[Grinov]

No doubt people here have heard this:

http://www.latimes.c...l=la-home-world

Now everyone is arguing wether or not he is dead, the question I want to put forward is:

Does the death of Osama benefit the United States (the Bush Administration) or would it be better that he was alive?

This post has been edited by Cheto: 24 September 2006 - 03:47 AM

[David-kyo]

I don't think it really matters, except that if he is, perhaps some people who had been yearning for revenge feel satisfied now. It's not like his death would deliver a serious blow to terrorism, is it.

[Grinov]

I meant politically, would the Bush Administration get a boost in the next elections if he was dead or not?

[David-kyo]

Rationally, I wouldn't think so, since they had nothing to do with his death. If he's dead.
Then again, elections in America aren't rational.

EDIT: Anyway, I, and probably most other people, will stay skeptical about this until we see his severed head kicked around like a football by US soldiers in the newspaper.

This post has been edited by David-kyo: 24 September 2006 - 04:01 AM

[Grinov]

I would have to agree but I still would like to hear from the Americans on this forum.

[Otal Nimrodi]

Speaking as an American, I have to say that we're the wrong folks to ask, but I'm guessing yeah. Just guessing, mind.

[MyPantsAreOnFire]

Unless it could somehow be spun that his death would have been the result of a US plan or campaign or intervention, it would be very tricky for anyone to try and claim credit for a man dying of organ failure due to typhoid somewhere in the wilderness of Pakistan. But I wouldn't put it past anyone to try, especially the neo-cons.

My biggest gripe with this is that there are too many Americans who think the death of Osama would "fix" things, or a huge step towards that goal, which serves only to highlight how little they understand terrorism, extremism and the ludicrously named "war on the terror." It seems many equate this to Hitler's suicide, which simply is not the case, not even close.

[Jordan]

Makes no difference. HE never did to begin with. Islamic extremits are not a minority. THey are are not spurred by one man. THey are a large group with many many leaders.

Osama was just one.

[MyPantsAreOnFire]

Makes no difference. HE never did to begin with. Islamic extremits are not a minority. THey are are not spurred by one man. THey are a large group with many many leaders.

Osama was just one.

Actually, you're understating what he was responsible for. Before bin Laden "broke on the scene" by merging his Al-Queda group with Zawahiri's Al-Jihad group, the overwhelming bulk of Islamic extremist terrorism was directed at Israel and within Egypt. Bin Laden really did almost singlehandedly swing the attention of many of these people and groups to the idea of attacking outside of the region, primarily the US. I do agree that the "super villain"-esque status he's been given by many is absurd and hopelessly naive, but he is a pretty significant historical figure in what he influenced and guided with his policies.

[barend]

yeah, Osama is irrellevant. as long as islamic extreemists hate EVERYONE adn care enough to share, the world is fucked.

for their contribution to civilian safety, their dedication to wiping out non muslims, and most importantly they way their attacks on the western world only compound the elements of western civilization they hate so much. (which makes it just lovely for those of us In the western world who aren't to crash hot bout it to begin with).

no, i'm sure they'll be able to carry on like a bunch of lunatics without a figure head.

[Grinov]

I would just like to remind everyone this is a "what if" thread but never the less:

http://news.bbc.co.u...ope/5374998.stm

[Slade]

It wouldn't matter much because our new undefinable, immortal enemy is Eurasia - sorry, Al-Quaeda (sp?) and in general "terrorism." I don't know if even the expert neo-con spin doctors could give people a lasting impression that catching Osama shows any remote progress.

[Jordan]

Civillian number 2 has a theory that Osama has been dead for 10 years and is used as a means to scare people when the CIA wants to pin the blame on a bad guy.

I'm not sure if thats true or not, but it does underline one important idea. HIs death means nothing. It means the UN and other free nations will now have to find an new Osama.

This post has been edited by Jordan: 25 September 2006 - 02:11 PM

[Slade]

Isn't it kinda contradictory to call nations that actively find scapegoats to excuse their unsavory actions "free nations"? And I think you mean the US. The UN's made up of more than the US, and many nations detest the US' foreign policy in recent years. Osama could be dead, but as you said, it wouldn't matter.

[barend]

Civillian number 2 has a theory that Osama has been dead for 10 years and is used as a means to scare people when the CIA wants to pin the blame on a bad guy.

I'm not sure if thats true or not, but it does underline one important idea. HIs death means nothing. It means the UN and other free nations will now have to find an new Osama.

in fact it could be the next reality TV eviction-based contest show...

'American Osama' it could be you...


why not, people don't mind being lied to as long as you entertain them.