to.

On that subject see this thread: viewtopic.php?f=94&t=44761

And I just don't think the CO would have issued a "go" order unless he was 100% sure about the target.

Launch criteria generally consists of a "preponderance of evidence" as opposed to "100%" certainty, and this mission was no different IMO. Most of the time it's a dry hole, but from time to time you score a jack pot.

Not that anyone gives a hoot what I think but I think this was handled as well as it could be handled, albeit belatedly.

There are a quadra-gazillion muslims, around the world, who despise everything we (USA) are and what we stand for - that's their life's mission and killing non-muslims is their job. Disposing of the remains of this particular murderer of innocent non-combatants in a manner accepted by the muslims just might get the so-called moderate muslims to come out from under their rocks, around the world, and publicly denounce the murderous muslim terrorists within the muslim cult and their heinous acts.

No constructive purpose would be served by parading the dead guy around town on the fender of a truck, IMO.

Oldgringo wrote:Not that anyone gives a hoot what I think but I think this was handled as well as it could be handled, albeit belatedly.

There are a quadra-gazillion muslims, around the world, who despise everything we (USA) are and what we stand for - that's their life's mission and killing non-muslims is their job. Disposing of the remains of this particular murderer of innocent non-combatants in a manner accepted by the muslims just might get the so-called moderate muslims to come out from under their rocks, around the world, and publicly denounce the murderous muslim terrorists within the muslim cult and their heinous acts.

No constructive purpose would be served by parading the dead guy around town on the fender of a truck, IMO.

I agree. We now simply have one more dead Terrorist, and a new one will pop up to take his place. The fight ain't over.

This video was emailed to me. I like his take and thought it was worth reposting.

Caution, a few mild curse words (relating to female dogs and donkey/derriere).

http://www.therightscoop.com/pat-condel ... for-obama/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

austinrealtor wrote:This video was emailed to me. I like his take and thought it was worth reposting.

Caution, a few mild curse words (relating to female dogs and donkey/derriere).

http://www.therightscoop.com/pat-condel ... for-obama/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think he called it correctly.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

austinrealtor wrote:This video was emailed to me. I like his take and thought it was worth reposting.

Caution, a few mild curse words (relating to female dogs and donkey/derriere).

http://www.therightscoop.com/pat-condel ... for-obama/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think he called it correctly.

I have to say I like this guy, he makes lots of good points.

I like it!!!

austinrealtor wrote:This video was emailed to me. I like his take and thought it was worth reposting.

Caution, a few mild curse words (relating to female dogs and donkey/derriere).

http://www.therightscoop.com/pat-condel ... for-obama/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Although I'm sure it's nothing extraordinary, his direct statement that the US and Britain are paying off the Pakistanis in order to keep the nukes locked away brought to mind an interesting parallel.

Emperor Theodosius II, who reigned from 408-450, oversaw two key decisions that allowed the Eastern Roman Empire to flourish for a millennium while the Western Roman Empire just 150 miles away ended up in ruins. Those decisions were to build the Theodosian walls to protect the empire and to buy off the Huns to keep them from attacking. Hindsight being 20/20, historians agree that the decision to buy off the Huns was a vital component of the strong leadership which allowed Byzantium to become so powerful over the following centuries.

I think the parallels to the US today are remarkable.

AndyC wrote:I saw something similar in Iraq, although it was at the local sheik level.

LOL, how true. I was Civil Affairs. I paid-off the locals every time I went on a mission.