• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

A glimpse into Bin Laden's fall

Status
Not open for further replies.
For once, I thought this was actually an interesting piece of reporting from CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/opinions/bergen-bin-laden-al-qaeda-decline-fall/index.html

Some highlights:

Newly released al Qaeda documents, including letters to and from Osama bin Laden in the year or so before his May 2011 death, show an organization that understood it had severe problems resulting from the CIA drone program that was killing many of the group's leaders in Pakistan's tribal regions bordering Afghanistan.

CIA efforts to spy on the group and kill its leaders were so effective that in June 2010 an al Qaeda official urged bin Laden, "You should have fewer exchanges of correspondence with us during this period. Make the period between contacts longer and further apart. Take excessive caution and care, especially this year."

This was wise counsel. Within a few weeks of this letter being written, the CIA would track bin Laden's trusted courier to his longtime hideout in Abbottabad, Pakistan, and on May 1, 2011, a U.S. Navy SEAL operation ordered by President Barack Obama killed al Qaeda's leader.

The documents show how al Qaeda's 9/11 operation unleashed so much force against it, including the CIA drone program, that it had to hide in the shadows and couldn't pull off any successful operation in the West for many years before the death of bin Laden.

A major theme of the documents is how much punishment the CIA drone program was inflicting on al Qaeda. Al Qaeda officials considered moving to Nuristan, a remote mountainous region of eastern Afghanistan, or to other parts of Pakistan such as Sindh or Balochistan and even to Iran, which had been a key sanctuary for a number of al Qaeda's leaders after the fall of the Taliban in late 2001. Al Qaeda mulled opening an office in Iran, but "we backed off this idea due to financial costs and other considerations."

The al Qaeda official wrote that Yazid was staying at the house of a "well-known" supporter of al Qaeda when a drone started making "distinctive loops that we all know and all the brothers have experienced. They all know that if a plane starts doing these turns, it is going to strike."

Yazid and his wife and three daughters and granddaughter were all killed in the drone strike, according to the official.


The official lamented that drones are "still circling our skies every day" and the only relief from them came when weather conditions worsened and there was cloud cover. The official wrote but "then they come back when the sky is clear."

Al Qaeda had tried to use jamming technology and to hack into the drones "but no result so far," according to the al Qaeda official.

According to the documents, Pakistani intelligence officials "reached out to" al Qaeda through longtime jihadist sympathizers who had formerly held positions in the Pakistani intelligence agency, ISI, as well as the leaders of militant groups such as the Haqqani Taliban faction that have contacts with the ISI.
 

Sch1sm

Member
Level headed right hand man to a leader growing cocky from years of being unaffected. You could almost make a movie.
 

potam

Banned
2012-09-05-noday.jpg

a clearer glimpse into Bin Laden's fall
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Still not exactly a "fan" of Drone Strikes, but at least in Afghanistan, combined with good intelligence they were certainly effective. Whether the collateral damage was worth it.. I don't know.
 

S-Wind

Member
Drone strikes.

Where America kills the pers.. er... "Target", the spouse, their children, and any grandchildren or anyone else on the vicinity.

BONUS: if it's a "Double Tap", then first responders (like those fire fighters and paramedics that ran into the flaming buildings on September 11, 2001) are killed too

(Isn't that a war crime????)

AMERICA!!!

FUCK YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Drone strikes.

Where America kills the pers.. er... "Target", the spouse, their children, and any grandchildren or anyone else on the vicinity.

BONUS: if it's a "Double Tap", then first responders (like those fire fighters and paramedics that ran into the flaming buildings on September 11, 2001) are killed too

(Isn't that a war crime????)

AMERICA!!!

FUCK YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!

What are you even saying right now?
 

WalkMan

Banned
Drone strikes.

Where America kills the pers.. er... "Target", the spouse, their children, and any grandchildren or anyone else on the vicinity.

BONUS: if it's a "Double Tap", then first responders (like those fire fighters and paramedics that ran into the flaming buildings on September 11, 2001) are killed too

(Isn't that a war crime????)

AMERICA!!!

FUCK YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!

Agreed. We should just sit around singing kumbaya, let our terrorist compadres join in too
 

Fiktion

Banned
Drone strikes.

Where America kills the pers.. er... "Target", the spouse, their children, and any grandchildren or anyone else on the vicinity.

BONUS: if it's a "Double Tap", then first responders (like those fire fighters and paramedics that ran into the flaming buildings on September 11, 2001) are killed too

(Isn't that a war crime????)

AMERICA!!!

FUCK YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!

Would you rather put boots on the ground?
 

Fiktion

Banned
Without boots you lack knowledge that you target the right persons, which resulted in lots of deaths of innocents.

You lack that knowledge with boots as well. Plus it's far more expensive and any sustained operation would amount to an occupation; plus in the mountainous tribal regions the logistics would be a nightmare.

There is no better alternative to drones.
 
The efficacy of drone use continues to be a hotly contested issue. There has been data, along with information seized by terror groups (such as these letters), that demonstrates their effectiveness. However, the immeasurable problem is the effects drone strikes have in aiding the recruiting efforts of terror organizations (mainly through the killing of civilians).

I think it's unfair, and frankly untenable, to suggest that the US purposefully targets civilians. The loss of civilian life is a deplorable side effect of, arguably, the most effective weapon the US (currently) has against terrorist organizations. Whether or not the cost of a single civilian life is worth any military target is something that can be debated unto the oceans run dry.
 

Oersted

Member
You lack that knowledge with boots as well. Plus it's far more expensive and any sustained operation would amount to an occupation; plus in the mountainous tribal regions the logistics would be a nightmare.

There is no better alternative to drones.

You lack it too, but less. A soldier might have told Osama from his daughters apart. Just a gut feeling.
 

potam

Banned
You lack it too, but less. A soldier might have told Osama from his daughters apart. Just a gut feeling.

uh...

uh...

uhhh...


You do realize we shot Bin Laden (see: the picture I posted in this thread) and didn't bomb him, right?
 

Fiktion

Banned
You lack it too, but less. A soldier might have told Osama from his daughters apart. Just a gut feeling.
Uh, we didn't drone Osama. We sent in DEVGRU (Seal Team Six). One of his wives was killed in the firefight, not his daughter.

Over 100,000 civilians died during the occupation of Iraq. Putting boots on the ground doesn't guarantee shit.
 

potam

Banned
I'm pretty sure there are studies showing that boots on the ground cause far more casualties than drones do.

The people who drone on (get it?) about innocent bystanders in drone strikes are either completely ignorant, or willfully blind, to the realities of war.
 

Oersted

Member
uh...

uh...

uhhh...


You do realize we shot Bin Laden (see: the picture I posted in this thread) and didn't bomb him, right?

Yes, a drone strike didn't kill Osama. Boots on the ground did. A drone killed Yazids daughters, granddaughter and wife. I should have made my sarcasm better worded, mind you.
 

lenos16

Member
The efficacy of drone use continues to be a hotly contested issue. There has been data, along with information seized by terror groups (such as these letters), that demonstrates their effectiveness. However, the immeasurable problem is the effects drone strikes have in aiding the recruiting efforts of terror organizations (mainly through the killing of civilians).

I.

Is there any recent studfies that have shown the significant effect of these? The IS seemed to be doing just fine with their propaganda videos and what not.
 
Kill my godfather on 9/11, bud? We will hunt you down for YEARS to come until justice is served. I miss you so much, Uncle Steve. I'll never, ever get another uncle like you, and my dad will never get another baby brother. Obama, thank you for finishing the fight against this coward.

My uncle had two 3 year-old kids when he was incinerated on the 103rd floor.

He was a star player for his high school football team in NJ before he worked on Wall Street for Cantor Fitzgerald.

And their entire floor was wiped out.

http://www.legacy.com/guestbooks/cantonrep/steven-b-paterson-condolences/99652

Sorry for your loss, but this is not "justice". This is revenge. Justice is served in a court room. As far as I know Osama Bin Laden was unarmed when he was killed. He should have been captured and put in front of a judge.

What are you even saying right now?

That the US government killed countless innocent people in their "war against terror". Did you not know that or are you ignoring it on purpose?

Agreed. We should just sit around singing kumbaya, let our terrorist compadres join in too

Right. Because the only alternative to the brutal approach of the US government is singing kumbaya. What a load of crap. Those drone strikes are terrorism. That's picture book state terrorism.
 
Is there any recent studfies that have shown the significant effect of these? The IS seemed to be doing just fine with their propaganda videos and what not.

Sure, you could google and find articles representing both sides of the debate. This is one that I was referring to specifically: http://patrickjohnston.info/materials/drones.pdf

This is an older article: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...y-effectiveness-of-u-s-drone-strikes-doubtful but gives a more neutral take on the use of drone strikes.
 

Sheroking

Member
Drones are good. Low cost, low risk to the lives of soldiers. America's liberal use of them, especially in cases with high potential for civilization casualties, is not so good. The answer, as usual, is probably found in the middle-ground.

I'm certainly not going to bitch about it in a thread about how drone strikes neutered Al Queda.
 

Fiktion

Banned
Gemüsepizza;155464246 said:
Right. Because the only alternative to the brutal approach of the US government is singing kumbaya. What a load of crap. Those drone strikes are terrorism. That's picture book state terrorism.
Context: This poster is a Putin apologist and supports the annexation of Ukraine and shouldn't be taken seriously on anything related to foreign policy.
 

Slavik81

Member
You lack that knowledge with boots as well. Plus it's far more expensive and any sustained operation would amount to an occupation; plus in the mountainous tribal regions the logistics would be a nightmare.

There is no better alternative to drones.

How do you think they recruit more members? It's easy to sign up people to fight against America when they can point to all the children being killed by Americans.

I believed in drones. They can be used effectively. However, Obama is far too willing to kill innocent people just to take down a guilty one. That disregard for innocent lives turns the indifferent into enemies and will fuck us all over in the long run.

The alternative is to make fewer enemies, keep the ones we do have far away from us and cultivate more allies.
 
Drone strikes.

Where America kills the pers.. er... "Target", the spouse, their children, and any grandchildren or anyone else on the vicinity.

BONUS: if it's a "Double Tap", then first responders (like those fire fighters and paramedics that ran into the flaming buildings on September 11, 2001) are killed too

(Isn't that a war crime????)

AMERICA!!!

FUCK YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!

Poor analogy. There were no terrorists in the Twin Towers. It is unfortunate innocents get killed. I guess the solution is stay away from terrorists and their supporters.
 
Gemüsepizza;155464246 said:
Sorry for your loss, but this is not "justice". This is revenge. Justice is served in a court room. As far as I know Osama Bin Laden was unarmed when he was killed. He should have been captured and put in front of a judge

That the US government killed countless innocent people in their "war against terror". Did you not know that or are you ignoring it on purpose?

Right. Because the only alternative to the brutal approach of the US government is singing kumbaya. What a load of crap. Those drone strikes are terrorism. That's picture book state terrorism.[/B]


Why did you change your response?
 

potam

Banned
There's serious discussion, and then there is Kremlin lunacy.

I know, but I'm just saying the majority of what is posted here shouldn't be taken seriously, or repeated as if it is an authoritative view. Just because someone else has a different view doesn't mean it's less-wrong than anything else posted here.
 

Oersted

Member
Is there any recent studfies that have shown the significant effect of these? The IS seemed to be doing just fine with their propaganda videos and what not.

How should they conduct studies in such areas, on such a topic? But well, its atleast imaginable that if innocent get killed, and noone will be hold accountable for that, they most likely won't scream "America Fuck Yeah!"
 
Context: This poster is a Putin apologist and supports the annexation of Ukraine and shouldn't be taken seriously on anything related to foreign policy.

Excuse me? I do not endorse any of Putin's actions, nor do I support the annexation of Ukraine. So can you please refrain from insulting me or telling lies, thank you. This is also not a thread about Putin, Russia or the Ukraine.

This is nonsense, why did you change your response? You changed you response after several minutes...

What? I didn't change my response.
 

Fiktion

Banned
Gemüsepizza;155465014 said:
Excuse me? I do not endorse any of Putin's actions, nor do I support the annexation of Ukraine. So can you please refrain from insulting me or telling lies, thank you. This is also not a thread about Putin, Russia or the Ukraine.

I would pull quotes but as you say, this is not the thread for that.

But in this very thread you've conveniently tried to get away with ninja editing so I'll let that speak for itself.
 
Although this has spiraled into a debate about drones, I did find the information about the assistance from the Pakistani government rather interesting, albeit unsurprising.
 
I would pull quotes but as you say, this is not the thread for that.

But in this very thread you've conveniently tried to get away with ninja editing so I'll let that speak for itself.

jlaw-okayneut7.gif


Yeah sure. There are no quotes. And what did I "ninja edit"? Jesus.

Edit: And you still haven't said a single word about my arguments regarding this topic. Only personal attacks.
 

Slavik81

Member
I am human. I cannot conceal my rage. I am simply an American who lost his family.
Unfortunately, we're instilling the same feeling in the friends and family of the innocent victims of drone strikes. Quite frankly, that scares me.

I'm sorry for your loss. I can only imagine how awful it would be to lose someone like that.
 

S-Wind

Member
I am human. I cannot conceal my rage. I am simply an American who lost his family.

News flash: The innocent people your government kills with it's drone strikes are also human. The loss of their family hurts no less.

Too many of you Americans fail to see that you are creating more enemies, in addition to losing the moral high ground.
 

S-Wind

Member
Poor analogy. There were no terrorists in the Twin Towers. It is unfortunate innocents get killed.I guess the solution is stay away from terrorists and their supporters.

Yeah, those children and grandchildren should have known better.

First responders answer their call of duty, which is to go save lives where it is needed.

They do not discriminate.
 

lenos16

Member
Sure, you could google and find articles representing both sides of the debate. This is one that I was referring to specifically: http://patrickjohnston.info/materials/drones.pdf

This is an older article: http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way...y-effectiveness-of-u-s-drone-strikes-doubtful but gives a more neutral take on the use of drone strikes.

The articles you listed mentioned lower casualty rates and terrorist activities in the region, while the data on the recruitment level has been inconclusive. Though I guess that this can't be helped as reliable data from the region is nearly impossible to get.
 

potam

Banned
Interesting picture. Weapons are just around and about with magazines inserted (and possibly a round already chambered). Prepped to go at a moment's notice I guess!

mags in is pretty standard. I doubt there's a round chambered, since that wouldn't really do much aside from become a liability. But, it's DEVGRU, so who knows...I imagine if one of them wanted to keep a round chambered, no one would bat an eye (maybe...)
 
Yeah, those children and grandchildren should have known better.

First responders answer their call of duty, which is to go save lives where it is needed.

They do not discriminate.

Their parents do know better. It's quite clear from the article they know any adult associated with Al Qaeda is a target. I know we should be sympathetic to their families but I'm not, knowing these are the people who celebrated 9/11, who condoned the recent massacre of 132 children.

I don't support firing on first responders. At the same time you are talking about the stronghold of the Taliban. People in these areas are supporters of the Taliban and Al Qaeda and do discriminate. If it were their enemy in the ruins they would let them die. NY is not a terrorist haven and the firefighters on 9/11 were not there to rescue terrorists or the relatives of terrorists.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom