You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Jeremy Corbyn
November 15 2019 10.37am

Jeremy Corbyn

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 44 of 429 < 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 >

 

View dannyh's Profile dannyh Flag wherever I lay my hat....... 01 Sep 15 11.13am Send a Private Message to dannyh Add dannyh as a friend

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 10.51am

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 10.36am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 10.04am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 9.52am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 9.40am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 7.56am

Quote Kermit8 at 31 Aug 2015 10.56pm

Putting someone on trial and showing compassion are not even close to being the same thing Mr H. Ask Ian Brady.

And pray tell how you would have got Bin Laden to come quietly and give himself up for trial? Did Bin Laden hold his hands up and want to be put before a trial when the marines arrived at his compound? No, he reached for his AK and used one of his wives as a human shield whilst firing indiscrimately.

The gap between leftie idealism and reality is astonishing.

I think that you've been watching too many films, there was no hollywood type shootout, just a simple execution. America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial.



I think you have chosen to believe what you want to believe.

Of course America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial because it would never have been Bin Laden's intention to go on trial.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.[/quote

First, again there was no shoot-out, and Bin-Laden was unarmed when shot. Not any moral judgements just facts, you were wrong.

Second, whether bin laden wanted to go on trial or not is completely irrelevant. I'm sure plenty of criminals don't want to go on trial but funnily enough, once incarcerated they don't have a choice. America had the capacity to arrest and try him, but execution was what they set out to do.


So what ?

So, matt was wrong in his argument that it was impossible to bring Osama to trial. I'm not making moral judgements just establishing the facts.

How do you know they are facts ? did you run the covert operation, Where you present for the years of lead up intelligence work ?

Im Guessing the answer is no you weren't, neither was I so all we have on the subject is opinion, not Fact.

Your opinion is no more valid than Matt's, or mine, or anyone elses. Something you may wish to remember in future when posting.

What proof do you have the USA wanted him dead from the start.

In fact Obama has publicy claimed he wanted him taken alive [Link]

Also what proof do you have he wasnt armed ? none Im guessing, but hey obvioulsy your pre judged opinion is "fact" where as Matts is clearly just made up assumption next to your "facts".

 


"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View ghosteagle's Profile ghosteagle Flag 01 Sep 15 11.21am Send a Private Message to ghosteagle Add ghosteagle as a friend

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 11.13am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 10.51am

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 10.36am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 10.04am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 9.52am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 9.40am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 7.56am

Quote Kermit8 at 31 Aug 2015 10.56pm

Putting someone on trial and showing compassion are not even close to being the same thing Mr H. Ask Ian Brady.

And pray tell how you would have got Bin Laden to come quietly and give himself up for trial? Did Bin Laden hold his hands up and want to be put before a trial when the marines arrived at his compound? No, he reached for his AK and used one of his wives as a human shield whilst firing indiscrimately.

The gap between leftie idealism and reality is astonishing.

I think that you've been watching too many films, there was no hollywood type shootout, just a simple execution. America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial.



I think you have chosen to believe what you want to believe.

Of course America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial because it would never have been Bin Laden's intention to go on trial.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.[/quote

First, again there was no shoot-out, and Bin-Laden was unarmed when shot. Not any moral judgements just facts, you were wrong.

Second, whether bin laden wanted to go on trial or not is completely irrelevant. I'm sure plenty of criminals don't want to go on trial but funnily enough, once incarcerated they don't have a choice. America had the capacity to arrest and try him, but execution was what they set out to do.


So what ?

So, matt was wrong in his argument that it was impossible to bring Osama to trial. I'm not making moral judgements just establishing the facts.

How do you know they are facts ? did you run the covert operation, Where you present for the years of lead up intelligence work ?

Im Guessing the answer is no you weren't, neither was I so all we have on the subject is opinion, not Fact.

Your opinion is no more valid than Matt's, or mine, or anyone elses. Something you may wish to remember in future when posting.

What proof do you have the USA wanted him dead from the start.

In fact Obama has publicy claimed he wanted him taken alive [Link]

Also what proof do you have he wasnt armed ? none Im guessing, but hey obvioulsy your pre judged opinion is "fact" where as Matts is clearly just made up assumption next to your "facts".

A long post, but a waste of time. The established facts as presented by the people who took part and media reports are how i have presented them. No ,i wasn't there but please, take your conspiracy theories elsewhere.

As to what proof i have that the usa wanted Osama dead, i point to the evidence already established. They had the opportunity to arrest him but instead executed him.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View dannyh's Profile dannyh Flag wherever I lay my hat....... 01 Sep 15 12.14pm Send a Private Message to dannyh Add dannyh as a friend

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 11.21am

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 11.13am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 10.51am

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 10.36am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 10.04am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 9.52am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 9.40am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 7.56am

Quote Kermit8 at 31 Aug 2015 10.56pm

Putting someone on trial and showing compassion are not even close to being the same thing Mr H. Ask Ian Brady.

And pray tell how you would have got Bin Laden to come quietly and give himself up for trial? Did Bin Laden hold his hands up and want to be put before a trial when the marines arrived at his compound? No, he reached for his AK and used one of his wives as a human shield whilst firing indiscrimately.

The gap between leftie idealism and reality is astonishing.

I think that you've been watching too many films, there was no hollywood type shootout, just a simple execution. America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial.



I think you have chosen to believe what you want to believe.

Of course America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial because it would never have been Bin Laden's intention to go on trial.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.[/quote

First, again there was no shoot-out, and Bin-Laden was unarmed when shot. Not any moral judgements just facts, you were wrong.

Second, whether bin laden wanted to go on trial or not is completely irrelevant. I'm sure plenty of criminals don't want to go on trial but funnily enough, once incarcerated they don't have a choice. America had the capacity to arrest and try him, but execution was what they set out to do.


So what ?

So, matt was wrong in his argument that it was impossible to bring Osama to trial. I'm not making moral judgements just establishing the facts.

How do you know they are facts ? did you run the covert operation, Where you present for the years of lead up intelligence work ?

Im Guessing the answer is no you weren't, neither was I so all we have on the subject is opinion, not Fact.

Your opinion is no more valid than Matt's, or mine, or anyone elses. Something you may wish to remember in future when posting.

What proof do you have the USA wanted him dead from the start.

In fact Obama has publicy claimed he wanted him taken alive [Link]

Also what proof do you have he wasnt armed ? none Im guessing, but hey obvioulsy your pre judged opinion is "fact" where as Matts is clearly just made up assumption next to your "facts".

A long post, but a waste of time. The established facts as presented by the people who took part and media reports are how i have presented them. No ,i wasn't there but please, take your conspiracy theories elsewhere.

As to what proof i have that the usa wanted Osama dead, i point to the evidence already established. They had the opportunity to arrest him but instead executed him.

More piss and wind from the king of piss and wind. not a single link to any "fact" that the Osama operation was an assassination.

I give you link quoting the American President saying he wanted him alive if possible and you completly ignore it, and you accuse me of conspiracy theories, just what conspiracy theories have I presnted, other than actaul quotes from the president of the USA I have have presented no theory other than that is it reasonable to assume that Bin laden would have armed himself knowing his heavily manned and armed stronghold was under attack ?

Just for the record they were US Navy Seals that lead the attack.

And my post wasnt a waste of time, it showed you up for what you are.

 


"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View ghosteagle's Profile ghosteagle Flag 01 Sep 15 12.21pm Send a Private Message to ghosteagle Add ghosteagle as a friend

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 12.14pm

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 11.21am

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 11.13am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 10.51am

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 10.36am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 10.04am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 9.52am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 9.40am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 7.56am

Quote Kermit8 at 31 Aug 2015 10.56pm

Putting someone on trial and showing compassion are not even close to being the same thing Mr H. Ask Ian Brady.

And pray tell how you would have got Bin Laden to come quietly and give himself up for trial? Did Bin Laden hold his hands up and want to be put before a trial when the marines arrived at his compound? No, he reached for his AK and used one of his wives as a human shield whilst firing indiscrimately.

The gap between leftie idealism and reality is astonishing.

I think that you've been watching too many films, there was no hollywood type shootout, just a simple execution. America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial.



I think you have chosen to believe what you want to believe.

Of course America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial because it would never have been Bin Laden's intention to go on trial.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.[/quote

First, again there was no shoot-out, and Bin-Laden was unarmed when shot. Not any moral judgements just facts, you were wrong.

Second, whether bin laden wanted to go on trial or not is completely irrelevant. I'm sure plenty of criminals don't want to go on trial but funnily enough, once incarcerated they don't have a choice. America had the capacity to arrest and try him, but execution was what they set out to do.


So what ?

So, matt was wrong in his argument that it was impossible to bring Osama to trial. I'm not making moral judgements just establishing the facts.

How do you know they are facts ? did you run the covert operation, Where you present for the years of lead up intelligence work ?

Im Guessing the answer is no you weren't, neither was I so all we have on the subject is opinion, not Fact.

Your opinion is no more valid than Matt's, or mine, or anyone elses. Something you may wish to remember in future when posting.

What proof do you have the USA wanted him dead from the start.

In fact Obama has publicy claimed he wanted him taken alive [Link]

Also what proof do you have he wasnt armed ? none Im guessing, but hey obvioulsy your pre judged opinion is "fact" where as Matts is clearly just made up assumption next to your "facts".

A long post, but a waste of time. The established facts as presented by the people who took part and media reports are how i have presented them. No ,i wasn't there but please, take your conspiracy theories elsewhere.

As to what proof i have that the usa wanted Osama dead, i point to the evidence already established. They had the opportunity to arrest him but instead executed him.

More piss and wind from the king of piss and wind. not a single link to any "fact" that the Osama operation was an assassination.

I give you link quoting the American President saying he wanted him alive if possible and you completly ignore it, and you accuse me of conspiracy theories, just what conspiracy theories have I presnted, other than actaul quotes from the president of the USA I have have presented no theory other than that is it reasonable to assume that Bin laden would have armed himself knowing his heavily manned and armed stronghold was under attack ?

Just for the record they were US Navy Seals that lead the attack.

And my post wasnt a waste of time, it showed you up for what you are.

The fact that Osama's death was an assassination is based on the established facts. They had opportunity to detain and arrest but killed him instead.

The fact that a politician said something has no credibility when considered alongside the facts, which i repeat again, were that america could have detained and arrested Osama. In general, it is always better to look at what happened rather than what the politicians say happened.

You claim it is reasonable to assume that Osama would have armed himself, yet there is no evidence of this and no reports that he did so. As such it seems that this is simply something that you have made up in your own mind.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View dannyh's Profile dannyh Flag wherever I lay my hat....... 01 Sep 15 12.33pm Send a Private Message to dannyh Add dannyh as a friend

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 12.21pm

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 12.14pm

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 11.21am

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 11.13am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 10.51am

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 10.36am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 10.04am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 9.52am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 9.40am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 7.56am

Quote Kermit8 at 31 Aug 2015 10.56pm

Putting someone on trial and showing compassion are not even close to being the same thing Mr H. Ask Ian Brady.

And pray tell how you would have got Bin Laden to come quietly and give himself up for trial? Did Bin Laden hold his hands up and want to be put before a trial when the marines arrived at his compound? No, he reached for his AK and used one of his wives as a human shield whilst firing indiscrimately.

The gap between leftie idealism and reality is astonishing.

I think that you've been watching too many films, there was no hollywood type shootout, just a simple execution. America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial.



I think you have chosen to believe what you want to believe.

Of course America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial because it would never have been Bin Laden's intention to go on trial.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.[/quote

First, again there was no shoot-out, and Bin-Laden was unarmed when shot. Not any moral judgements just facts, you were wrong.

Second, whether bin laden wanted to go on trial or not is completely irrelevant. I'm sure plenty of criminals don't want to go on trial but funnily enough, once incarcerated they don't have a choice. America had the capacity to arrest and try him, but execution was what they set out to do.


So what ?

So, matt was wrong in his argument that it was impossible to bring Osama to trial. I'm not making moral judgements just establishing the facts.

How do you know they are facts ? did you run the covert operation, Where you present for the years of lead up intelligence work ?

Im Guessing the answer is no you weren't, neither was I so all we have on the subject is opinion, not Fact.

Your opinion is no more valid than Matt's, or mine, or anyone elses. Something you may wish to remember in future when posting.

What proof do you have the USA wanted him dead from the start.

In fact Obama has publicy claimed he wanted him taken alive [Link]

Also what proof do you have he wasnt armed ? none Im guessing, but hey obvioulsy your pre judged opinion is "fact" where as Matts is clearly just made up assumption next to your "facts".

A long post, but a waste of time. The established facts as presented by the people who took part and media reports are how i have presented them. No ,i wasn't there but please, take your conspiracy theories elsewhere.

As to what proof i have that the usa wanted Osama dead, i point to the evidence already established. They had the opportunity to arrest him but instead executed him.

More piss and wind from the king of piss and wind. not a single link to any "fact" that the Osama operation was an assassination.

I give you link quoting the American President saying he wanted him alive if possible and you completly ignore it, and you accuse me of conspiracy theories, just what conspiracy theories have I presnted, other than actaul quotes from the president of the USA I have have presented no theory other than that is it reasonable to assume that Bin laden would have armed himself knowing his heavily manned and armed stronghold was under attack ?

Just for the record they were US Navy Seals that lead the attack.

And my post wasnt a waste of time, it showed you up for what you are.

The fact that Osama's death was an assassination is based on the established facts. They had opportunity to detain and arrest but killed him instead.

What are these facts ? please show me, how do you know 100 percent that there was opportunity in the middle of a firefight in close quaters to detain and arrest the worlds Number one terror target, without further injury to your team. The simple answer is you don't know you have made an assumption based on what little scraps of material (valid) are avalible, as have Matt and I.

The fact that a politician said something has no credibility when considered alongside the facts, which i repeat again, were that america could have detained and arrested Osama. In general, it is always better to look at what happened rather than what the politicians say happened.

I shall remeber your Politicians are not to be trusted next time you blather on about the Labour pin up Corbyn, which I assume is 100 percent trust worthy, and that you have facts to back that honesty claim up ? Please enlighten us all to the "facts" of the mission, this about the 3rd time I have asked you to show me facts that it was an assissination mission from the start, so far ....nothing as expected, just more personnel opinion doing a very bad impseranation of fact.

You claim it is reasonable to assume that Osama would have armed himself, yet there is no evidence of this and no reports that he did so. As such it seems that this is simply something that you have made up in your own mind.

There is no eveidence other than your opinion that he wasnt armed, and you accuse me of conspiracy theories ? I'm beginning to think your a little bit bonkers and not worth the effort.

Made up in my own mind hahahahah, even if I had, what makes what you are saying anything other than your own meaderings, and dont quote "facts" as you havent supplied a single one.

Quote


 


"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View dannyh's Profile dannyh Flag wherever I lay my hat....... 01 Sep 15 12.35pm Send a Private Message to dannyh Add dannyh as a friend

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 12.33pm

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 12.21pm

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 12.14pm

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 11.21am

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 11.13am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 10.51am

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 10.36am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 10.04am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 9.52am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 9.40am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 7.56am

Quote Kermit8 at 31 Aug 2015 10.56pm

Putting someone on trial and showing compassion are not even close to being the same thing Mr H. Ask Ian Brady.

And pray tell how you would have got Bin Laden to come quietly and give himself up for trial? Did Bin Laden hold his hands up and want to be put before a trial when the marines arrived at his compound? No, he reached for his AK and used one of his wives as a human shield whilst firing indiscrimately.

The gap between leftie idealism and reality is astonishing.

I think that you've been watching too many films, there was no hollywood type shootout, just a simple execution. America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial.



I think you have chosen to believe what you want to believe.

Of course America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial because it would never have been Bin Laden's intention to go on trial.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.[/quote

First, again there was no shoot-out, and Bin-Laden was unarmed when shot. Not any moral judgements just facts, you were wrong.

Second, whether bin laden wanted to go on trial or not is completely irrelevant. I'm sure plenty of criminals don't want to go on trial but funnily enough, once incarcerated they don't have a choice. America had the capacity to arrest and try him, but execution was what they set out to do.


So what ?

So, matt was wrong in his argument that it was impossible to bring Osama to trial. I'm not making moral judgements just establishing the facts.

How do you know they are facts ? did you run the covert operation, Where you present for the years of lead up intelligence work ?

Im Guessing the answer is no you weren't, neither was I so all we have on the subject is opinion, not Fact.

Your opinion is no more valid than Matt's, or mine, or anyone elses. Something you may wish to remember in future when posting.

What proof do you have the USA wanted him dead from the start.

In fact Obama has publicy claimed he wanted him taken alive [Link]

Also what proof do you have he wasnt armed ? none Im guessing, but hey obvioulsy your pre judged opinion is "fact" where as Matts is clearly just made up assumption next to your "facts".

A long post, but a waste of time. The established facts as presented by the people who took part and media reports are how i have presented them. No ,i wasn't there but please, take your conspiracy theories elsewhere.

As to what proof i have that the usa wanted Osama dead, i point to the evidence already established. They had the opportunity to arrest him but instead executed him.

More piss and wind from the king of piss and wind. not a single link to any "fact" that the Osama operation was an assassination.

I give you link quoting the American President saying he wanted him alive if possible and you completly ignore it, and you accuse me of conspiracy theories, just what conspiracy theories have I presnted, other than actaul quotes from the president of the USA I have have presented no theory other than that is it reasonable to assume that Bin laden would have armed himself knowing his heavily manned and armed stronghold was under attack ?

Just for the record they were US Navy Seals that lead the attack.

And my post wasnt a waste of time, it showed you up for what you are.

The fact that Osama's death was an assassination is based on the established facts. They had opportunity to detain and arrest but killed him instead.

What are these facts ? please show me, how do you know 100 percent that there was opportunity in the middle of a firefight in close quaters to detain and arrest the worlds Number one terror target, without further injury to your team. The simple answer is you don't know you have made an assumption based on what little scraps of material (valid) are avalible, as have Matt and I.

The fact that a politician said something has no credibility when considered alongside the facts, which i repeat again, were that america could have detained and arrested Osama. In general, it is always better to look at what happened rather than what the politicians say happened.

I shall remeber your Politicians are not to be trusted next time you blather on about the Labour pin up Corbyn, which I assume is 100 percent trust worthy, and that you have facts to back that honesty claim up ? Please enlighten us all to the "facts" of the mission, this about the 3rd time I have asked you to show me facts that it was an assissination mission from the start, so far ....nothing as expected, just more personnel opinion doing a very bad impseranation of fact.

You claim it is reasonable to assume that Osama would have armed himself, yet there is no evidence of this and no reports that he did so. As such it seems that this is simply something that you have made up in your own mind.

There is no eveidence other than your opinion that he wasnt armed, and you accuse me of conspiracy theories ? I'm beginning to think your a little bit bonkers and not worth the effort.

Made up in my own mind hahahahah, even if I had, what makes what you are saying anything other than your own meaderings, and dont quote "facts" as you havent supplied a single one.

Quote



 


"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View matt_himself's Profile matt_himself Flag Hard Brexit 01 Sep 15 12.40pm Send a Private Message to matt_himself Add matt_himself as a friend

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 10.04am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 9.52am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 9.40am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 7.56am

Quote Kermit8 at 31 Aug 2015 10.56pm

Putting someone on trial and showing compassion are not even close to being the same thing Mr H. Ask Ian Brady.

And pray tell how you would have got Bin Laden to come quietly and give himself up for trial? Did Bin Laden hold his hands up and want to be put before a trial when the marines arrived at his compound? No, he reached for his AK and used one of his wives as a human shield whilst firing indiscrimately.

The gap between leftie idealism and reality is astonishing.

I think that you've been watching too many films, there was no hollywood type shootout, just a simple execution. America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial.



I think you have chosen to believe what you want to believe.

Of course America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial because it would never have been Bin Laden's intention to go on trial.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.[/quote

First, again there was no shoot-out, and Bin-Laden was unarmed when shot. Not any moral judgements just facts, you were wrong.

Second, whether bin laden wanted to go on trial or not is completely irrelevant. I'm sure plenty of criminals don't want to go on trial but funnily enough, once incarcerated they don't have a choice. America had the capacity to arrest and try him, but execution was what they set out to do.

It all depends upon which version of events you believe, isn't it?

The fonal paragraph is nonsense. What do you think would have happened in the event of a trial? Bin Laden would have refused to accept the court as legitimate, shut his mouth and there would have been terrorist attacks aplenty.

The fact is, killing Bin Laden then probably saved more lives than holding a trial would have cost. But the most important thing is leftie indignation at the U.S. Process, isn't it?


Edited by matt_himself (01 Sep 2015 12.40pm)

 


"The real question is, at the end of the day, do we want to run our country? Are we proud of who we are? Are we happy to be just a star on somebody else's flag, or do we want to be an independent nation? - Nigel Farage

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View ghosteagle's Profile ghosteagle Flag 01 Sep 15 12.43pm Send a Private Message to ghosteagle Add ghosteagle as a friend

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 12.33pm

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 12.21pm

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 12.14pm

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 11.21am

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 11.13am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 10.51am

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 10.36am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 10.04am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 9.52am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 9.40am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 7.56am

Quote Kermit8 at 31 Aug 2015 10.56pm

Putting someone on trial and showing compassion are not even close to being the same thing Mr H. Ask Ian Brady.

And pray tell how you would have got Bin Laden to come quietly and give himself up for trial? Did Bin Laden hold his hands up and want to be put before a trial when the marines arrived at his compound? No, he reached for his AK and used one of his wives as a human shield whilst firing indiscrimately.

The gap between leftie idealism and reality is astonishing.

I think that you've been watching too many films, there was no hollywood type shootout, just a simple execution. America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial.



I think you have chosen to believe what you want to believe.

Of course America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial because it would never have been Bin Laden's intention to go on trial.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.[/quote

First, again there was no shoot-out, and Bin-Laden was unarmed when shot. Not any moral judgements just facts, you were wrong.

Second, whether bin laden wanted to go on trial or not is completely irrelevant. I'm sure plenty of criminals don't want to go on trial but funnily enough, once incarcerated they don't have a choice. America had the capacity to arrest and try him, but execution was what they set out to do.


So what ?

So, matt was wrong in his argument that it was impossible to bring Osama to trial. I'm not making moral judgements just establishing the facts.

How do you know they are facts ? did you run the covert operation, Where you present for the years of lead up intelligence work ?

Im Guessing the answer is no you weren't, neither was I so all we have on the subject is opinion, not Fact.

Your opinion is no more valid than Matt's, or mine, or anyone elses. Something you may wish to remember in future when posting.

What proof do you have the USA wanted him dead from the start.

In fact Obama has publicy claimed he wanted him taken alive [Link]

Also what proof do you have he wasnt armed ? none Im guessing, but hey obvioulsy your pre judged opinion is "fact" where as Matts is clearly just made up assumption next to your "facts".

A long post, but a waste of time. The established facts as presented by the people who took part and media reports are how i have presented them. No ,i wasn't there but please, take your conspiracy theories elsewhere.

As to what proof i have that the usa wanted Osama dead, i point to the evidence already established. They had the opportunity to arrest him but instead executed him.

More piss and wind from the king of piss and wind. not a single link to any "fact" that the Osama operation was an assassination.

I give you link quoting the American President saying he wanted him alive if possible and you completly ignore it, and you accuse me of conspiracy theories, just what conspiracy theories have I presnted, other than actaul quotes from the president of the USA I have have presented no theory other than that is it reasonable to assume that Bin laden would have armed himself knowing his heavily manned and armed stronghold was under attack ?

Just for the record they were US Navy Seals that lead the attack.

And my post wasnt a waste of time, it showed you up for what you are.

The fact that Osama's death was an assassination is based on the established facts. They had opportunity to detain and arrest but killed him instead.

What are these facts ? please show me, how do you know 100 percent that there was opportunity in the middle of a firefight in close quaters to detain and arrest the worlds Number one terror target, without further injury to your team. The simple answer is you don't know you have made an assumption based on what little scraps of material (valid) are avalible, as have Matt and I.

The fact that a politician said something has no credibility when considered alongside the facts, which i repeat again, were that america could have detained and arrested Osama. In general, it is always better to look at what happened rather than what the politicians say happened.

I shall remeber your Politicians are not to be trusted next time you blather on about the Labour pin up Corbyn, which I assume is 100 percent trust worthy, and that you have facts to back that honesty claim up ? Please enlighten us all to the "facts" of the mission, this about the 3rd time I have asked you to show me facts that it was an assissination mission from the start, so far ....nothing as expected, just more personnel opinion doing a very bad impseranation of fact.

You claim it is reasonable to assume that Osama would have armed himself, yet there is no evidence of this and no reports that he did so. As such it seems that this is simply something that you have made up in your own mind.

There is no eveidence other than your opinion that he wasnt armed, and you accuse me of conspiracy theories ? I'm beginning to think your a little bit bonkers and not worth the effort.

Made up in my own mind hahahahah, even if I had, what makes what you are saying anything other than your own meaderings, and dont quote "facts" as you havent supplied a single one.

Quote


Your arguments remain the same. You are quite right to point out that i wasn't there, but again my opinion is based upon the reports and testimony of the people who took part in the operation. I can find no evidence to indicate that Osama was armed and all reports indicate that he was not and was executed. The only point that there seems to be confusion about is weather Osama was alone and executed while cowering in a corner or if he pulled a women in front of him and was then shot through the head.

Again, the evidence that he wasn't armed is based on the report at the time and the testimony of the people involved. Your conspiracy theory is based, apparently, on the images inside your head. You are of course entitled to an opinion, but please try and relate it to the real world.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View ghosteagle's Profile ghosteagle Flag 01 Sep 15 12.51pm Send a Private Message to ghosteagle Add ghosteagle as a friend

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 12.40pm

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 10.04am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 9.52am

Quote ghosteagle at 01 Sep 2015 9.40am

Quote matt_himself at 01 Sep 2015 7.56am

Quote Kermit8 at 31 Aug 2015 10.56pm

Putting someone on trial and showing compassion are not even close to being the same thing Mr H. Ask Ian Brady.

And pray tell how you would have got Bin Laden to come quietly and give himself up for trial? Did Bin Laden hold his hands up and want to be put before a trial when the marines arrived at his compound? No, he reached for his AK and used one of his wives as a human shield whilst firing indiscrimately.

The gap between leftie idealism and reality is astonishing.

I think that you've been watching too many films, there was no hollywood type shootout, just a simple execution. America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial.



I think you have chosen to believe what you want to believe.

Of course America never had any intention of bringing him back for trial because it would never have been Bin Laden's intention to go on trial.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.[/quote

First, again there was no shoot-out, and Bin-Laden was unarmed when shot. Not any moral judgements just facts, you were wrong.

Second, whether bin laden wanted to go on trial or not is completely irrelevant. I'm sure plenty of criminals don't want to go on trial but funnily enough, once incarcerated they don't have a choice. America had the capacity to arrest and try him, but execution was what they set out to do.

It all depends upon which version of events you believe, isn't it?

The fonal paragraph is nonsense. What do you think would have happened in the event of a trial? Bin Laden would have refused to accept the court as legitimate, shut his mouth and there would have been terrorist attacks aplenty.

The fact is, killing Bin Laden then probably saved more lives than holding a trial would have cost. But the most important thing is leftie indignation at the U.S. Process, isn't it?


Edited by matt_himself (01 Sep 2015 12.40pm)

Firstly, it is not about what series of events you believe as no reports or people who took part in the operation have claimed that Osama was armed.

In the event of a trial Im sure that Osama would have refused to speak or recognise the court. Again, this happens and the law is designed so that trials can continue. It would be a weak justice system indeed that relied on the recognition of the defendant for its legitimacy.

I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that his trial would have increased terrorist attacks? By definition al qaeda is always looking to attack america, it is not holding back saving up attacks for a rainy day.

So, the assassination of Osama didn't save any lives. The removal of the head of a terrorist organisation may well have done, but his death did nothing additional.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Jimenez's Profile Jimenez Flag SELHURSTPARKCHESTER,DA BRONX 01 Sep 15 12.55pm Send a Private Message to Jimenez Add Jimenez as a friend

The one & only time Obama has had any Balls.

 


Pro USA & Israel

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stuk's Profile Stuk Flag Top half 01 Sep 15 1.09pm Send a Private Message to Stuk Add Stuk as a friend

Great. Another one spouting "facts".

 


Optimistic as ever

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 01 Sep 15 1.59pm

Quote dannyh at 01 Sep 2015 12.33pm
What are these facts ? please show me, how do you know 100 percent that there was opportunity in the middle of a firefight in close quaters to detain and arrest the worlds Number one terror target, without further injury to your team. The simple answer is you don't know you have made an assumption based on what little scraps of material (valid) are avalible, as have Matt and I.

The US Dept. of Defense and Seal Team operations. They specifically stated they were planning to capture Osama Bin Laden if at all possible, but the failure of one of the heavily modified helicopters (which crashed) meant that was no longer a viable option, so it became a kill mission. Which seems more than fair.

But I also have no problem with the idea of targeted assassination operations such as these, that target specific individuals.

People like Bin Laden made a specific choice, and knew the consequences of their actions could only ever result in victory, or death. Doesn't make a difference if he was armed or not, or surrendered - The alternative would have been to either leave him alive or take him and leave valuable information.

And you can take a corpse, where you can't take a person, because you don't have to worry about throwing it out, or tying it to the exterior.

In that situation, its clear, you deny your enemy the asset, and take as much information as you can. Its the right decision, and more or less a lawful one. Live by the sword and all of that.

Edited by jamiemartin721 (01 Sep 2015 2.05pm)

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 44 of 429 < 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Jeremy Corbyn