Why G.W. Bush Does Not Deserve Credit For The Death Of Osama bin Laden

The anti-Obama rhetoric on this site is disturbing to say the least. You're all aware that Obama made cpturing or killing OBN his top priority while Bush forgot about him no? And that the SEALS couldn't carry out the mission without his say so. I'm pretty sure if the mission ended up a wash you would all be the first to blame him but now you guys don't wanna give him credit?

As my man RZA would say:

YOU KNOW THIS SHIT IS, FUCKING RIDICULOUS!

 

The killing of Osama will not change anything. One really can't demonize Osama without taking into consideration the depths of corruption within the government (America) which empowered this man and supported him. Osama was assisted in this 911 mission. The horrendous tragedy of 911 was an "inside job" which our military men and women paid dearly for with their lives in persuing the death of a man who could not have committed the acts of 911 without the "inside" assistance of some kind from within our own government.:smt010

 

You guys are so gullable it's not even funny anymore.

Obama and Bush don't run shit but their mouths.

 

Yeah the responses from some of the people on here (you know who you are) are full of b/s. Obama's job approval rating hit 57% now!

 

"Revenge Has No Place in the Justice System"

Supporters of capital punishment sometimes claim that death-penalty opponents would change their tune if a family member became a murder victim. They say the opponents would want to take revenge by having the murderer executed.

Their argument is refuted by the example of Coretta Scott King, widow of Martin Luther King Jr., and many other relatives of murder victims.

Mrs. King opposes the death penalty because it contributes to a cycle of violence. Her husband, a champion of nonviolence, frequently denounced this cycle. He taught that responding to problems with violence and hatred increases evil in the world.

As he said: "The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. . . . In fact, violence merely increases hate. . . . Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars."

Under his reasoning, the death penalty is not a solution to anything. Instead, it is a violent and hateful act that makes the world worse.

He also pointed to history's lesson that vengeance can decimate nations and individuals. Revenge often produces a chain of destructive acts, with each side taking turns avenging an injury and calling the result justice. The outcome is an unending, internecine cycle of violence.

For this reason, revenge and hatred should be considered base emotions ranking on about the same level as greed and envy. And for the good of individuals and society, such emotions need to be kept under the control of rational thought processes.

Most people wouldn't want parents or schoolteachers encouraging children to be vindictive and hateful. It makes no more sense for the government to possess and encourage those attitudes.

But that's exactly what government does by using revenge in the justice system. Its example teaches the public that malice, retaliation, and violence are appropriate means of handling problems. As a result, people are likely to apply the lesson in their daily lives.

Moreover, the victims of revenge and their supporters often develop bitterness and a desire to strike back. Many of them may destructively vent those feelings in society. In the case of prisoners, this often occurs after they are released, particularly if they were abused or unnecessarily humiliated in prison.

Because vengeance causes such problems, it's not surprising that no reputable study has ever shown that capital punishment deters murder. In fact, states using the death penalty have higher murder rates than those that don't.

Of course, society needs to protect itself from criminals. This is done by improving law-enforcement methods, correcting social conditions that contribute to crime, incarcerating those who are a danger to society, rehabilitating criminals who aren't incorrigible, and deterring people from becoming lawbreakers.

But when government goes beyond the steps necessary to protect society, and sinks to the level of using vengeance and hatred, the wrong message is sent. And the results are destructive.

Mrs. King has also criticized capital punishment as being racist in its application, as making irrevocable any miscarriages of justice, and as setting a dehumanizing example of brutality unworthy of a civilized society.

Additionally, she says the death penalty actually harms families of murder victims. "The death penalty adds to the suffering of the surviving family members and loved ones of victims," she explains. "For them, revenge and retribution can never produce genuine healing. It can only deprive them of the opportunity for forgiveness and reconciliation that is needed for the healing process."

This means prosecutors often unwittingly cause additional pain to families of murder victims. They tell them that their anger and sorrow will be allayed when the state imposes capital punishment on the murderer.

The families are thereby set up for years of frustration and pain as appeals drag on. Each court proceeding can reopen their emotional scars. All the while, they hold the unwarranted belief that the death penalty somehow possesses curative powers.

If the execution is eventually carried out, many of those families find it to be a severe disappointment, particularly in terms of improving their emotional state. Some come to see that its main effect was not to heal them, but to inflict similar pain on innocent relatives of the executed prisoner.

Thus, contrary to what some prosecutors and politicians say, executions are not "healing." When the death penalty is recognized as having no real therapeutic qualities, relatives of murder victims can find that true healing is not produced by hatred and revenge.

Healing is more likely to be found through positive acts. These can include seeking to understand the causes of violence, working to help correct the social conditions that contribute to crime, and comforting the victims of crime and their families.

Mrs. King's views on capital punishment are shared by persons who have suffered similar losses and are members of the national group Murder Victims Families for Reconciliation (www.mvfr.org). This group opposes the death penalty in all cases.

Its members are convinced that, as Martin Luther King Jr. also said, "The old law of an eye for an eye leaves everybody blind."

 

well stated

 

Oh yeah...Im gonna read all that shit

 

So you beleive in 911 conspiracy? do you think it was completely an inside job?

 

hu? ok so now martin luther king words are shit


that's the kind of world we have


"The old law of an eye for an eye leaves everybody blind."

 

fucking hippies

im glad ur not on the line defending this country

 

The Washington Post has joined the credit Bush crowd. It's a shame this "contributionist" perspective is catching on.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...-years/2011/05/03/AFz4eQsF_story.html?hpid=z1

 

without bush, we wouldnt be in Afghanistan in the first place

he was sending green berets to Kabul looking for oil (i mean Al Queda), when Barack was still holding community get-togethers and flipping burgers at McDonalds for charity

so yeah i see why he's getting credit

remember how much scrutiny and opposition he faced for those long hard years, after 9/11. Barack only had to endure the dumbshit for three

 

The twin towers did not explode when those government planes flew into them...they imploded. Implosions require a measure of great planning because the building must fall (inwardly) so as not to destroy other buildings around it. The dynamite could be heard and seen being set off on each floor. Note that building 7 was not even touched by a jet yet it too imploded. Why? Because the owner of building 7 requested it so that he would receive hundreds of millions of dollars in "hush" money for his awareness of what was going down. The planning (dynamite being set) was in progress for several weeks before 911. Moreover, it was not a jet airliner that hit the pentagon...it was a missile. I love my country, but I will always fear my government. There are a lot of dark places that can only be fully explained by those in high places.

 

Afghanistan doesn't have any oil, sir. And 9/11 would not have taken place were Bush not asleep at the wheel. Clinton left office with the FBI and CIA dead set on dismantling al-Qaeda. What Bush did after taking office was rearrange the intelligence focus from domestic terrorism to Iraq, and this was 8 months before 9/11 when he met with the Joint Chiefs to discuss - you guessed it, Iraq. For what does Bush deserve credit? He dismantled the unit dedicated to capturing and killing OBL, failed to capitalize at Tora Bora, invaded Iraq, publicly stated he didn't think much about Osama, and later underutilized Operation Cannonball - which was distracted by the war in Iraq. Furthermore, his "enhanced interrogation techniques" didn't lead to the identity of the courier who later led us to bin Laden. And I'm pretty sure Obama around 2001 was a senator.

What Bush deserves credit for is leaving us an utter clusterfuck.

 

This is conspiracy theory, not fact. Those towers weren't designed to withstand the impact of a jumbo airliner loaded with fuel for an intercontinental or transnational flight, and have those jets subsequently lodged inside those buildings and turn them into furnaces.

I agree there's 'questions' I have about the Twin Towers, but what I do know is that I SAW two jets slam into those buildings and I SAW them fall down.

Anyone who 'claims' to know more than that is speculating at best, and engaging in the worst kind of conspiracy theory at worst.

I know people who were driving to work in the D.C. metro area who saw the jet that hit the Pentagon skimming just above the highway catching light poles that embedded into its fuselage. But the 'truthers' will say it was a missile modified to look like an airliner, and that the passengers on the missing jet were taken away somewhere and executed!!??

You can't believe that.

It amazes me the amount of people who refuse to believe anything they personally didn't SEE for themselves.

Man if that Pakistani mission went shit outta control, Obama may have been forced to resign. That negro catches so much heat from folks it's unbelievable.

Even when he get's shit right, they try to give the guy who said he 'didn't know where Bin Laden was and didn't worry about him', partial credit for this mission.

SO much bullshit I can't even filter it all!!!:smt091

 

Truth.

 

Truth,

Real talk-if you gonna start handing a heroic medal to slimy politician then you got to give one to dumb cowboy Bush as well. He is the one who went hard after Bin Laden, he started the hard core interrogation, water boarding, building the elite team like SEAL back up.... so yeah if you gonna give credit to Bama then y'al libs should be fair and give a credit to dumb Bush as well. He did all the dirty work while getting criticized like abitch, all Bama did was telling the SEALs to pull the tirgger, any sitting Prez could have done that.

 

what. the. fuck.

If thats the case then give Clinton credit because he initially went after OBL in the first place. And Bush enjoyed 80% approval rating and almost unanimous support from both sides of the aisle when he invaded afghanistan.

but to go down the line of your points:

* He ignored Clinton's plan of going after bin laden
* There's no concrete proof that the info from the torture directly lead to OBL's killing
* He missed his shot at OBL at tora bora and few other times (not widely published in the media)..

But here's the real reason why Obama deserves sole credit as the president as opposed to spreading over two or three presidents.

The president should get as much credit that commensurate with as much BLAME he would have gotten if the mission had went to shit.

As far as we know this is what happened:
* intelligence was able to piece together circumstantial evidence based primarily off a NICKNAME that given up some 4 to seven years ago during KLM's torture session (supposedly)

* Even with satellite surveillance and such they STILL were only 60-80% sure that OBL was in the compound.

* They purposefully kept Pakistan in the dark about the mission because they didn't trust them.

* They went into Pakistan (a sovereign country) without permission.

* They killed most of the men and wounded a woman most of whom were NOT armed while storming the compound

* There were women and children in the compound and witnesses when they killed OBL.

Obama authorized all of this..and for all of that the mission was a success and the move called RISKY. And now the republicans want to give Bush partial if not full credit for it happening.

Now imagine for a minute if things were 180 degrees the other way and the mission went sideways:

It turns out OBL was NOT in the compound...then that means

They set a mission based on info gathered YEARS ago primarily a NICK NAME (guess that means torture doesn't work huh.).

They were only 60-80%sure OBL was in the compound which means they were HALF-ASS sure.

They didn't involve Pakistan who will cry bloody murder and make an international incident out it.

They killed unarmed people in storming the compound only to find NO OBL.

And Obama authorized all of this..now here's the question do you think republicans would STILL want to include Bush in whats now a colossal clusterfuck?

Or do you think they would pile on and say that Obama was the SOLE reason this whole thing went to shit??

Be honest..

 

exactly.

The tempo of SOCOM ramped up under his administration, resulting in recruiting green berets 'fresh off the street'

 

I'm not familiar with the other stuff you mentioned...never heard of that before. I'm speaking from what I've seen. When the facts are before you, you can ignore them or ponder them. I choose to ponder that which is before me. I know it's hard to believe that an evil such as this could happen in America but unfortunately it's not the only evil and it will not be the last.

Yes, you saw the twin towers fall. You know this for a fact because you saw them fall. But what you fail to take note of is HOW the Towers felled. The towers IMPLODED...this was a CONTROL measure. When something EXplodes there is an OUTWARD direction...never will the building implode. No implosion can take place in a building several stories high without explosives being placed in strategic places on each or every other floor. This is what precisely happened with the Twin Towers as well as building 7. You also fail to take note that Building 7 also felled and it was NOT hit at all. Explain that! So until you face these facts, you will never consider the fact that 911 was well planned and devised. It is very painful to imagine that such a thing would happen in America, I know. Like you, I argued against it for over 4 years, but then someone showed me a slow motion click of the Pentagon tragedy and from that point I had to realize that indeed it was planned. There was no Boeing 747 recovered at the Pentagon site. No plane was ever recovered in Pennslyvania either. Now the whys and hows of it, I do not know...but nonetheless it is what it is.

[YOUTUBE]mcWT2lQszEE[/YOUTUBE]

[HDYT]_0eC3uns3pA[/HDYT]