I'm a military history junkie but I can only speculate as I am just now following the coverage again today but I think it was because this SEAL unit had the most proficient and largest number of men trained for this specialized task. SEAL team 6 was formed in large part as a counter terrorist and hostage rescue team. Many of them were probably in the Afghan theater already when things became clearer and it would not have taken much to bring them all up to speed. I suspect Delta is spread all over the world right now in missions more suited to their specialized areas....My two cents...

A great book for background on the subject is Richard Marcinko's "Rogue Warrior".

There are some short run morale boost aspects to killing off bin Laden. But as I said, in the LONG RUN, it was utterly irrelevant if bin Laden died in a hail of bullets, died of kidney failure or simply stayed hidden for another 20 years. The central geopolitical issues into which bin Laden inserted himself as a fringe player remain and no resolution is likely for many years to come.

liverflukes;505032 said:

---

I'm a military history junkie but I can only speculate as I am just now following the coverage again today but I think it was because this SEAL unit had the most proficient and largest number of men trained for this specialized task. SEAL team 6 was formed in large part as a counter terrorist and hostage rescue team. Many of them were probably in the Afghan theater already when things became clearer and it would not have taken much to bring them all up to speed. I suspect Delta is spread all over the world right now in missions more suited to their specialized areas....My two cents...

A great book for background on the subject is Richard Marcinko's "Rogue Warrior".

---

Cal_Fan2;505019 said:

---

I disagree...when it comes to politics or bias, perception is everything

---

What does that even mean? Throughout the course of history, public perception has been wrong many times, and also easily manipulated by those with enough influence and power. Simply citing an opinion poll does not prove one way or the other whether or not the media is too liberal.

Anyway, I'm not actually making a claim that the media is biased towards the left or the right. In fact, I think it's neither; the media is biased towards whatever will make the most money, or in other words, shallow sensationalism. MSNBC has attempted to be sensationalist left, while Fox News attempts to be sensationalist right, because each has made an attempt to play to their respective demographic for the sake of ratings (though I think Fox is more effective at it).

bearister;505023 said:

---

Bin Laden provided the pretext to launch a plan that was long in the making. Thus it was not he who cost us two wars and counting and thousands of dead bodies and trillions in debt. The "cause" was Bush/Cheney/Wolfowitz and the Neocons. And to think, those lads get a free pass on the death and destruction they wrought. Please read Right Winger Pat Buchanan's essay:

http://www.amconmag.com/article/2003/mar/24/00007/

---

to my days as a junior staffer in DC, working at CSIS for and with people who later steered us astray (Rodman, Libby, Wolfowitz, Kagan, Fukuyama). I once shared an elevator at State with Richard Perle, leaving Adm. Crowe's swearing-in ceremony to the Court of St. James. He made my skin crawl, and the temperature of the elevator drop 20 degrees.

My anger toward these men is personal. Every time I read an article like this I think how fortunate I was to leave DC long before I would have had to choose between career and scruples.

liverflukes;505032 said:

---

I'm a military history junkie but I can only speculate as I am just now following the coverage again today but I think it was because this SEAL unit had the most proficient and largest number of men trained for this specialized task. SEAL team 6 was formed in large part as a counter terrorist and hostage rescue team. Many of them were probably in the Afghan theater already when things became clearer and it would not have taken much to bring them all up to speed. I suspect Delta is spread all over the world right now in missions more suited to their specialized areas....My two cents...

A great book for background on the subject is Richard Marcinko's "Rogue Warrior".

---

I think that is about right....SEAL Team Six, now known as the United States Naval Special Warfare Development Group (DEVGRU), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Special_Warfare_Development_Group was already in Afghanistan and had a mock up of the mansion already set up at Bagram Air Base and had been practicing for the convert incursion for a couple months now... You probably know but some don't that these guys aren't just SEAL's, they are the elite SEAL's....

Unity, December 1941:



Unity 2011 version:



:headbang

I'm guessing that those Navy Seals did not leave Bin Laden's compound without taking with them one or more captured occupants for interrogation. Also, I'm not a big conspiracy fan, but in this case it seems curious to me that they would dump Bin Laden's body in the sea - I think that they'd want to do forensics on the body to see what they could learn from it about how he was living. Or maybe they didn't kill him but have him in some interrogation center somewhere.

GoCal80;505047 said:

---

I'm guessing that those Navy Seals did not leave Bin Laden's compound without taking with them one or more captured occupants for interrogation. Also, I'm not a big conspiracy fan, but in this case it seems curious to me that they would dump Bin Laden's body in the sea - I think that they'd want to do forensics on the body to see what they could learn from it about how he was living. Or maybe they didn't kill him but have him in some interrogation center somewhere.

---

I don't think he would have allowed himself to be captured. Additionally, he apparently had 30 minutes or so to ponder his fate. Dumping his body minimizes the outrage which would have occurred in not abiding by specific religious practices following death. What country would willingly allow his remains on their soil? Why allow his grave to be a symbolic pilgrimage site? They did forensics, probably took pieces of him and I'm sure pictures will eventually come out. As for interrogations, what's left to ask him that we don't already know?

As a side note, I would have given up all future Cal tickets and t.v. games to see the look on his face when he realized 70 virgins were not waiting for him in the afterlife. Cal in the Rose Bowl excluded of course...

okaydo;504915 said:

---

---

You missed the gimme sitting on the table.




Matching site:



Logo on the printout:




Secretary of State "NOFORN" binder held by Hillary:



Google maps satellite imagery circa 2005 before the western walls were fully constructed: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=34.169186,73.243473&spn=0.003937,0.008256&t=k&z=18&lci=com.panoramio.all

Cal_Fan2;505007 said:

---

.for every liberal who thinks FOX news are liars, there is a conservative who thinks MSNBC is equally guilty...

---

well, those conservatives are wrong. There is documented, incontrovertible evidence that Fox News is guided more by ideology than any network on the liberal side, and it has greater viewership, and thus greater reach. The idea that "both sides do it equally" is just not true. How many memos have been leaked showing that MSNBC or CNN brass was telling their news side -- not their opinion shows, but the news shows -- to use particular language that was slanted towards the progressive side of issues? None that I remember. Fox News, on the other hand, has produced several such examples of top-down instructions to use conservative language that would be shocking if anyone were surprised.

(For the record, though, I think the "Obama bin Laden" label was an innocent typo.)

I haven't watched Fox long enough yesterday, but supposedly that typo was on for an awfully long time, as opposed to a couple of shots.

Go Bears! There must be a Cal connection to one of the Navy SEALs. There has to be!

Who is nuts? This articles spells out that the helicopter evaded Pakistan's radar system. Keep drinking the KOOL-aid, girly man.

"The choppers entered Pakistani airspace using sophisticated technology intended to evade that country's radar systems, a U.S. official said."

Here's to your community organizer as President and Professional Assasin! Afterall, he did command the kill mission. What happened to his due process arguments for Club Gitmo? Opps! You Obamist will neve admit you're sheep following the master over the cliff.

Bottom lines in this whole event:

1) Even though I am a staunch conservative and generally don't support Obama's policies, you HAVE to give the man credit for having the guts to make the right decision here and get it done. Great job, Mr. President! Excellent leadership. And, the decisions to not tell Pakistan, and to dump the body in the ocean were absolutely perfect. The entire plan was flawless and well-executed.

2) The JSOC Seal Team 6 men are the baddest dudes on the planet. Using them a bit more often probably makes a lot of sense.

3) While getting OBL doesn't "solve" anything or "end" anything, it was nonetheless very, very important. I couldn't see going through a ten-year anniversary of 9/11 with him still on the loose.

4) The guys on South Park are really, really funny. They usually make their shows relevant to what has happened in the news recently. In this case, they were ahead of the game as last year they had an espisode end with OBL getting shot in the head by a JSOC Seal that had repelled down a helicopter rope on a stage in the town square.

I'd hate to step into the political mudslinging because there is no end to these argument. But, might as well.

As a statement, it's true that both sides sling mud. Both sides do it. But the right is more successful at it. Also, the right tends to congregate around a few very popular conservative sources, some of whom are known to be very controversial.

The left has MSNBC news. The right has Fox News. Fox is way more successful in the US than MSNBC.

The right has O'Reilly. The left has Keith Oberman. I'm not sure Oberman is even still on (as I don't bother with this "pundit" crap). I'm sure O'Reilly is as strong as ever.

The right has Rush Limbaugh. I'm not sure who the equivalent on the left is. In fact, there probably isn't one since I can't think of it. It's probably something on that one station (Air America?).

Because the right has more popular, controversial figures, it feels like the mainstream (on the right) is responsible. I think that's a personal judgment call. At what point does a fringe person with an opinion (a la Glenn Beck) become mainstream?

Not all controversial statements and not all sources are alike. It's one thing to hear something from a random radio pundit or a biased media group. It's another to hear it from a mainstream news source or an elected Congressperson.

I'm biased and I'm admittedly center-left. To be frank, I feel that people who watch Faux News are really subject to extreme conservative bias. The state of most news networks on TV is pretty sad (MSNBC, CNN included).

I think NPR tends to be one of the best, least-biased news sources out there and it's a shame that those on the right are making it their decision to destroy it.

/rant

Interesting note: an unidentified CIA spokesperson said that while Khalid did reveal the name of the courier, he did NOT do so under torture, but rather during more conventional interrogation.

And Generalissimo Franco is still dead.

drunkoski;505107 said:

---

and this is evidence it doesn't happen? fox as a whole has plenty of liberal programing. they are in the business to make money. a conservative news network makes money. stop turning it into something it isn't.

---

your comment demonstrates the problem; people have become accepting of the idea that it's OK for the news to be biased. It's not OK. It doesn't matter what's on the other Fox networks, and it doesn't matter what Hannity or Beck (or Olbermann or Maddow) say; that's all entertainment and opinion programming. The problem with Fox News is that they let the bias seep into their news programming. When "government option" polls unfavorably but "public option" fares well they instruct their anchors to start using the former, even though it's a term unfamiliar to those watching. That's a problem. (I think it's also a problem that these news networks are filling up their days with opinion programming; soon their anchors will get as much screen time as MTV veejays. But as you say, they're in the business to make money, and the opinion programming sells.)

drunkoski;505199 said:

---

all news networks are biased:
watch cnbc or msnbc and tell me the fix isn't in there as well. your only problem with fox is that you don't agree with it politically.

---

That's it? That's all you can come back with? "Nuh-uh"?

By the way, on the torture thing, the most recent AP story on the subject includes this:

Quote:

---

Mohammed did not reveal the names while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, former officials said. He identified them many months later under standard interrogation, they said, leaving it once again up for debate as to whether the harsh technique was a valuable tool or an unnecessarily violent tactic.

---

drunkoski;505207 said:

---

i'm not going to argue fox news is unbiased. nor should it have to be. that's your issue not mine.

---

fify

drunkoski;505207 said:

---

as for the torture issue i'm just shocked people would leak it didn't happen because of torture. shocked i tells ya! no political motivation exists there right?

---

Clearly there's motivation on all sides, including what you cited yesterday. The actual truth will slowly come out.

drunkoski;505107 said:

---

and this is evidence it doesn't happen? fox as a whole has plenty of liberal programing. they are in the business to make money. a conservative news network makes money. stop turning it into something it isn't.

---

:rollinglaugh:

drunkoski;504809 said:

---

remember torture doesn't work:

http://www.startribune.com/nation/121089124.html

---

Conflicting reports, DO: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=13512344

Quote:

---

The revelation that intelligence gleaned from the CIA's so-called black sites helped kill bin Laden was seen as vindication for many intelligence officials who have been repeatedly investigated and criticized for their involvement in a program that involved the harshest interrogation methods in U.S. history.

"We got beat up for it, but those efforts led to this great day," said Marty Martin, a retired CIA officer who for years led the hunt for bin Laden.

Mohammed did not reveal the names while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, former officials said. He identified them many months later under standard interrogation, they said, leaving it once again up for debate as to whether the harsh technique was a valuable tool or an unnecessarily violent tactic.

---

drunkoski;505222 said:

---

it's a for profit network. jon stewart reports the news as well and i'd hardly say he's unbaised.

---

I'm starting to get the sense that you can't see or don't care about the difference between Jon Stewart and Peter Jennings. You do understand that their jobs are different, right?

drunkoski;505231 said:

---

i love how all the birthers were idiots, but a for profit tv network conspiring to bring down the liberal party and the poor (I love that argument) is not only believable, but obvious to many.

---

drunkoski;505236 said:

---

are you arguing peter jennings is unbiased? their jobs are to provide ratings and entertainment. I assure you that even the most unbiased anchor in US history would get fired immediately if his ratings sucked. edit: what would happen if it's up to you? foxnews gets shut down by the govt?

---

ok, you're just making sh!t up to be contrary. sorry it took so long to catch on.

freshfunk;505155 said:

---

As a statement, it's true that both sides sling mud. Both sides do it. But the right is more successful at it. Also, the right tends to congregate around a few very popular conservative sources, some of whom are known to be very controversial.


Not all controversial statements and not all sources are alike. It's one thing to hear something from a random radio pundit or a biased media group. It's another to hear it from a mainstream news source or an elected Congressperson.

/rant

---

Recently heard Paul Pierson a Cal Poli Sci professor who recently published "Winner take all Politics". To boil down some of his comments.
Lots of people say "both sides do it"; but that is like saying comparing the NY Yankees with a Little League BB team and saying "they both play baseball".

The Democrats have their fringe element. The Republicans do also. But for the Republicans the fringe element is controlling much of what the Republican Party is doing and almost all of its candidates are paying homage to that fringe.

On the Left -- if you listen to Progressive pundits, many of them hate Obama with almost as much passion as they hated W (some even more since they feel betrayed). But it is clear that they remain a fringe element.

CalFish;505228 said:

---

Conflicting reports, DO: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=13512344

---

Mohammed did not reveal the names while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, former officials said. He identified them many months later under standard interrogation, they said, leaving it once again up for debate as to whether the harsh technique was a valuable tool or an unnecessarily violent tactic.

No wonder Mike Mohamed's stock in the draft dropped. The Pro Scouts must have thought he supported Al Queda.

68great;505253 said:

---

Mohammed did not reveal the names while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, former officials said. He identified them many months later under standard interrogation, they said, leaving it once again up for debate as to whether the harsh technique was a valuable tool or an unnecessarily violent tactic.

No wonder Mike Mohamed's stock in the draft dropped. The Pro Scouts must have thought he supported Al Queda.

---

Yeah, this whole affair is making people wonder whether the draft combine has started to go too far. Roger Goodell was on TV yesterday asserting "The NFL does not torture!"

68great;505249 said:

---

Recently heard Paul Pierson a Cal Poli Sci professor who recently published "Winner take all Politics". To boil down some of his comments.
Lots of people say "both sides do it"; but that is like saying comparing the NY Yankees with a Little League BB team and saying "they both play baseball".

The Democrats have their fringe element. The Republicans do also. But for the Republicans the fringe element is controlling much of what the Republican Party is doing and almost all of its candidates are paying homage to that fringe.

On the Left -- if you listen to Progressive pundits, many of them hate Obama with almost as much passion as they hated W (some even more since they feel betrayed). But it is clear that they remain a fringe element.

---

Most of this mud slinging stuff is atmospheric will little consequence-just preaching to their bases. I don't think it influences much at all besides talking heads. The so called conservative mud slinging at Obama didn't prevent McCain from being drubbed; and, likewise the Democrats were tossed out last year not because of media but because of performance. The people in the middle are deciding these elections and one thing is apparent; they don't really like either party. Unfortunately what all this mud slinging does lead to is: 1) the parties thinking that their elections are mandates for their extreme positions which is nonsense 2) a lack of responsible governance.

GB54;505267 said:

---

Most of this mud slinging stuff is atmospheric will little consequence-just preaching to their bases. I don't think it influences much at all besides talking heads. The so called conservative mud slinging at Obama didn't prevent McCain from being drubbed; and, likewise the Democrats were tossed out last year not because of media but because of performance. The people in the middle are deciding these elections and one thing is apparent; they don't really like either party. Unfortunately what all this mud slinging does lead to is: 1) the parties thinking that their elections are mandates for their extreme positions which is nonsense 2) a lack of responsible governance.

---

What I've been saying all along...too bad the far leanings on both sides can't see this through their bitter hatred... Independents would tell them otherwise

68great;504850 said:

---

There have been multiple studies that torture yields less correct and effective information than other more intelligent means of interrogation.

---

Which is probably the reason why it took 10 years to get the guy. The other 10 million bits of information yielded through the water board had us looking in caves in another country.

SitkaBear;505266 said:

---

My favorite Fox News missive was a few years back when they started calling "suicide bombers" (those individuals who strap on a bomb and blow themselves as well as others up) as "homocide bombers."

The difference in the wording is so obvious to the informed, yet so misleading to the un-informed, that to think a news department would deliberately misuse a widely accepted "news term" with such important socio-political meaning leads me to distrust every piece of "news" Fox attempts to report.

---

..and that one came straight from the Bush administration; it was a decision (in the person of Ari Fleischer, who IIRC confused the assembled press when he first used it) aimed at making suicide bombers seem less, I don't know, sympathetic. ("If only someone had given them a hug and let them know that suicide wasn't the answer!") Fox News apparently found their argument compelling. I agree, that term was so clumsily Orwellian it was funny.

CALiforniALUM;505278 said:

---

Which is probably the reason why it took 10 years to get the guy. The other 10 million bits of information yielded through the water board had us looking in caves in another country.

---

That's pretty funny!

So, DO, whaddawegottado to get you to say nice things about JT...... waterboard ya?

BearyWhite;505284 said:

---

..and that one came straight from the top, it was a Bush decision (in the person of Ari Fleischer, who IIRC confused the assembled press when he first used it) aimed at making suicide bombers seem less, I don't know, sympathetic. ("If only someone had given them a hug and let them know that suicide wasn't the answer!") Fox News apparently found their argument compelling. I agree, that term was so clumsily Orwellian it was funny.

---

BW..... you know I've been arguing from the middle against both extreme sides but you have GOT to know both sides do this...I mean the war is libya is not a war, it is a Kinetic Military Action?... Now I know you will find a reason for saying this is ok and that other is not. What I find amusing is that again, both sides do this but far leaning folk don't see it.... Kinetic Military Action is just as bad as homicide bomber....at least to those of us near the middle..