Who will ask the main question: Osama is dead. So what?

[judy]

What I mean, is the main question for me is:
OK, they killed Osama. Does this mean that they will stop bombing Pakistan with drones? Does this mean that the war in Afghanistan is over? Wasn't the capture/death of OBL the main reason why the U.S invaded Afghanistan in the first place?

Does this mean that the use of OBL to whip crowds into a frenzy of terror is over?

I remember what I.F Stone said, and never believe what governments say, because "all governments lie".
But whether or not this killing of Obama happened like they said it happened, and aside from the revenge factor of killing the person we were told was "responsible for 9/11", what difference does it make?

We have created more terrorists in 10 years than in the past 200 anyway. There is also Ayman El Zawahiri who killed Anwar Sadat, and is "second in command" (note the quotes, as I don't believe in Al Qaeda as an organized hierarchical entity anyway). Will he be the next boogeyman?
Are security measures going to get worse?

Again, what difference does it make?
What is there to celebrate?
When are we going to start working for peace?
That would be worth celebrating...

[Hosnon]

1. The raw emotion of 9/11 is why we celebrate this.

Strategically it is not that big of a deal but psychologically... damn.

[midnight]

6. What we learned about 9-11 is that Bush ignored warnings...

So psychologically we need better transparency into this crime... Todate the second investigation is stallled...

[Hosnon]

10. Sure... that too. But this is a good day and the world is a better place without that shithead. nt.

[midnight]

2. Last night a clip of a women from the middle east was

shown to be saying Osama was dead in 2009. So I find this whole issue perplexing...

[Skinner]

3. Here's so what:

If you kill 3,000 innocent Americans, you will be held accountable.

I know it feels icky to say it, but it's an important message to send.

[judy]

7. Who killed 3,000 Americans???

1 - Many people in the towers and in the planes were from foreign countries including the Middle East...
2 - Did OBL, alone, perpetrate this crime against humanity?
If #2 is the case, then hooray, no more wars...wish you were right :(

[Skinner]

9. Who killed 3,000 Americans??? Here's a hint:

His name rhymes with "Osama bin Laden".

[judy]

14. If you are right, Skinner,

Then it is truly worth celebrating, because there is no need for war anymore.
The sole perpetrator of the attacks of September 11th 2001 is gone, the head of the snake is cut off, the Al Qaeda war machine is beaten.
Do you really believe this? One man did these elaborate attacks from a cave in Afghanistan?
If you are right, then OK. Let's start the march toward Peace...stop the drones, pull out the troops, and get those Navy Seals on Qaddafi instead of killing his innocent grandchildren :(

[Skinner]

18. Is that really your argument?

Bin Laden is not responsible because he was in a cave and couldn't have personally hijacked four planes at the same time all by himself.

That is silly.

Follow your argument to its logical conclusion: No leader can ever be held responsible for anything they ever do, because after all, they can't do it all alone.

Do you use that standard for George W. Bush? Or Barack Obama?

[judy]

20. No this is not my argument at all....

My question had to do with what OBL's death is going to mean for the future in U.S foreign policy.
I understand the closure aspect of OBL's death. But I cannot be in too much of a celebrating mood, if it doesn't mean the end of the Afghanistan war, and the end of the bombing of Pakistan, etc.

I wish all leaders were held accountable for what they do. Including GWB, and including Obama. Will that ever happen?

I hope one day the U.S will have to stop their military only approach to solving problems of economy and influence.
And I hate the shouts of "USA!USA!", and I don't support American exceptionalism.

So forgive me if I ask what this death really means for the future. I think it is a fair question.
You and I agree that OBL wasn't alone. So what does his death mean in the so-called War On Terror? Probably nothing...
Or do you think it will make a difference?

I just thought that was worth discussing, not flaming...

[whatchamacallit]

8. The important word being "if" of course. (nt)

[jp11]

13. Yes, nearly 10 years later, but the 'problem' with that is the people who'd

kill innocent Americans don't care that much if they die. I'd add that even being held accountable he got to see his victory in us creating another generation of terrorists to join his cause and curtailing our own freedoms to 'protect' ourselves from him.

The message would have had more meaning if we didn't get duped into Iraq and virtually ignored Bin Laden/Afghanistan for so many years. Only with Obama has direction on those things been put back in place and it is possible Afghanistan can't be 'fixed'.

[lonestarnot]

4. So what? Just WTF are you about anyway. So what my ass!

Isn't that a Dick Cheney line? Yes I believe it was.

[socialist_n_TN]

5. Yeah, I agree. I all this sniping on DU about.........

celebrating/not celebrating, my attitude has been I'm not going to celebrate a violent death, but I WILL celebrate if that violent death brings the troops home. And reallocates the warfare money towards worthy domestic priorities. And keeps us from other "wars of choice" based on jingoism.

So yeah, what next? Will I be celebrating or not?

[Solomon]

11. You're right. We should have let him continue skulking around in

caves and plotting against us. Killing him didn't do a bit of good. :sarcasm:

[dkf]

12. The point is that we have closure on 9/11.

Now we can take on the issue of terrorism with a little more clear headedness.

[judy]

16. That definitely is true...

..I will agree to that, and the psychological effect of killing the guy.
And with fingers crossed, I can still hope that it will allow the US to move a little closer to the direction of peace, though I won't hold my breath...

[PVnRT]

15. It's a symbol

The very fact that he was alive, and apparently hiding in plain sight in the country of a an "ally," was a nice middle finger to the United States for a very long time. The fact that a small force acting on good intelligence sneaked in and got him with little fanfare instead of the usual drop-bombs-until-we-get-someone-by-accident approach is what is pleasing to me. We should have (and probably could have) done this ten years ago, but the Idiot was in charge.

"What's next," though, is a question that smart journalists should start asking. Which is why you won't hear it from anyone in the mainstream media. My guess is that al-Qaeda or other groups might try to pull off a few attacks, but the loss of a symbol like bin Laden is going to be a huge blow. I also believe this is going to start shifting public opinion even more against large-scale involvement in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Middle East.

[judy]

17. Thank you PVnRT

..for understanding the meaning of my question and not flaming me...this is truly a matter worth discussing, and questioning...

[dkf]

19. Very nice analysis.

Back to Surgical strikes instead of full on wars.