Osama Bin Laden has been found!?!

[o.iatlhawksfan]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>The Dubai-based satellite TV channel Al Arabiya is reporting that Osama Bin Laden has been “located” by US intelligence in the Kararakoram – a mountain range that spans the borders of Pakistan, the Kashmir and China (K2 is one of its peaks). There was a high-level meeting last week in Doha including General Petraeus, the recently-nominated Commander of US Central Command, and it is reasonable to speculate that – if there is truth to the report – it flows from this piece of intelligence. Whether the latest rumors about the tracking down of OBL have foundation will quickly become apparent. If they do have substance, Al Arabiya will have scored a huge world scoop – and have its rival Al Jazeera spitting nails.</div>

I found it on another forum, take from a grain of salt, but it was posted by someone who rarely fake articles.

 

[o.iatlhawksfan]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Bin Laden Is in Pakistan, AFP Says, Citing Afghan Intelligence

By Ed Johnson

May 28 (Bloomberg) -- Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is hiding in Pakistan's northwestern Chitral region bordering Afghanistan, Agence France-Presse reported, citing an Afghan intelligence official.

Afghan authorities received information about bin Laden's whereabouts four or five months ago, the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told AFP. He didn't elaborate, according to the report.

There have been no confirmed sightings of bin Laden since he escaped U.S.-led forces in the Tora Bora region of Afghanistan in December 2001. He has recorded at least four video and audio tapes since last September from his presumed hiding places on the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Pakistan's government has previously denied bin Laden is hiding in its tribal regions, and said he is in Kunar province in neighboring Afghanistan, according to the report.</div>
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...mp;refer=africa

 

[NJNetz]

Wasn't he rumored to be dead like 5 times?

 

[Mamba]

Let's just nuke 'em.

 

[Real]

Can't say I'm shocked.

 

[zєяσ]

Uh, 4 or 5 months ago? Wtf?(Why announce it now? Why emphasize "recently nominated"? Conspiracy theories! Dum dum dum)

 

[Kid Chocolate]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (o.iatlhawksfan @ May 28 2008, 04:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>take from a grain of salt</div>

???????????????????

 

[AEM]

We know where he is, we just can't get to him.

Wait for it, that line will be forthcoming.

 

[Денг Гордон]

Didn't we already know he was in that region?

 

[Denny Crane]

I don't get why people complain about taking out Saddam because it was a unilateral invasion of a country that was "no threat" to us. The same people now support Obama for some reason I don't get.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7080101233.html

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Obama Says He Would Take Fight To Pakistan
Thursday, August 2, 2007; Page A01

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama issued a pointed warning yesterday to Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, saying that as president he would be prepared to order U.S. troops into that country unilaterally if it failed to act on its own against Islamic extremists.</div>

I'm curious. Does anyone really think it's a good idea to unilaterally attack Pakistan?

 

[AEM]

The Cockroach Civil Liberties League loves the idea, for obvious reasons.

 

[Денг Гордон]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 28 2008, 08:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't get why people complain about taking out Saddam because it was a unilateral invasion of a country that was "no threat" to us. The same people now support Obama for some reason I don't get.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7080101233.html

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Obama Says He Would Take Fight To Pakistan
Thursday, August 2, 2007; Page A01

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama issued a pointed warning yesterday to Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, saying that as president he would be prepared to order U.S. troops into that country unilaterally if it failed to act on its own against Islamic extremists.</div>

I'm curious. Does anyone really think it's a good idea to unilaterally attack Pakistan?
</div>

I think the reasoning would be that Sadaam didn't attack us, and Osama did...so Osama being in Pakistan (and them blocking us) would be reason to go to war.

Don't really want to go to war against Pakistan though. They have nuclear weapons (I don't believe any that would hit the United States, but plenty of short range stuff). They would definitely nuke our troops over there. They also have the 7th largest army in the world...and they are the #1 contributor to the UN Peace Keeping forces, so it would look bad going up against them...and their army isn't going to be any pushover either. Seems like a dumb idea, Obama needs to calm down this rhetoric.

 

[Denny Crane]

No, they wouldn't use nukes against us, sheesh.

The big deal is that we'd alienate an ally and the people of a country that is generally friendly towards us. If the people are pissed enough, they could cause a lot of mischief for the government, and those nukes could end up in the wrong hands.

But hey, Obama shows he's got some cowboy (diplomacy) in him.

 

[MikeDC]

Oooh, they've got the 7th largest army in the world! And the most guys armed with spears and wearing cotton pajamas.

 

[Chutney]

You wouldn't alienate the people, because they already overwhelmingly hate the US. The reason it hasn't become a bigger problem is because that country's essentially a dictatorship and opposition has been suppressed for a while now.

 

[Denny Crane]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chutney @ May 28 2008, 07:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>You wouldn't alienate the people, because they already overwhelmingly hate the US. The reason it hasn't become a bigger problem is because that country's essentially a dictatorship and opposition has been suppressed for a while now.</div>

No, they don't hate the US. They sure looked like they were going to elect a pro-west (e.g. US) government to replace Musharref.

 

[Chutney]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 29 2008, 09:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chutney @ May 28 2008, 07:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>You wouldn't alienate the people, because they already overwhelmingly hate the US. The reason it hasn't become a bigger problem is because that country's essentially a dictatorship and opposition has been suppressed for a while now.</div>

No, they don't hate the US. They sure looked like they were going to elect a pro-west (e.g. US) government to replace Musharref.
</div>
They don't support these candidates on the basis of their pro-west leanings, they support them because they promise to bring legitimate democracy to the country. When you're as suppressed as that area is, you're going to kind of center all your political beliefs around the demand for democratic freedoms. In reality though, the population absolutely despises Musharraf and they also realize that one of the main reasons he's been in power for all these years is from US support.

I'm not saying the US should attack Pakistan, though. Just pointing out that you can't assume that just because the government's an ally, that the people are as well. The Pakistani government hasn't represented the people for a very, very long time.

 

[Denny Crane]

^^^ We also have provided all kinds of relief for the people during natural disasters there, most recently the massive earthquake they had in 2005.

 

[Chutney]

I'm not trying to justify it, but it is a fact.