Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: POLL of regsistered Rs: Who deserves more credit for killing binladen ? Obama or romney

Posted 11 years ago on Sept. 10, 2012, 10:37 p.m. EST by bensdad (8977)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Ohio: 62% say romney or dont know North Carolina: 71% say romney or dont know

is this to laugh at or to cry ?



Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by factsrfun (8310) from Phoenix, AZ 11 years ago

Not surprising, Republicans are unaffected by facts by and large, if you are affected by facts, you have already realized the GOP has gone crazy.

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 11 years ago

Who are the lemmings? This is an example of deceptively worded facts. When you read the words "Who deserves more credit for killing Bin Laden? Obama or Romney? Ohio: 62% say Romney or don't know" the mind assumes that 62% of Republican Ohio voters thought Romney was responsible for killing Bin laden. Actually only 15% did. 47% said they were not sure.

The deception is adding the positive responses to the neutral responses.

Here are the screen shots from the show this report was likely taken from.


[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 11 years ago

Ahh, good catch. That still don't account for the Sixty two percent of the Conservative electorate that don't know what is going on in current affairs, lol. Have you checked out the raw data yet? It's really interesting.


[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 11 years ago

Thanks for providing the link for the actual PPP poll. I looked for the original on their website but couldn't find it.

The conservatives probably were thinking that the seals were more responsible for Bin Ladens death. I would expect a similar response from liberals on a question that showed a conservative Presidents popular action.

Did you find any other interesting tid bits?

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 11 years ago

Oh, for sure. Didn't know so many Ohiowans had such a high regard for Castro, lol.

I will have to say, though, that if you look at all the questions, you'll see that "not sure" was used allot more when politically sensitive topics were asked. It's almost an "i am not going to give you the pleasure" type response

What i thought was interesting was different answers when asked to Demo's, Repub's, and "Independents and others".
Again, it was all interesting

Also Obama having the elderly vote and Romney Having the Independent vote makes this election in Ohio an interesting show down.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 11 years ago

I was assuming Castro was a local candidate, not the former dictator.

"It's almost an "i am not going to give you the pleasure" type response.

Maybe. The conservatives might have been thinking that the navy seals were more responsible for Bin Ladens death. I was polled once and sometimes a choice of just two answers does not represent your true feelings when a third choice might be more accurate.

It will be interesting to see Bensdad's response tomorrow.

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 11 years ago

Yeah, you're right. He is a mayor in San Antonio with a twin brother.

What are you saying? That that former dictator was not as civilized as are two party dictatorship. Besides, it don't matter what we think, it just matters what his people thought. And I don't mean what are people believe his people thought, either.

[-] 2 points by doitagain (234) from Brooklyn, NY 11 years ago

really? majority of people being mislead. Osama bin was terminated, if it really was..? http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/08/06/seal-team-6-marines-who-killed-osama-bin-laden-died-in-helicopter-crash-ap/ gost writers making up their stories. and you people ready to eat everything that comes out of their mouths

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years ago

Seriously? Where were they phoning(?) the twilight zone? How much of Ohio is in the Twilight zone?


[-] 1 points by tangential (33) 11 years ago

The guy that pulled the trigger, and the men and women who risked their lives with him. Why do we make things so difficult?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 11 years ago

thats not the question
the question is how are so many Rs in OH & NC so stupid?

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 11 years ago

I have zero doubt that Osama is dead.

But I always find it rather fucked up when the government basically says "We'd show you the proof... but just trust us... plus we don't want to spike the football."

And then they hold an entire DNC dedicated to spiking the football on killing Bin Laden.

It's never okay to suppress information and truth.

But considering Romney is not a member of the federal government and is only part of local/state government... he doesn't get credit on anything the federal government does.

Whoever they called and said "Romney" are completely ignorant.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Some people will never get beyond their partisanship.

[-] -2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 11 years ago

you're a great example of that

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Why? because I don't agree with you anti Obama partisan extremist accusations that he is a war criminal?

It's a reach to compare these delusional partisan opinions with my contention that the drone bombings are wrong but cannot be called war crimes because of the real circumstances surrounding them. We disagree.

Is that why?

[-] -1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 11 years ago

How is claiming bombing innocent civilians is a war crime partisan in anyway?

I'm siding with high level people in the UN in regards to this. I've backed my side with facts several times.

Bombing civilians... and then bombing their rescuers is a war crime. Both of the past 2 administrations have done this. They both have committed war crimes. Look it up. Also this is not a partisan issue... it's based on facts and laws. And the fact that bombing innocent civilians is WRONG.

Delusional? Are you saying no innocent civilians have been bombed?

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Innocent civilians are killed in every war. Before D Day we bombed France for weeks to "soften up" the Nazis. Many innocent French were killed.

We've been killing hundreds of thousands of civilians (innocent & otherwise) During this republican created "war on terror".

The important fact to consider is that this President has reduced US military killings from 1 million+ to thousands! And therefore cut accidental civilian deaths to far below that.

I agree it's wrong, I am against it. I protest it. I don't agree it constitutes a war crime.

We disagree only on your unsubstantiated extreme partisan accusation.

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 11 years ago

Stop making excuses for bombing civilians.

Killing civilians in the past does not make it okay today.

Killing civilians is WRONG.

Stop making excuses for war crimes.

2010 was the highest death rate of civilians in Afghanistan.

I call Bush a war criminal for killing civilians. I call Obama a war criminal for killing civilians. How is that partisan?

Oh that's right... you don't have a logical argument.

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Killing civilians in war does not constitute a war crime! Not for FDR, Bush, or Obama.

It;s wrong and I'm against it. But you cannot wage war without it. War crimes would be the torture that your boy Bush perpetrated, and that Obama banned.

That's the difference. Sorry. We disagree.

[-] -1 points by CarlAndrews (-113) 11 years ago

Killing civilians in war does not constitute a war crime!

Since when? Aren't you aware of the Geneva convention?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Since forever! It happens. It's unfortunate. I'm against it. but it does not constitute a war crime.

Torture like Bush approved is a war crime. Not the accidental, collateral damage we are guilty of.

[-] -2 points by CarlAndrews (-113) 11 years ago

A lot of American soldiers kill civilians on purpose or by not being careful. In fact, there is really no excuse for accidental kills. They have all kinds of surveying technologies to assess a terrain before opening fire. The idea of collateral damage in modern warfare is most times dubious.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

I disagree! It's unfortunate. I'm against it. I protest against these wars/military actions. But I will not assume we are committing war crimes without evidence and a finding in court.

Sorry. Try again.

[-] -2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 11 years ago

Stop making excuses for war crimes and bombing civilians.

my boy bush? God damn you are so fucking ridiculous sometimes. I do not support Bush. I did not vote for bush. I've been saying he should be in prison since his second year in office.

[-] -2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

If you can't control your emotions they will control you. Please refrain from the childish obscenities.

I think you are an anti Obama partisan. I will deal with you that way when you spew your anti Obama partisan comments.

When you lose control you make it obvious that I am right.

YOUR boy Bush was a war criminal for approving torture. Obama banned those practices.

Understand partisan boy?

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 11 years ago

Keep on making excuses for those war crimes.

You're only helping the military industrial complex.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

I protest against the republican created war on terror, the republican initiated drone bombings, the republican crafted the patriot act/NDAA, the republican created oil wars, and the republican created fear mongering that brought us all of that.

You never mention the republican created roots to these problems.

THAT is providing cover and excuses for the real architects of our problems. You attack the Pres who is slowly undoing that damage.

Ignoring these republican roots shows you aren't serious about ending these problems, and betrays your anti Obama partisanship.

Partisan boy, I am unconvinced by your faux outrage when you ignore your republican boys responsibilities in these problems.

[-] -2 points by CarlAndrews (-113) 11 years ago

You're an utter idiot.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago


What do you know!

So are you!

Only an idiot would defend thrashy!

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Name calling = weak argument.

You got nothing except schoolyard bullying tactics!

You're dismissed.

[-] -1 points by CarlAndrews (-113) 11 years ago

I was not trying to make an argument. I was simply sharing a fact. Your arguments are so ludicrous that they don't deserve to be challenged. You're just another Obama water boy insisting that war is OK.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

I'm against the republican created Afghan war that Pres Obama has agreed to end.

I am against the drone tactic that Bush began and Pres Obama has escalated.

I am against the republican created civil rights violations that Pres Obama has failed to end.

I protest all these things. We cannot end them without growing robust protests against these issues.

I only disagree with the partisan accusation that Pres Obama is a war criminal.

So there!

[+] -4 points by CarlAndrews (-113) 11 years ago

Obama will never end the Afghan war. Don't fall for the "promises" of politicians. You should just Obama by his actions, not by his words.

Accusing Obama of being a war criminal is not about partisanship in the least. Defending him blindly like you do is.


[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

I do not defend him blindly.

That is a false accusation. I have criticized him plenty. If we want anything changed we must protest against all pols and force them to change.

unfounded extremist partisan attacks that the Pres is a war criminal is unproductive, & untrue.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 11 years ago

The correct answer is Seal Team Six and the CIA agents who discovered his location. The only thing Obama did (or Bush, McCain, Romney would have done) is use a telephone to give the go ahead.

[-] 0 points by danrobo (-4) 11 years ago

Bush deserves the credit since this has been in place since his admin

[-] -1 points by yobstreet (-575) 11 years ago

Are you saying Obama is a killer? Well, surprise, surprise... ? Like y'all didn't know this already, right?

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 11 years ago

I am not commenting on who killed who
I'm pointing out the insane stupidity of a huge bloc of our citizens.
How many lemmings believe the Earth is less than 10,000 years old?
How many lemmings believe Obama is a Muslim?

WW II did not happen because of hitler -
it happened because of the german lemmings

[-] 1 points by yobstreet (-575) 11 years ago

"Killing" does not imply the kill of the be-killed by a killer? What then, pray tell, does it mean?

I believe that Obama, like most politicians, is relatively casual in religious belief; that he has displayed some obvious deference as an act of reverence of all things Islam - does that make him a Muslim? Well, not necessarily but who's to say... he's definitely a Muslim "sympathizer"; use of which here implies a public stance, as personal declaration, that favors one of perhaps several parties extremely opposed.

I agree, Hitler was NOT a killer. :)

Lemmings ? You're equating people to lemmings?

Well, I have to admit, as your post surely attests, that the intellect of the average American is truly astounding. Perhaps that's why those German lemmings now call us "idiots."

[-] 0 points by ogoj11 (263) 11 years ago

Have you ever felt the excitement of being in a crowd of large animals joyfully affirming an irrational belief while thundering across the plains to certain death? It's better than a glass of chablis before bedtime.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

No. I've never really been a (R)epelican't.

I did get a little taste of it though, as a libe(R)tarian that actually voted for Mr. P.

Boy, was that ever a mistake.


[-] -2 points by Lucky1 (-125) from Wray, CO 11 years ago

Are you kidding? You DNC garbage are reduced to this?


[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 11 years ago

truth hurts?

[-] -2 points by Lucky1 (-125) from Wray, CO 11 years ago

And that answers the question....?

[+] -5 points by Gluon (-19) 11 years ago

Obama deserves credit for ordering Seal Team Six and the CIA for killing Osama Bin Laden in an illegal manner without providing him a proper trial and a proper burial, and for brutally killing him in front of his wife and daughter.

[-] 2 points by Mooks (1985) 11 years ago

Bin Laden was extremely lucky to go the way that he did. Far more lucky than he deserved.

[-] 0 points by Muon (-1) 11 years ago

Do you care about the OWS message, about creating a better world? Because, in a better world everyone is allowed a fair trial no matter what he did. There's no way around that.

And, it's not only about Bin Laden. It's also about his family, his daughter. She did not deserve to see her father shot to death in front of her. And, it's for all of us. We all should live in a world where we can expect a fair trial.

Mob killings should be reserved to the days of the KKK. Liberty and justice rests on the idea of fair trials.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

OBL had to be dispatched quickly in order to end the endless "war on terror" and the fear mongering used so insidiously to kill without trial, and pass civil rights violations (patriot act, ndaa).

After exploiting the 9/11 attacks to create this fear mongering, killing w/o trial, & rights violations there was little incentive to kill OBL and end the threat.

The "threat" has been used very effectively to create the Sec indust. complex and 2 wars, and a whole host of other agenda items. Even the new voter ID laws go back to thefear.

The war on terror must end! OBL had to be dispatched quickly. Pres Obama made the right, tough decision because he wants to put it all behing us.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 11 years ago

the war on terror is not even close to over. How many years do you consider "close" ? Afghan terrorist bombings still happening. Just last night they shot down a NATO helicopter in Afghanistan.

They just added another group to the "terrorist to get list" in Pakistan last week.

Didn't Osama get killed over a year ago? Why is the war on terror still going just as hard as last year in May?

Don't get me wrong... I'm glad Osama is gone... but you make some wild claims in your comment.

Killing without trial is Obama and the CIA's specialty... maybe you've heard of the drone strikes and the kill list which have been amped and accelerated since Bush left office?

I do think it's fucked up that the government refuses to release the photographic evidence of how this event went down. Suppressing information is not okay.

Also it's not a tough decision.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

How would you know it's not a tough decision ? Sounds like you don't want to give Pres Obama any props. That wouldn't be because of your anti Obama partisanship. would it?

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 11 years ago

Going after Osama is an easy decision because it was part of his platform. It's been his decision since before getting elected. That is why I said going after Osama is not a hard decision.

I'll give props when they provide the photos they're suppressing.

Suppressing information is wrong.

This isn't nap time where momma reads us a nice story. People deserve evidence and truth.

There is ZERO logical reasoning behind suppressing the information about his death.

I have no doubt he's dead... but something is not right here.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

No one is talking about the decision to go after Osama. We're talking about the specific "tough" decision to authorize the specific mission.

No photos because that would put US service people in jeopardy.

You don't give props because you are anti Obama partisan.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 11 years ago

I don't give props because they're suppressing evidence.

Show me the photo and I'll give the props.

We witnessed Saddam and Gaddafi. There is zero justification for covering up the evidence about Osama.

This isn't story time. People can handle truth.

Their fear was about inspiring more hatred because of releasing the photo. Which is ignorant because it doesn't make him any less dead which is what actually inspires the hatred. Obama's exact words were "we don't need to spike the football."

But if he truly feels that way... what was the DNC about where that was their prime topic? "GM is alive and Osama is dead."

They're going against their own logic in regards to the "national security" claim.

They made us watch people's brains falling out in my drivers education class. We can handle a dead Osama photo.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

At least Obama didn't parachute onto an aircraft carrier to military bands and "mission accomplished" banners when nothing had been accomplished!

Thats like spiking the football at the 30 yrd line. LMFAO

No, this President has been very low key. Appropriately respectful of the US military. not using them as political props. Not bragging like Bush, Not torturing (or commiting war crimes) like Bush.

Slowly drawing down, undoing the massive damage created by your boy Bush when he exploited the 9/11 attacks to create 2 wars, use fear mongering to violate our civil rights, and push the neocon agenda.

It will be years of hard work, patience, and setbacks before we can get back to normal.

And nothing will be done if we don't protest against this Pres and all pols to change the drone strike policies, and the the war on terror, repeal the republican created civil rights violations, and reject the fear mongering, that repubs are still trying to use against the American people.

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 11 years ago

My boy Bush...? damn you're so ignorant sometimes.

There is no point in chatting with you.

Later Obama campaign guy. You're just as ignorant as the Romney campaign guys.


[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 11 years ago

But you do resort to disregarding facts, logic, and reasoning.

Which is why you deserve the title of ignorant.

I do not ignore the republican roots of these problems. Hence saying Bush should be in prison.

Now I'm done. I said good day.


[-] -2 points by CarlAndrews (-113) 11 years ago

I'm pissed off at you! You're much to intelligent to waste your brain power on VQkag2. The waste of a talent is the worst crime of all. What do you have to say in your defense?

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 11 years ago

I'm bored... it's my day off... and trying to get out information is never a waste of time even if some quote from some guy says otherwise.

However.... if they start acting ridiculous and continually accuse me of supporting Bush and siding me with a mass murderer... I get pissed off and I will call them ignorant.

I'm human.

Not only is he reading it... even if he "disagrees" ...other people will read it. Like you have.

VQ claims to be against these wars, but doesn't call any aspect of them a war crime. If they're not war crimes then that suggest they are legitimate and should continue until the governments goal is done. Claiming they're illegitimate and need to end means that their continuation is a war crime. Because if you have an illegitimate war that need to end and it continues going... the ongoing is a war crime. Plain and simple.

Why else would it need to end if it wasn't wrong?

Drone wars are wrong. Still being in Afghanistan is wrong. Libya was wrong. Bombing Somalia, Yemen, and Pakistan is wrong. Getting this involved on the other side of the world is damaging our country and it's ongoing has only been inspiring resistance in other countries.

Plus Wall Street is making a killing on these wars too.

[-] -3 points by CarlAndrews (-113) 11 years ago

There are no excuses for killing a man without trial. As soon as we start making some, that's when the idea of a better world is gone.

Obama was not courageous, he was a coward. He sent his men and killed OBL like an animal trapped in a cage, then dumped him into the sea. Not only did he strip the man of a trial, he stripped him of a proper Islamic burial. Obama was grotesque in this dossier.

The fact that you promote the idea of killing people without a trial shows you have nothing in common with OWS.

You're just here to push for Obama. A grown up Obama water boy. That's all you are.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

You offer a good defense of Osama Bin Laden.

I do not share you sympathy as I live in NYC, breathed in the towers for almost a month and have NO sympathy for him.

I have no expectation that anyone killed in war will have a trial. That is just silly.

Whether I have anything in common with OWS is not relevant and certainly not for you to judge.

I am not here to push for PRES Obama. I will challenge the false partisan accusation that he is a war criminal.

That's all. Get over yourself. You seem detached from reality with you out of touch accusation that I am a water boy for Obama just because I won't call him a war criminal.

[-] -1 points by CarlAndrews (-113) 11 years ago

You offer a good defense of Osama Bin Laden.

I don't defend Obama's actions one bit. Read my comment again. I defend the right for every man and woman to have a proper and fair trial. There's a big difference.

I have no expectation that anyone killed in war will have a trial.

He was not killed in war. He was hounded in Pakistan illegally (US did not have permission to do the mission in Pakistan) then shot point blank after already being captured. You do know what a POW is don't you? If you capture an enemy, you cannot kill him. It is illegal.

I will challenge the false partisan accusation that he is a war criminal.

This is not a partisan accusation. Are you a moron?

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

"moron"? No. name calling = weak arguments. Please refrain. If you have no substantial facts to contribute just admit defeat and bow out gracefully. Be an adult! Not a child.

You defend Osamas right to trial? ok. fine then my statement still stands. Osama defender boy!

Osama was killed in the war on terror. Remember Osama, & your boy Bush created that in 2001. The details do not seem clear but the suggestion is that he was not in custody & his hands were hidden. So........ He had to die. Better that way no? Don't want to give our enemy a court forum to incite more violence do you?

Pakistan was against the mission because they were protecting & defending him. A little like you. Osama defender boy!

Anything else? Are we done? have you been thoroughly demoralized, and dispatched yet.?

[-] 2 points by DanielBarton (1345) 11 years ago

Even Saddam got a trial and he did much worse things in the eyes of humanity

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

That was a show trial that Bush engineered. Is that the kind of trial you support.?


Why bother. It was not REAL! And why give Osama a platform to rally his followers to kill more people?

Look Osama didn't surrender, he was killed in the war on terror.

I'm against the war on terror. Protest but it isn't necessary to defend Osama.

[-] 2 points by DanielBarton (1345) 11 years ago

The war on terror is a lie of a war to allow people to forget our rights. The war cannot be won because there will always be a terrorist. Alfred said it perfectly some people just want to see the world burn.

Bush didn't engineer the trial we captured him then turned him over to the people of Iraq who then hung him.

We should of given him a trial even though the evidence was stacked high against him because we should practice our consituition even off our borders. Even if they attacked we shouldnt be afriad because if the cause is just one must take the abuse to see it done and done right

[-] -1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Bush controlled the Iraqi govt. no?

And there WILL always be terrorists, but we have to get things to a point so that our leaders can say the war on terror is over! Maybe that would be a lie since there will still be a threat (always was, even before 9/11). But the war on terror IS a lie as you say, so I think it will take another lie to end it.

Then we can proceed post haste with a justified end to the civil rights violations and any military actions against "terrorists" around the world.

Got to happen. Couldn't claim the war is over without getting OBL.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 11 years ago

i love people that say that after the war life will be different. well its done for Osama has been dead for over a year now. so why are more and more of my rights being taken away; soon ill have to submit a paper to the government to post anything online. I will not accept the rights of any human being taken away from them when they are not doing anything wrong. Its time for the tyranny of our government to be stop its time for those in power to realize they are powerless.

bush appointed a leader and they threw him out remember that is why there is a civil war going on in Iraq right now

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

I'm against this war on terror, and the related civil rights violations. I protest this Pres and all pols for repeal & an end. Your accusations are ridiculous and unnecessarily personal.

[-] 0 points by DanielBarton (1345) 11 years ago

so were yours and i've seen your other post on here i know what you want

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

I agree it's a fake from the beginning when it was created by exploiting the 9/11 attacks. Of course our military actions in the name of this fake war and acts of violence against us/civilians by al qaeda are real.

And the fear that comes along with the fake endless war on terror is used to implement real civil rights violations as well as justification for military action.

So I agree it is a manufactured war created 10 years ago ni an effort to further an agenda to seize worldwide resources, create economic growth, control American dissent, but I know it will end.

A manufactured war must have a manufactured end. We must stop the fear mongering rhetoric. This is critical! Stop elevating a few Al Qaeda bomb throwers to an existential threat, End the full scale wars! Get Osama, stop the drone bombings, pull the military and mercs out, Declare the fake war over! cut the military budget, repeal the civil rights violations.

Done! Will take years. but It will not end if we do not protest for it. It's up to us to make our preferences known.

We can't wait for politicians to do everything. We must force the change we want.

Of course it can end. It must end. I haven't given up. You sound like you're ready for a corner to crawl into.

I don't welcome this war on terror created 10 years ago. I've been protesting it for 10 years. I've been protesting war/military escalation for decades. But I haven't given up the fight against it.

Have you.?

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 11 years ago

No i haven't i believe that military action was necessary and should of been taken against the countries we took against. Congress called for us to do this the American people called for this. Was it larger than necessary the troops will tell you it wasn't but it could of been smaller if more support for the U.N. and the countries that hosted theses criminals.

Of course it can end. It must end. I haven't given up. You sound like you're ready for a corner to crawl into. what the hell do you mean by this i want to drag half these people out of office.

You praise Obama as he drags the the bill of rights through the mud.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

The war on terror will take years to end. Osamas death is just one element.

I also do not except rights violations. We must protest against it. Pressure all pols to end the war on terror, & thefear mongering that created the right violations.

"It's the only way"

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 11 years ago

like hchc said the war on terror is a fake war that can not end. We are living in the time of 1984 and people like you are welcoming it with open arms

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 11 years ago

The war on terror is never gonig to end as long as the parties currently involved are the ones that started it.

Welcome to perpetual war and rights stirpping, all in the name of fighting "terror"

[-] -1 points by CarlAndrews (-113) 11 years ago

name calling = weak arguments.

False. Name calling is not an argument, it's a logical fallacy.

What can I say, you are a moron.

You defend Osamas right to trial? ok. fine then my statement still stands. Osama defender boy!

I defend the right of every man and woman to trial. This includes Osama.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

But, you called him names too!

You're weird

[-] -1 points by CarlAndrews (-113) 11 years ago

You're weird

That's sounds like something my 6 year old girl would say! "You're weird Daddy"

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 11 years ago

Your six year old is smarter than you are then!


You should pay more attention to her. You might learn something.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 11 years ago

Great. I don't care about Osamas right to trial.

But regardless of your profound defense of Osama Bin Ladens right to trial.

Let me just say in closing.

Replace pro 1% war mongering conservatives with pro 99% peace loving progressives.

Protest & pressure all pols against the drone bombings, The war on terror, The fear mongering, & the civil rights violations.

[-] 1 points by Mooks (1985) 11 years ago

In principle I agree with all of that. Sometimes exceptions need to be made though. An international trial and execution that made him a martyr would have been exactly what he wanted and been an inspiration for new generations of terrorists. A couple of quick rounds to the head and dumping his body in the ocean deprived him of all that. Sometimes shit isn't fair or just, but it does not necessarily mean that it is wrong.