Former US Navy Seal describes the moment he killed Osama bin Laden

[Hitman]

Link: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...lled-osama-bin-laden/articleshow/58455621.cms

The former US Navy Seal who claims to have killed Osama bin Laden has given his account of shooting dead the leader of terrorist organisation Al-Qaida.

Robert O'Neill, who claims responsibility for firing the fatal bullets, has for the first time published a detailed description of the mission that lead to the mastermind of 9/11 attacks being gunned down in a secure compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, in May 2011.

In a dramatic extract from his new book, The Operator, published in the Mirror, the former Seal described the moment he fired two shots at bin Laden and "split open" his head.

"I turned to the right and looked into an adjoining room," he said. " Osama bin Laden stood near the entrance at the foot of the bed, taller and thinner than I'd expected, his beard shorter and hair whiter. He had a woman in front of him, his hands on her shoulders. In less than a second, I aimed above the woman's right shoulder and pulled the trigger twice. Bin Laden's head split open and he dropped. I put another bullet in his head. Insurance."

Mr O'Neill also recounted the tense moments as the elite Seal team+ landed outside the compound under the cover of darkness. One of the helicopters carrying the unit was forced to make a crash landing, and the team initially failed to break into the compound.

"Within seconds of jumping from the chopper, the breacher attached a seven-foot charge of C-6 to the gate in front of us and blew it," he said. "The metal gate peeled open like a tin can. Behind it was a solid brick wall. The breacher said: 'Failed breach. This is bad.' 'No, this is good,' I said. 'That's a fake door. That means he's in there.' As we entered, it was all dawning on me: 'Holy ****, we're here, that's Bin Laden's house. This is so cool. We're probably not going to live, but this is historic and I'm going to savour this."

The Seal team advanced through the three-floor compound, tying up any women and children they encountered. It later emerged that Bin Laden's four wives and 17 of his children were living there. At one stage, while making their way through the house, the team encountered Bin Laden's youngest son, 23-year-old Khalid, on a landing, before he ran behind a bannister. He did not know that the intruders were American, so, O'Neill said, the Seal team leader whispered to him in Arabic, saying: "Khalid, come here." As he poked his head round the corner and said "What?", he was shot in the head — a moment Mr O'Neill recounted in graphic detail.

"That was his final word", he said. "The point man shot him in the face. The bullet entered above the chin and exited out the back of his head. Khalid dropped."

Mr O'Neill also described the anxieties of the soldiers carrying out the raid. At one point, a Seal shot a woman who he said had jumped in front of a man he was firing at. "Am I going to be in trouble?", the soldier asked his friend. Mr O'Neill said that, after firing the shots that killed Bin Laden, his mind went blank until one of his colleagues, arriving in the room, turned to him and said: "You just killed Osama bin Laden."

 

[Yossarian]

Written like true fiction. Especially considering that at least one other Seal (Matt Bissonnette) also claims he was the one who fired the fatal shot that killed OBL.

Whilst other members of Seal Team Six quietly say that the one who fired the fatal shot would never break their code of secrecy and reveal that it was him.

And oh, that is quite apart from the claims that the members of Seal Team Six that killed OBL all died in a helicopter crash.

Also read this link - where it claims that Seal Team Six committed war crimes including killings of civilians covered up - by killing more civilians who were witnesses, beheadings and mutilations while serving in Afghanistan and Iraq.

I have not posted such extracts from the article because some of the graphic details are so gruesome that if they were quoted here then this post will be deleted.

AN EXPLOSIVE investigation claims Navy SEAL Team 6 had a dark side and some officers committed war crimes including beheadings and mutilations while serving in Afghanistan and Iraq.

http://www.news.com.au/world/middle...q/news-story/5685baf46c1907034170b0a7c8d79ff7

 

[KingKhanWC]

^

There was also accounts OBL went to pick up a firearm which was the reason given for killing him and not apprehending him.

To this day no proof has been provided of his death in this incident.

But yes we must take the word of the same people who claimed WMD's existed in Iraq.

 

[Subaltern]

^

There was also accounts OBL went to pick up a firearm which was the reason given for killing him and not apprehending him.

To this day no proof has been provided of his death in this incident.

But yes we must take the word of the same people who claimed WMD's existed in Iraq.

would rather believe people who were wrong about WMDs in foreign nations, than people from Pakistan who claimed not to know where OBL was, yet he was hiding a stone's throw away from Pakistan's version of West Point.

And people wonder, why Pakistan has such poor image overseas.

 

[Major]

aymen al zawhiri himself confirmed bin ladens death.

If people think otherwise then lool.

 

[Gilly]

would rather believe people who were wrong about WMDs in foreign nations, than people from Pakistan who claimed not to know where OBL was, yet he was hiding a stone's throw away from Pakistan's version of West Point.

And people wonder, why Pakistan has such poor image overseas.

I think that is where the divide is, Saddam was merrily going about slaughtering Kuwaiti's and Kurds for fun and he himself claimed he had WMD's. Some people think that he should have been left alone to kill and slaughter as many Kuwaiti's and Kurds as he liked and just concentrate on demonizing the US.

 

[Syed1]

Yes yes brilliantly written fiction novel, truly gripping. Bravo

So Osama's son was running away and all these guys had to do is to say in perfect Arabic "Khalid come here" and the Khalid just fell for it LMAO

 

[Major]

Yes yes brilliantly written fiction novel, truly gripping. Bravo

So Osama's son was running away and all these guys had to do is to say in perfect Arabic "Khalid come here" and the Khalid just fell for it LMAO

bro, US Navy seals arn't a joke.

They dot just carry out raids just like that. The bin Laden attack was all planned carefully. Look at the way the US exploited our radar capabilities. there goes your 80% army budget

 

[Syed1]

bro, US Navy seals arn't a joke.

They dot just carry out raids just like that. The bin Laden attack was all planned carefully. Look at the way the US exploited our radar capabilities. there goes your 80% army budget

Yeah yeah they are all so good that two different seal team members have claimed to be the one that fired the fatal shot while being alone in the room. Mashallah what skill

The fiction novel also says that one of the choppers had to randomly land because of a malfunction. What happened to the crew of that chopper did they have jet packs and fly back to their base on their own?

 

[Major]

Yeah yeah they are all so good that two different seal team members have claimed to be the one that fired the fatal shot while being alone in the room. Mashallah what skill

The fiction novel also says that one of the choppers had to randomly land because of a malfunction. What happened to the crew of that chopper did they have jet packs and fly back to their base on their own?

there were two choppers, due to the malfunction they had to blow it up, and the crew of both choppers had to be fitted in one

 

[Major]

Yeah yeah they are all so good that two different seal team members have claimed to be the one that fired the fatal shot while being alone in the room. Mashallah what skill

The fiction novel also says that one of the choppers had to randomly land because of a malfunction. What happened to the crew of that chopper did they have jet packs and fly back to their base on their own?

call it fiction or not, but everyone could confirm that two choppers went through Pakistan's air space un-noticed.


also the poor Shakeel Afridi hasn't been jailed for no reason.....

 

[Gilly]

Written like true fiction. Especially considering that at least one other Seal (Matt Bissonnette) also claims he was the one who fired the fatal shot that killed OBL.

Any chance of a link to where Matt Bissonnette claimed to have shot Bin Laden?. I knew he wrote a book on the mission but didn't know about his claim to be the one that shot Bin laden.

 

[TM Riddle]

Yeah yeah they are all so good that two different seal team members have claimed to be the one that fired the fatal shot while being alone in the room. Mashallah what skill

The fiction novel also says that one of the choppers had to randomly land because of a malfunction. What happened to the crew of that chopper did they have jet packs and fly back to their base on their own?

So what do you think happened exactly?Do you believe he's still alive and kicking and the whole mission was a hoax?

 

[Runner Up]

Should have captured alive and presented in front of world. They didn't even show his body.

 

[Yossarian]

Any chance of a link to where Matt Bissonnette claimed to have shot Bin Laden?. I knew he wrote a book on the mission but didn't know about his claim to be the one that shot Bin laden.

"Two different people telling two different stories for two different reasons," said Matt Bissonnette in an interview with NBC News. His second book, "No Hero," comes out next week. "Whatever he says, he says. I don't want to touch that."

[....]

Some of Bissonnette's peers also took issue with the book, which became a No. 1 best-seller. In Bissonnette's account, he's the second man in the SEAL "stack" and the second man in bin Laden's bedroom. After a teammate shoots bin Laden Bissonnette puts more bullets into him and helps finish him off.

[.....]

In the Esquire version of the raid, O'Neill is second in the stack. The first SEAL in the stack, the point man, sees a tall man stick his head out of the bedroom door on the third floor. He fires at least one shot.

"I don't think he hit him," O'Neill told Esquire. "He thinks he might have."

[.....]

Matt Bissonnette doesn't appear at all in this telling. The encounter with bin Laden takes about 15 seconds, and only two men, O'Neill and the point man, are in the room. Later, more SEALs show up. O'Neill told Esquire that ultimately there were many more wounds on the body than the ones he inflicted.

(Update: Robert O'Neill has now said in an on-the-record interview with the Washington Post that he killed bin Laden with a shot to the forehead. He also acknowledges that at least two other SEALS, including Bissonnette, fired shots.)

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/who-shot-bin-laden-tale-two-seals-n241241

A lot of different versions going on there. If OBL was shot in the head by O'Neil, and his head split open, then he'd be already dead and Bissonnette wouldn't be 'finishing him off'.

O'Neil doesn't even mention Bissonnette first time around, but subsequently he says at least two other seals also fired shots at OBL, including Bissonnette.

Sounds as if at least one, if not both, are telling a lot of porkies. That's assuming they were even there (the claims that the team that shot OBL all died in the helicopter crash in Afghanistan?).

 

[CricketCartoons]

Should have captured alive and presented in front of world. They didn't even show his body.

But they showed Obama watching the action live, and there is no reason not to trust him when he verified it.

 

[Slog]

^

There was also accounts OBL went to pick up a firearm which was the reason given for killing him and not apprehending him.

To this day no proof has been provided of his death in this incident.

But yes we must take the word of the same people who claimed WMD's existed in Iraq.

you dont need to believe the US

You can believe his wives, his sons and the al qaeda high command

 

[Slog]

The fiction novel also says that one of the choppers had to randomly land because of a malfunction. What happened to the crew of that chopper did they have jet packs and fly back to their base on their own?

they went back on the other chopper

Pakistan had remains of the first chopper

 

[Gilly]

A lot of different versions going on there. If OBL was shot in the head by O'Neil, and his head split open, then he'd be already dead and Bissonnette wouldn't be 'finishing him off'.

O'Neil doesn't even mention Bissonnette first time around, but subsequently he says at least two other seals also fired shots at OBL, including Bissonnette.

Sounds as if at least one, if not both, are telling a lot of porkies. That's assuming they were even there (the claims that the team that shot OBL all died in the helicopter crash in Afghanistan?).

I think its pretty self explanatory what happened but could get confusing for some.

From the same link you provided:

In Bissonnette's account, he's the second man in the SEAL "stack" and the second man in bin Laden's bedroom. After a teammate shoots bin Laden Bissonnette puts more bullets into him and helps finish him off.

That does tie in with O'Neils account.

The helicopter crashed at the scene because the walls of the compound interfered with the updraft of air to the rotor blades and everyone returned in the second helicopter.

 

[JaDed]

Should have captured alive and presented in front of world. They didn't even show his body.

Would be a stupid thing to do imo,a nd have the image to brainwash people again.

 

[Major]

Should have captured alive and presented in front of world. They didn't even show his body.

)

That would had been the most stupid thing to do.

Keeping him alive could had allowed Al Qaeda to carry out attacks and ask for negotiation on his release.

Plus, taking him alive would had confirmed the mission actually happened.

The reason why this mission was never properly acknowledge, why the dogs body was never shown was because that could had been used as proof that US violated many laws. Like entering the airspace of Pakistan.

But then again their hands were tied as our (you know who) particular agency kept hiding him.

 

[desirous of desire]

I think that is where the divide is, Saddam was merrily going about slaughtering Kuwaiti's and Kurds for fun and he himself claimed he had WMD's. Some people think that he should have been left alone to kill and slaughter as many Kuwaiti's and Kurds as he liked and just concentrate on demonizing the US.

Except that Americans already knew Saddam's claim was false.Listen to what General Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice said in 2001 from 36:00 onward if you are among the people who can change their opinion and dont feel insult in it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YD_k0ipRf3E

Maybe if people cared as much for lives of innocent Iraqi people as they did for Qataris at that time, the world would have been better off.Do you believe America attacked because it cared for Kuwaiti's and Kurds?

 

[kaayal]

Glorifying killing...

 

[KingKhanWC]

you dont need to believe the US

You can believe his wives, his sons and the al qaeda high command

It is the same thing.

 

[Subaltern]

Except that Americans already knew Saddam's claim was false.Listen to what General Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice said in 2001 from 36:00 onward if you are among the people who can change their opinion and dont feel insult in it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YD_k0ipRf3E

Maybe if people cared as much for lives of innocent Iraqi people as they did for Qataris at that time, the world would have been better off.Do you believe America attacked because it cared for Kuwaiti's and Kurds?

Those who bash America, forget two things that are facts:

1. Every country acts in their own self interest. USA is the current uni-polar hegemon of the world. Since 1991 to now, this is the first time in human history that the world is unipolar. USA too will act in its own interest.

2. Can you name a SINGLE nation/polity in history of mankind that treats other with as much consideration as the USA ? USSR/China has no problems spreading insurgencies on a far greater scale than the US, till there is commie revolution. Look at South America for eg. Russia, China, etc. have killed millions in conquering/re-establishing control in places like Central Asia, Tibet, etc.

Arabs, caliphates, Mongols, Timurids, Delhi Sultans, French, Spanish, English- each and every single one of them make USA look like Gandhi by comparison.

You seriously think, if the situation was exactly the opposite, with the muslim world holding all the nukes and economic power and Europe being backwards, it would be like today ? No, Europe would be genocided into oblivion inside of a decade.

So be thankful for what you have. Obviously USA is there for USA first. But its conduct shows, its the nicest world-power in history of mankind. For that, be thankful, not grudgeful.
US's conduct towards foreigners, never mind its own citizens are order of magnitude greater than any arab nation and 99% of nations on this planet.

 

[Slog]

It is the same thing.

Convenient. Why not just cut to the chase and just say I'll believe whatever I want regardless of evidence

 

[KingKhanWC]

Convenient. Why not just cut to the chase and just say I'll believe whatever I want regardless of evidence

lol what evidence? People who were integrated by a state who openly admits to torture? Any court would throw out such statements.

 

[Third_Umpire]

At least for me personally, the doubt was put to rest when a family member that was a high ranking official in the PAF confirmed that the raid took place, the suspect was actually who the US claims it was, and that Pakistani authorities had no idea this was happening (at least the masses, if there was 1-2 people who colluded then maybe that's possible).

Everyone can believe the information they deem most credible though some run the risk of becoming conspiracy theorists if they don't let common sense prevail.

 

[enkidu_]

Those who bash America, forget two things that are facts:

1. Every country acts in their own self interest. USA is the current uni-polar hegemon of the world. Since 1991 to now, this is the first time in human history that the world is unipolar. USA too will act in its own interest.

2. Can you name a SINGLE nation/polity in history of mankind that treats other with as much consideration as the USA ? USSR/China has no problems spreading insurgencies on a far greater scale than the US, till there is commie revolution. Look at South America for eg. Russia, China, etc. have killed millions in conquering/re-establishing control in places like Central Asia, Tibet, etc.

Arabs, caliphates, Mongols, Timurids, Delhi Sultans, French, Spanish, English- each and every single one of them make USA look like Gandhi by comparison.

You seriously think, if the situation was exactly the opposite, with the muslim world holding all the nukes and economic power and Europe being backwards, it would be like today ? No, Europe would be genocided into oblivion inside of a decade.

So be thankful for what you have. Obviously USA is there for USA first. But its conduct shows, its the nicest world-power in history of mankind. For that, be thankful, not grudgeful.
US's conduct towards foreigners, never mind its own citizens are order of magnitude greater than any arab nation and 99% of nations on this planet.

What an anthology of delusions. You're talking as a social Darwinist, "yes, your killer killed you because he was able to kill you", some pseudo moral circular logic. If you want to know how the US has been gentle read "Napalm: An American Biography" by Robert M. Neer. Here a single excerpt on Korea, considering threatening North Korea is a fad (pp. 99-100) :

“Practically every U.S. fighter plane that has flown into Korean air carried at least two napalm bombs,” chemical officer Townsend wrote in January 1951. About 21,000 gallons of napalm hit Korea every day in 1950. As combat intensified after China’s intervention, that number more than tripled (...) a total of 32,357 tons of napalm fell on Korea, about double that dropped on Japan in 1945. Not only did the allies drop more bombs on Korea than in the Pacific theater during World War II— 635,000 tons, versus 503,000 tons— more of what fell was napalm, in both absolute and relative terms.

Biblical devastation resulted. In May 1951, after President Truman relieved him from command, MacArthur testified to Congress that “The war in Korea has already almost destroyed that nation of 20,000,000 people. I have never seen such devastation. I have seen, I guess, as much blood and disaster as any living man, and it just curdled my stomach, the last time I was there. After I looked at that wreckage and those thousands of women and children and everything, I vomited.” The former supreme commander continued, “If you go on indefinitely, you are perpetuating a slaughter such as I have never heard of in the history of mankind.” War leveled at least half of eighteen of the North’s twenty- two major cities. Pyongyang, a city of half a million people before 1950, was said to have had only two buildings left intact. LeMay, who went on to head the Strategic Air Command and became the youngest U.S. four-star general since Ulysses Grant, wrote “We burned down just about every city in North Korea and South Korea both... we killed off over a million civilian Koreans and drove several million more from their homes, with the inevitable additional tragedies bound to ensue.” As O’Donnell, who had advocated early area attacks, told Congress on June 25, 1951, “Oh, yes: we did it all later anyhow... I would say that the entire, almost the entire Korean Peninsula is just a terrible mess. Everything is destroyed. There is nothing left standing worthy of the name.”

^such mercy. Do read about the immediate effects of Napalm too.

The US has been evil since its very beginning, built on the eradication of a whole race - no empire ever did this before - and then its so called isolationism which was mainly about bullying Latin America. It has waged illegal wars since aeons on all continent, covertly or overtly ; the economic sanctions and embargo's it has "sponsored" have already have been worse than any other empire in history could ever do. Look at Iraq and find me a single comparison throughout history, from the beginning of the idea of empire during the Iron Age up to now.

Bin Laden was a saint compared to Western leaders (what did Churchill say when "beastly" Indians were dying in British engineered famines ? Probably merciful famines. I mean the English were probably thinking that Bengalis shouldn't get overweight.)

 

[Subaltern]

What an anthology of delusions. You're talking as a social Darwinist, "yes, your killer killed you because he was able to kill you", some pseudo moral circular logic. If you want to know how the US has been gentle read "Napalm: An American Biography" by Robert M. Neer. Here a single excerpt on Korea, considering threatening North Korea is a fad (pp. 99-100) :

Nevermind a super-power (of which the world has only seen 3 in its history), name me a great power that has better conduct than the USA.

^such mercy. Do read about the immediate effects of Napalm too.

The US has been evil since its very beginning, built on the eradication of a whole race - no empire ever did this before - and then its so called isolationism which was mainly about bullying Latin America. It has waged illegal wars since aeons on all continent, covertly or overtly ; the economic sanctions and embargo's it has "sponsored" have already have been worse than any other empire in history could ever do. Look at Iraq and find me a single comparison throughout history, from the beginning of the idea of empire during the Iron Age up to now.

Bin Laden was a saint compared to Western leaders (what did Churchill say when "beastly" Indians were dying in British engineered famines ? Probably merciful famines. I mean the English were probably thinking that Bengalis shouldn't get overweight.)

If USA is evil, then every single nation is evil. I hope you realize that 90% of native Americans died due to having no immunity whatsoever to Eurasian germs. There are plenty of records from places such as British Columbia, Washington, Oregon, etc. that show the natives were wiped out by disease spread before any European explorer even arrived, never mind settlers. Do read the actual writings of said Spanish and British explorers who were mystified by the landscape dotted with settlements but hardly any people.

As for Bin Laden being a saint, i can only say 'one-eyed Islamism' is the reason you think so. A terrorist who was too much of a coward to actually fight an open battle, deserves exactly what he got- no grave, no samadhi, nothing. Killed like a rat in a hole and scattered into the sea.

If you think USA is so 'evil', like i said, dig through history and show me one empire/major power/world power in the last 1000 years that has done better towards non-citizens.

Its because of US's superior morality and superior humanity that Afghans or Iraqis are even alive today. If it were any other nation, they'd be nuked into history with zero remorse.

Muslims have a need to justify USA as evil, because USA sits on its holy soil (Saudi Arabia, land of Mecca & Medina) and does as it pleases. If USA were not evil, Islamists would face an existential crisis trying to justify how Allah would allow a kaffir nation to sit in its holiest site. The only way Islamists can justify it, is by calling USA evil and therefore, it is not will of Allah but 'will of Satan'. That is the entire basis on why muslims hate USA.

Tomorrow if China replaces USA as the top dog and sits in Saudi lands doing what it pleases, the same hatred would be reserved for the Chinese.

 

[Yossarian]

The helicopter crashed at the scene because the walls of the compound interfered with the updraft of air to the rotor blades and everyone returned in the second helicopter.

I was referring to the Chinook helicopter crash that killed 30 Americans and 8 Afghans. Seventeen of the U.S. servicemen killed were Navy SEALs, including 15 commandos from the Gold Squadron of the elite Naval Warfare Development Group (DEVGRU), better known as SEAL Team Six.

Families suspect SEAL Team 6 crash was inside job on worst day in Afghanistan

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/20/families-suspect-seal-team-6-crash-was-inside-job-/

Obama stonewalls SEAL Team 6 helicopter crash probe, watchdog says

The Obama administration is violating a judge’s order to turn over documents in the Aug. 6, 2011, shootdown of a U.S. helicopter — call sign Extortion 17 — that killed members of SEAL Team 6 in Afghanistan, a watchdog group is charging.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/5/obama-stonewalls-seal-team-6-extortion-17-helicopt/

It was Seal Team Six that carried out the attack on OBL's compound. Some even allege that the 15 Seal Team Six members killed in the Chinook crash included those that took out OBL.

 

[enkidu_]

Nevermind a super-power (of which the world has only seen 3 in its history), name me a great power that has better conduct than the USA.

And how did the US became a "superpower" ? Because it made sure Europe destroys itself during the WWII, then it put the continental powers under economic and ideological subjugation. Have you ever wondered where Hitler found the bankers and capital he needed for his mass industrialization quinquennial plans ? Go read Preparata's Conjuring Hitler.

Again, you'll not find a single empire in world history who has decimated peoples outside its sphere of influence ; the US is the only country in the history of mankind spending the equivalent of tens of salaries of its own worker per single bomb to kill peasants thousands of miles away who, let alone posing a threat, might even not have heard of it.

If USA is evil, then every single nation is evil. I hope you realize that 90% of native Americans died due to having no immunity whatsoever to Eurasian germs. There are plenty of records from places such as British Columbia, Washington, Oregon, etc. that show the natives were wiped out by disease spread before any European explorer even arrived, never mind settlers. Do read the actual writings of said Spanish and British explorers who were mystified by the landscape dotted with settlements but hardly any people.

Oh yes, that American mythology : some dozens (let's say, three thousands ?) Native Americans were living in the world's largest desert, and then Europeans came up, brought some diseases, and Natives just fell likes flies - with Europeans never ever harming them (all the cowboy movies are, after all, pure fiction). Even Australian Aborigines just decided to disappear.

Too bad Charles C. Mann has methodically debunked this well-fitting vision, showing that the topographic and climatic conditions were favouring a population running into the millions.

And what witnesses ? Howard Zinn in the first pages of his magnum opus says exactly the opposite of what you portray here (how for instance some indigenous populations came to help Christopher Colombus and his men, and they basically killed the former to take their gold.)

As for Bin Laden being a saint, i can only say 'one-eyed Islamism' is the reason you think so. A terrorist who was too much of a coward to actually fight an open battle, deserves exactly what he got- no grave, no samadhi, nothing. Killed like a rat in a hole and scattered into the sea.

He had 10s of millions of dollars when, at 23, he abandoned a potential lavish lifestyle for the caves of Afghanistan, fighting with the mujahideen ; he's less coward than you or me, and probably richer than you or me put together multiplied by a hundred. We too will die, perhaps like a dog, or a rat, or a monkey, but Bin Laden died looking into the yes of a dozen of world powers for a full decade.

If you think USA is so 'evil', like i said, dig through history and show me one empire/major power/world power in the last 1000 years that has done better towards non-citizens.

Only the Spaniards have been worst really.

Its because of US's superior morality and superior humanity that Afghans or Iraqis are even alive today. If it were any other nation, they'd be nuked into history with zero remorse.

Yes, because it wasn't as if the US wouldn't pay the consequences of its actions if they did it right, you know like the Saudis getting off the bandwagon due to internal pressure or something.

Muslims have a need to justify USA as evil, because USA sits on its holy soil (Saudi Arabia, land of Mecca & Medina) and does as it pleases. If USA were not evil, Islamists would face an existential crisis trying to justify how Allah would allow a kaffir nation to sit in its holiest site. The only way Islamists can justify it, is by calling USA evil and therefore, it is not will of Allah but 'will of Satan'. That is the entire basis on why muslims hate USA.

That's not the case at all. It's for the continuing predation it has entertained for decades, but we will get the US out of the whole Islamic world soon, perhaps even in your lifetime, keep tuned.

Tomorrow if China replaces USA as the top dog and sits in Saudi lands doing what it pleases, the same hatred would be reserved for the Chinese.

China is a thousands year old civilization which had a tributary system to administer its imperialist outbursts in the region, which consisted taking some money in exchange of spreading its high culture. The One Belt One Road project of core leader Xi Jinping is the same, infrastructure building and regional economic integration to defuse all tensions ; the US has been infrastructure destroying and vital disintegration.

What the US spreads ? Pseudo democracy and McDonald's ?

By the way, you didn't answer : who's the worst, Bin Laden or Churchill who was making fun of Bengalis dying by the millions during the artificial made famines ?

 

[enkidu_]

Churchill famously said : "I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion." But well. The British just killed few millions of Bengalis whereas they could have killed millions of Marathis, Rajasthanis, ... and of course they built roads. They were so humane. They should come back.

 

[Subaltern]

Churchill famously said : "I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion." But well. The British just killed few millions of Bengalis whereas they could have killed millions of Marathis, Rajasthanis, ... and of course they built roads. They were so humane. They should come back.

The British are not the USA. That is racism, pure and simple.

 

[Subaltern]

And how did the US became a "superpower" ? Because it made sure Europe destroys itself during the WWII, then it put the continental powers under economic and ideological subjugation. Have you ever wondered where Hitler found the bankers and capital he needed for his mass industrialization quinquennial plans ? Go read Preparata's Conjuring Hitler.

US didn't become super-power after WWII. it became super-power before WWI. You have very little idea of US military and economic might circa 1910s if you think USA became 'super-power' because it had nukes in the 1940s.

In any-case, every great power has risen by power of conquest, bar the USA. USA has risen without any meaningful conquest, from lowly back-water esque lands of 1800 to an economic super-power by pretty much developing its own continental land. That, is a far peceaful rise than any other great power in history.

Again, you'll not find a single empire in world history who has decimated peoples outside its sphere of influence ; the US is the only country in the history of mankind spending the equivalent of tens of salaries of its own worker per single bomb to kill peasants thousands of miles away who, let alone posing a threat, might even not have heard of it.

Mankind's sphere of influence has always expanded. Your argument is nonsensical.
So US & UK are bad guys of all, for killing people around the globe. So then, 1250s, Mongols are the worst guys ever, coz they can kill people ten thousand kms apart by wishing it and did so. So ergo, 800 AD, the Caliphates were the worst empire ever till then, for ability to kill people 7000-8000 kms apart, just by wishing it. And did.

Your argument is nonsensical, because it predicates any newer great power to be automatically worse than its predecessors.

 

[Subaltern]

Oh yes, that American mythology : some dozens (let's say, three thousands ?) Native Americans were living in the world's largest desert, and then Europeans came up, brought some diseases, and Natives just fell likes flies - with Europeans never ever harming them (all the cowboy movies are, after all, pure fiction). Even Australian Aborigines just decided to disappear.

Half of continental North America fell like flies. Everything west of the Rockies. Everything east of the rockies had less than 10 million people living in continental USA before arrival of Europeans. most were actually deported. Estimates vary,but between 40-60% natives died of disease Europeans brought into North America.
This, is a fact.

Too bad Charles C. Mann has methodically debunked this well-fitting vision, showing that the topographic and climatic conditions were favouring a population running into the millions.

Yes. 10 million in entire continental USA and Canada. In 1600 AD, Bengal alone had 20 million people. Do you have any idea what it means for demographic collapse when USA + Canada has less people than Bengal circa 1600 AD ?

And what witnesses ? Howard Zinn in the first pages of his magnum opus says exactly the opposite of what you portray here (how for instance some indigenous populations came to help Christopher Colombus and his men, and they basically killed the former to take their gold.)

Again, reductio ad absurdum. Columbus isn't bringing Ebola from europe by their millions. He is bringing all the old world killer diseases that we possess immunities to some degree : small pox, plague, influenza,TB.
No body is alleging that USA was colonized by pacifistic Buddhist monks. Point is, show us who has done better.

He had 10s of millions of dollars when, at 23, he abandoned a potential lavish lifestyle for the caves of Afghanistan, fighting with the mujahideen ; he's less coward than you or me, and probably richer than you or me put together multiplied by a hundred. We too will die, perhaps like a dog, or a rat, or a monkey, but Bin Laden died looking into the yes of a dozen of world powers for a full decade.

No, he is a coward. An ideologically staunch, but coward nonetheless. He was born into the riches, so it matters not. Bin Laden is the not the first, nor the last terrorist in the world who will be remembered only in history books and nobody will know his name, just like nobody knows the names of the Irish terrorists from 100 years ago.
He took US money to pursue his agenda in Afghanistan, obeyed their commands and then tried to mess with USA. Got himself killed. coward and a *********.

Only the Spaniards have been worst really.

Arabs caliphate, Romans, British, Mughals, Chinese, they are all worse. USA doesn't just show up and kill just to conquer more USA land until it is stopped. All of the powers apart from the USA has been at conquestionary wars.
China today is in concessionary wars. USA is not. So how can we say US is worse ?
Ofcourse, if u get in the way of USA, it will run u over. Don't put yourself against the super-power. Nobody is saying they are saints. But i am saying they are the best the world ever had. And for that, be thankful you exist.
If USA a power like the Caliphate or Han Empire, Mongols, Brits, Germans, French, Spanish, Japanese, you'd be nuked a long, long time ago.

 

[enkidu_]

The British are not the USA. That is racism, pure and simple.

The US basically continues the geopolitics of the British (Mackinder and all that crap, as Brezinsky assumes), but who cares, British could have hundreds of millions of Indians but just killed few millions - and for good reasons (civilization, education, tea, etc) -, who cares about de-industrialization and all these myths, British have been the most humane of all empires, such moral superiority, they cared so much for the local Indians that they let them become civil servants while they could have killed them, wow, just wow.

US didn't become super-power after WWII. it became super-power before WWI. You have very little idea of US military and economic might circa 1910s if you think USA became 'super-power' because it had nukes in the 1940s.

The US was an industrial power, but not a geopolitical one, because in Europe you had candidates who made sure it would approach Eurasia (France and England), while in purely scientific terms, Germany was ahead ; it's thanks to the WWII that the US got beyond scientifically, by luring German scientists, Jews as well as Nazis, which is quite cynical (see Operation Paperclip).

When they bargained the European powers through the Marshall Plan they made sure that they became a geopolitical power, having a free inroads into the ex-colonies.

In any-case, every great power has risen by power of conquest, bar the USA. USA has risen without any meaningful conquest, from lowly back-water esque lands of 1800 to an economic super-power by pretty much developing its own continental land. That, is a far peceaful rise than any other great power in history.

What ? How did Europeans found themselves on the American continent ? Through teleportation ?

Mankind's sphere of influence has always expanded. Your argument is nonsensical.
So US & UK are bad guys of all, for killing people around the globe. So then, 1250s, Mongols are the worst guys ever, coz they can kill people ten thousand kms apart by wishing it and did so. So ergo, 800 AD, the Caliphates were the worst empire ever till then, for ability to kill people 7000-8000 kms apart, just by wishing it. And did.

As I said, in terms of geopolitics, British and US are basically the same, but even then American methods have been drastically innovative (for the worst). The difference is that all of them didn't launch wars against specific populations by themselves. Populations were conquered during their imperial expansion, but no Mongol, British official or Caliph ever said "let's target such population for such specific reasons". The US is the only empire in world history which has never fought a single genuine army in its history (please don't bring the Normandy hoax, we all know it's the Soviets who defeated the Nazis). It has targeted civilian populations solely. That's a dramatic and cynical novelty.

 

[enkidu_]

Half of continental North America fell like flies. Everything west of the Rockies. Everything east of the rockies had less than 10 million people living in continental USA before arrival of Europeans. most were actually deported. Estimates vary,but between 40-60% natives died of disease Europeans brought into North America.
This, is a fact.

Yes. 10 million in entire continental USA and Canada. In 1600 AD, Bengal alone had 20 million people. Do you have any idea what it means for demographic collapse when USA + Canada has less people than Bengal circa 1600 AD ?

Again, reductio ad absurdum. Columbus isn't bringing Ebola from europe by their millions. He is bringing all the old world killer diseases that we possess immunities to some degree : small pox, plague, influenza,TB.
No body is alleging that USA was colonized by pacifistic Buddhist monks. Point is, show us who has done better.

Why do you consciously subscribe to lies so adamantly ? Read the author mentioned :

(...)
"At the time of Columbus the Western Hemisphere had been thoroughly painted with the human brush," Mann concludes. By the highest estimates, more than a 100 million people may have lived in this hemisphere -- more than in Europe at the time -- before Columbus arrived.

As much as two-thirds of the continental United States had once been farmed, the lands terraced, irrigated and built into mysterious mounds that marked settlements. In Mexico, indigenous peoples had already invented maize; created bountiful gardens of tomatoes and beans; and developed astronomy, math and writing in ways that rivaled the speed and sophistication of the Sumerians. Nor were Indians just part of the scenery: Mann suggests that Indian traditions of personal autonomy and social equality may have been the primary inspiration for American colonists' attitudes about freedom and equality, and that they influenced the writings of John Locke, David Hume and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
(...)
Mann naturally centers his investigation on findings in anthropology and archaeology, but one also wishes for a bigger interpretive boost from economics, sociology and, especially, epidemiology. Could such a mass extermination over two continents have really happened? The author interviews several medical researchers and finds that it could. But again the evidence feels a tad slim: Even the Black Death, a century earlier, killed only about a third, not 95 percent, of the European population. And we hear almost nothing from oral histories of the extant indigenous peoples -- the Guajiro of Colombia and Venezuela, the Yanomami in the Amazon, the Inca's descendants in Bolivia and Peru, the Maya of Mexico and Guatemala, or the North American Indians, and so wonder whether they could shed light upon these questions.
(...)

http://www.sfgate.com/books/article/The-myth-of-an-empty-frontier-Explorers-2647934.php

No, he is a coward. An ideologically staunch, but coward nonetheless. He was born into the riches, so it matters not. Bin Laden is the not the first, nor the last terrorist in the world who will be remembered only in history books and nobody will know his name, just like nobody knows the names of the Irish terrorists from 100 years ago.
He took US money to pursue his agenda in Afghanistan, obeyed their commands and then tried to mess with USA. Got himself killed. coward and a *********.

Aren't you more of a coward ?

Arabs caliphate, Romans, British, Mughals, Chinese, they are all worse. USA doesn't just show up and kill just to conquer more USA land until it is stopped. All of the powers apart from the USA has been at conquestionary wars.
China today is in concessionary wars. USA is not. So how can we say US is worse ?
Ofcourse, if u get in the way of USA, it will run u over. Don't put yourself against the super-power. Nobody is saying they are saints. But i am saying they are the best the world ever had. And for that, be thankful you exist.
If USA a power like the Caliphate or Han Empire, Mongols, Brits, Germans, French, Spanish, Japanese, you'd be nuked a long, long time ago.

"Be thankful you exist" lmao that servile attitude wow, do you have a statue of Trump you worship everyday for your existence ?

I already said US are worst than all minus Spaniards.

 

[Subaltern]

Yes, because it wasn't as if the US wouldn't pay the consequences of its actions if they did it right, you know like the Saudis getting off the bandwagon due to internal pressure or something.

If USA was like the Caliphate or Britain or Romans, they'd nuke the Saudis if they got out of line. Be thankful, they do not.

That's not the case at all. It's for the continuing predation it has entertained for decades, but we will get the US out of the whole Islamic world soon, perhaps even in your lifetime, keep tuned.

What predation ? USA has the industry, the technology, the knowhow, the everything. All Saudi has, is stuff under its ground it lucked out with. Saudi owe the British and the US for their oil. So don't say BS. If Arabs could keep their peace between themselves, there wouldn't be the Americans or Brits in Arabia.

China is a thousands year old civilization which had a tributary system to administer its imperialist outbursts in the region, which consisted taking some money in exchange of spreading its high culture. The One Belt One Road project of core leader Xi Jinping is the same, infrastructure building and regional economic integration to defuse all tensions ; the US has been infrastructure destroying and vital disintegration.

Nonsense. USA cares about its infrastructure links deeply, which is why USA is the biggest buddy of Singapore, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, Saudi, Israel, Egypt. That is the US supply infrastructure and actually also the current global supply infrastructure.

What the US spreads ? Pseudo democracy and McDonald's ?

For a start, lack of global major power conflict and being at an all-time minimum globally for major power wars.
Nobody cares about some backwater of the world being bombed in the grand scheme of things. What matters to the most, is whether people like France and Germany, India and China, Burma and Thailand, Argentina and Brazil are fighting every 2 generations or not. So i like the stability USA provides, thank you very much.

By the way, you didn't answer : who's the worst, Bin Laden or Churchill who was making fun of Bengalis dying by the millions during the artificial made famines ?

Bin Laden, if we are to compare his views to Churchill. Bin Laden had far less power than Churchill but for the power he had, he did far more harm than what Churchill could've done. In that respect, i judge Churchill better.

 

[Subaltern]

Aren't you more of a coward ?

??? How do you know i don't care or work as hard for my goals as Bin Laden ? I am not killing people and hiding due to it. That doesn't mean my pursuit is any less noble. So basically, to you, all the mullahs and muslims who are not ghazis are also cowards, correct ?

"Be thankful you exist" lmao that servile attitude wow, do you have a statue of Trump you worship everyday for your existence ?

Trump != USA. And yes, i am thankful USA is not like the Caliphate.

I already said US are worst than all minus Spaniards.

You saying matters not a jot. Evidence is required. Every single great power is worse than USA has been, due to the simple fact that USA doesn't conquer just because it can. The Caliphate didn't stop, they were stopped. and they fell apart. That is the story of EVERY great power in history, bar USA. They are happy to rule the world via power of money.
I am happier they are ruling the world via power of money than every other empire in history that has ruled by power of the sword.

 

[enkidu_]

If USA was like the Caliphate or Britain or Romans, they'd nuke the Saudis if they got out of line. Be thankful, they do not.

They'd lose the oil and basically that'd be the '73 oil crisis on steroids, which would effectively screw human civilization.

What predation ? USA has the industry, the technology, the knowhow, the everything. All Saudi has, is stuff under its ground it lucked out with. Saudi owe the British and the US for their oil. So don't say BS. If Arabs could keep their peace between themselves, there wouldn't be the Americans or Brits in Arabia.

It's predation in the region through neo colonial policies.

Nonsense. USA cares about its infrastructure links deeply, which is why USA is the biggest buddy of Singapore, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, Saudi, Israel, Egypt. That is the US supply infrastructure and actually also the current global supply infrastructure.

Huh ? I talked of infrastructure-building, like the Chinese are doing in Asia and Africa, pumping billions of dollars to build roads, ports, ... what US has been destroyed elsewhere basically.

For a start, lack of global major power conflict and being at an all-time minimum globally for major power wars.
Nobody cares about some backwater of the world being bombed in the grand scheme of things. What matters to the most, is whether people like France and Germany, India and China, Burma and Thailand, Argentina and Brazil are fighting every 2 generations or not. So i like the stability USA provides, thank you very much.

You have the right to think like that, it's called moral utilitarianism, I don't think British official lost sleep either when Indians were dying off hunger, it's fair enough as philosophy of life.

Bin Laden, if we are to compare his views to Churchill. Bin Laden had far less power than Churchill but for the power he had, he did far more harm than what Churchill could've done. In that respect, i judge Churchill better.

So basically thousands of Americans have more value than millions of Indians, right ?

 

[enkidu_]

??? How do you know i don't care or work as hard for my goals as Bin Laden ? I am not killing people and hiding due to it. That doesn't mean my pursuit is any less noble. So basically, to you, all the mullahs and muslims who are not ghazis are also cowards, correct ?

No, I meant, you say a guy who abandons fortunes at 23 is a coward, so basically who isn't ?

Trump != USA. And yes, i am thankful USA is not like the Caliphate.

Why are you so fearful of the caliphate ? Which caliphate extended into modern day India ?

You saying matters not a jot. Evidence is required. Every single great power is worse than USA has been, due to the simple fact that USA doesn't conquer just because it can. The Caliphate didn't stop, they were stopped. and they fell apart. That is the story of EVERY great power in history, bar USA. They are happy to rule the world via power of money.
I am happier they are ruling the world via power of money than every other empire in history that has ruled by power of the sword.

You're too much of an Americanophile to admit it anyway it's redundant.

The British also ruled by money. They had few 10 000s of men ruling 300 millions peoples in the Subcontinent.

 

[Subaltern]

They'd lose the oil and basically that'd be the '73 oil crisis on steroids, which would effectively screw human civilization.

Explain how USA loses the oil if USA has the means to militarily control the oil of entire middle east. You think if USA declares unilateral war on the middle east, nukes it, then positions its entire military in the middle east, middle east can do something about it ???

It's predation in the region through neo colonial policies.

Sure. Heck of a lot better than naked warfare and neverending cities being burnt and sacked by any other model prior to USA.

Huh ? I talked of infrastructure-building, like the Chinese are doing in Asia and Africa, pumping billions of dollars to build roads, ports, ... what US has been destroyed elsewhere basically.

LOL. China is dumping its money as loan to build infrastructure, most of it, like its own 'empty cities'. Nobody is going to ship crap all the way from China to Europe over land when it just takes 22 days and is 10x cheaper by shipping. The world is in oversupply, which is why shipping is falling. You guys have been sold a needle in a banana, make no mistake.

You have the right to think like that, it's called moral utilitarianism, I don't think British official lost sleep either when Indians were dying off hunger, it's fair enough as philosophy of life.

No, its called big picture. You cannot say USA is the worst power, when empirically speaking, far less % of humanity are dying in wars than ever in human history, under its watch. That is just straight up, falsehood, not moral utilitarianism.

So basically thousands of Americans have more value than millions of Indians, right ?

No, not what i said. Think harder on my response.

 

[enkidu_]

[MENTION=143451]Subaltern[/MENTION] : why aren't the British gentler imperialists than the US then ? At least they built schools, roads, ... ???

 

[enkidu_]

Explain how USA loses the oil if USA has the means to militarily control the oil of entire middle east. You think if USA declares unilateral war on the middle east, nukes it, then positions its entire military in the middle east, middle east can do something about it ???

If you nuke it you'll lose the oil ? You think Arabs will not burn oil fields or something if they perceive an imminent threat for the control of their material resources ? Then the world economy will basically sink.

Sure. Heck of a lot better than naked warfare and neverending cities being burnt and sacked by any other model prior to USA.

Basically you prefer a robber steals you without punch than a robber steals you with a punch ? I have to say it does make sense.

LOL. China is dumping its money as loan to build infrastructure, most of it, like its own 'empty cities'. Nobody is going to ship crap all the way from China to Europe over land when it just takes 22 days and is 10x cheaper by shipping. The world is in oversupply, which is why shipping is falling. You guys have been sold a needle in a banana, make no mistake.

I guess the ADB is joking then :

The economic importance of participating in OBOR cannot be understated as it could provide business and new investments opportunities for countries eyeing foreign investments. According to a report by the Asian Development Bank (ADB), Asia will require approximately US$8.2 trillion (RM35.6 trillion) to finance infrastructure development from 2010 to 2020.

http://www.nst.com.my/opinion/colum...lt-one-road-initiative-strengthening-economic

No, its called big picture. You cannot say USA is the worst power, when empirically speaking, far less % of humanity are dying in wars than ever in human history, under its watch. That is just straight up, falsehood, not moral utilitarianism.

Empirically speaking they have been a neo colonial predator.

No, not what i said. Think harder on my response.

That's what I got.

 

[Subaltern]

No, I meant, you say a guy who abandons fortunes at 23 is a coward, so basically who isn't ?

Wont be the first or the last rich kid to go crazy and pursue a crazy dream, living like a pauper, either.

Why are you so fearful of the caliphate ? Which caliphate extended into modern day India ?

Do not confuse contempt with fear. Contempt comes from disgust, revolting feeling, not fear.
The Caliphate simply showed up, as far as it could and killed people to conquer its lands. By their tens of thousands, till they were stopped. USA is not doing it. By default, USA is a more pacifistic power than the caliphate.

You're too much of an Americanophile to admit it anyway it's redundant.



The British also ruled by money. They had few 10 000s of men ruling 300 millions peoples in the Subcontinent.

Again, do not confuse logistics of ruling with basis of ruling. USA rules by owning people and companies. Britain ruled by the might of its arms and conquered as much as it possibly could. USA isn't jus showing up somewhere and planting US flag there and calling it US land.

Thus, basis of world power under the US,is different.

And yes, i'd much rather live under the rule of money than the rule of sword. Who wouldn't ?
Give me a choice between a world power who will show up and kill me anytime they are able to, its just a matter of time, coz of religion or land or something, then claim it as their own, versus a world power that will show up and buy everything up and leave me poor.
I mean, seriously, thats even a question ???? Us people who are not willing to throw our lives away for promises of jannat, will obviously take the 'fakir but alive' option than sudden death for no fault of our own.

 

[Subaltern]

If you nuke it you'll lose the oil ? You think Arabs will not burn oil fields or something if they perceive an imminent threat for the control of their material resources ? Then the world economy will basically sink.

USA has the tech to put out oil field fires. Thats how Kuwait was given its oil back.
Point is, if USA wanted to, it can take over the oil fields of Arabia at will. Could've anytime in the last 70 years. It is also the only power in history of mankind, to not militaristically take over a resource-rich region while being fully capable. Give credit where credit is due, is all i am saying.

Basically you prefer a robber steals you without punch than a robber steals you with a punch ? I have to say it does make sense.

I prefer a robber who steals with a punch than a robber who kills me outright.

I guess the ADB is joking then :



http://www.nst.com.my/opinion/colum...lt-one-road-initiative-strengthening-economic

As i said, keep watching. Pakistan is already sinking in the red. You do realize, Indians are only ****** off coz CPEC passes through Indian sovereign lands ? We otherwise, love the CPEC and that should tell you something.

Empirically speaking they have been a neo colonial predator.

Call it what you want, but its empirically the best result ever achieved in terms of human stability, peace and economic growth.

That's what I got.

Then you got it wrong. Churchill was a greater man than Bin Laden, coz he could've done far worse but didn't. Bin Laden pretty much did as bad as he could. I don't see how bin Laden could've been a more terrible terrorist. I can easily see how Churchill could've been a far worse PM for 'lives'.

 

[enkidu_]

USA has the tech to put out oil field fires. Thats how Kuwait was given its oil back.
Point is, if USA wanted to, it can take over the oil fields of Arabia at will. Could've anytime in the last 70 years. It is also the only power in history of mankind, to not militaristically take over a resource-rich region while being fully capable. Give credit where credit is due, is all i am saying.

Saddam didn't target oil fields in order to destroy them entirely as Arabs would do if they see that US would get there. When Roosevelt signed the Quincy pact with Ibn Saud in '45 it wasn't for his Arabian eyes, but because he knew the US had its own interests in securing the stability in Arabia by saving the Sauds ; the US couldn't launch an outright attack but co opt local collaborators to assure its interests. Look at Iraq or Afghanistan, because of insurgency, they're going in no direction (even the Iraqi oil has mainly been sold to Chinese). If they attacked the holy lands, they would have faced way worse, so it's better to keep the "friendly" Sauds.

I prefer a robber who steals with a punch than a robber who kills me outright.

or no robber

As i said, keep watching. Pakistan is already sinking in the red. You do realize, Indians are only ****** off coz CPEC passes through Indian sovereign lands ? We otherwise, love the CPEC and that should tell you something.

I don't think I've shown anywhere the idea that Pakistanis care about Indian sentiments, but do love, it's better for the health, we'll take care of the infrastructure building.

Call it what you want, but its empirically the best result ever achieved in terms of human stability, peace and economic growth.

You seemed to have lived very long to pass such judgement.

Then you got it wrong. Churchill was a greater man than Bin Laden, coz he could've done far worse but didn't. Bin Laden pretty much did as bad as he could. I don't see how bin Laden could've been a more terrible terrorist. I can easily see how Churchill could've been a far worse PM for 'lives'.

So nearly laughing at the death of millions of Bengalis is a great proof of humanism, lesson taken.

 

[Subaltern]

Saddam didn't target oil fields in order to destroy them entirely as Arabs would do if they see that US would get there. When Roosevelt signed the Quincy pact with Ibn Saud in '45 it wasn't for his Arabian eyes, but because he knew the US had its own interests in securing the stability in Arabia by saving the Sauds ; the US couldn't launch an outright attack but co opt local collaborators to assure its interests. Look at Iraq or Afghanistan, because of insurgency, they're going in no direction (even the Iraqi oil has mainly been sold to Chinese). If they attacked the holy lands, they would have faced way worse, so it's better to keep the "friendly" Sauds.

Nonsense. Saddam did only thing he could do against the oil wells, which is torch them. There is nothing the arabs can do that the US can't undo technologically about the oil fields. They already did it in Kuwait.
The US can nuke the holy lands of muslims and nobody can so much as touch them. What, you think Russians, Chinese, Indians are launching nukes to USA for sake of Mecca ? hahaha.

or no robber

Every single great power in history of mankind has been a murderous robber to those not within its borders. US has not been the murderous robber, just a normal one. I'd take it over any other great power in history of mankind.

I don't think I've shown anywhere the idea that Pakistanis care about Indian sentiments, but do love, it's better for the health, we'll take care of the infrastructure building.

Yes. more empty cities on chinese financial loans. Would do wonder for your nation i am sure. Just like its working out for Sri Lanka.

You seemed to have lived very long to pass such judgement.

Or educated enough to pass such a judgement.

So nearly laughing at the death of millions of Bengalis is a great proof of humanism, lesson taken.

I'd rather have someone with the power to kill millions more just laugh, than a two-bit terrrorist who did all the damage he could froth at the mouth while being a *********.

 

[enkidu_]

Nonsense. Saddam did only thing he could do against the oil wells, which is torch them. There is nothing the arabs can do that the US can't undo technologically about the oil fields. They already did it in Kuwait.
The US can nuke the holy lands of muslims and nobody can so much as touch them. What, you think Russians, Chinese, Indians are launching nukes to USA for sake of Mecca ? hahaha.

I think you don't got it. Saddam didn't target oil fields, but infrastructure, for the reason that he wanted to exploit oil later on. Arabs on the other hand could burn their whole oil resources and that will have an unfathomable impact on world civilization (look at what happened when they fluctuated the prices in '73, it was the end of welfare policies in major European countries like France, imagine now if they do this but a thousand times worse).

If they nuke the Holy Land there'll be a worldwide jihad against them. They can't already deal with Afghan peasants (like they couldn't with Vietnamese farmers despite raining them with Napalm), they will meet the same end as the Soviet Union.

Every single great power in history of mankind has been a murderous robber to those not within its borders. US has not been the murderous robber, just a normal one. I'd take it over any other great power in history of mankind.

Can you then assume then that an Indian in the 1850s could have said the exact same about the British ? After all the East Indian Company came up for business, and only later imposed a de facto rule.

Yes. more empty cities on chinese financial loans. Would do wonder for your nation i am sure. Just like its working out for Sri Lanka.

It's not empty cities, but mainly ports, roads, ... which will favour regional economic integration. I'd take this over US methodic destruction in Iraq, Libya, etc

Or educated enough to pass such a judgement.

Education doesn't mean intelligence.

I'd rather have someone with the power to kill millions more just laugh, than a two-bit terrrorist who did all the damage he could froth at the mouth while being a *********.

Your slavish mentality is incredible. Your throwing roses at a man who laughed about your compatriots dying off hunger for the only reason that he could have done worse ; that's like applauding a serial killer because he killed 30 peoples while he could have killed 31. Are you just aware of how alienated you are ?

 

[desirous of desire]

Those who bash America, forget two things that are facts:

1. Every country acts in their own self interest. USA is the current uni-polar hegemon of the world. Since 1991 to now, this is the first time in human history that the world is unipolar. USA too will act in its own interest.

2. Can you name a SINGLE nation/polity in history of mankind that treats other with as much consideration as the USA ? USSR/China has no problems spreading insurgencies on a far greater scale than the US, till there is commie revolution. Look at South America for eg. Russia, China, etc. have killed millions in conquering/re-establishing control in places like Central Asia, Tibet, etc.

Arabs, caliphates, Mongols, Timurids, Delhi Sultans, French, Spanish, English- each and every single one of them make USA look like Gandhi by comparison.

You seriously think, if the situation was exactly the opposite, with the muslim world holding all the nukes and economic power and Europe being backwards, it would be like today ? No, Europe would be genocided into oblivion inside of a decade.

So be thankful for what you have. Obviously USA is there for USA first. But its conduct shows, its the nicest world-power in history of mankind. For that, be thankful, not grudgeful.
US's conduct towards foreigners, never mind its own citizens are order of magnitude greater than any arab nation and 99% of nations on this planet.

Doesnt India treat Kashmiris better? Yes or No?

Look at Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Vietnam, Korean war, Iraq , Afghanistan , countless interventions to change regimes all across the globe, creating Taliban ,ISIS and supporting dictators that oppress their own people. But of course you wont realize if you yourself dont bear the wrath of american supremacist plans. Will you ever wish to change your opinion to what is truth in reality ? I certainly dont want you to realize because in that case your future is bleak considering you will only change when things personally affect you.

 

[Subaltern]

I think you don't got it. Saddam didn't target oil fields, but infrastructure, for the reason that he wanted to exploit oil later on. Arabs on the other hand could burn their whole oil resources and that will have an unfathomable impact on world civilization (look at what happened when they fluctuated the prices in '73, it was the end of welfare policies in major European countries like France, imagine now if they do this but a thousand times worse).

That is false. Saddam burnt the oil wells the only way you can burn them to make them unusable. You cant burn the oil that is underground, buddy. the only thing you can do is burn it at the well-head, which is exactly what Saddam did. And USA put it out.
There is nothing one can do the oil fields, that US cant technologically neutralize.

If they nuke the Holy Land there'll be a worldwide jihad against them. They can't already deal with Afghan peasants (like they couldn't with Vietnamese farmers despite raining them with Napalm), they will meet the same end as the Soviet Union.

They can't deal with Afghans because US is civilized and restrained. If they wanted to have a military solution to the middle east with total war on the table, the US wins. They can quite easily deal with Afghan or any other such middle eastern problem by going 'see an afghan, shoot an afghan'.

Can you then assume then that an Indian in the 1850s could have said the exact same about the British ? After all the East Indian Company came up for business, and only later imposed a de facto rule.

But USA has not imposed de-facto or de-jure rule on anyone else. So that does make them better.

It's not empty cities, but mainly ports, roads, ... which will favour regional economic integration. I'd take this over US methodic destruction in Iraq, Libya, etc

Sure, time will tell.

Education doesn't mean intelligence.

Never claimed it did. Education means information and given the information, i am fine with the proclamation. I cannot see a single great power or superpower in human history that has been as humane as the USA to its non-citizens.

Your slavish mentality is incredible. Your throwing roses at a man who laughed about your compatriots dying off hunger for the only reason that he could have done worse ; that's like applauding a serial killer because he killed 30 peoples while he could have killed 31. Are you just aware of how alienated you are ?

I don't think i am alienated at all because i think Bin Laden was a worse human being than Churchill. I doubt you will find any Indian who thinks Binny was a better man.

 

[enkidu_]

That is false. Saddam burnt the oil wells the only way you can burn them to make them unusable. You cant burn the oil that is underground, buddy. the only thing you can do is burn it at the well-head, which is exactly what Saddam did. And USA put it out.
There is nothing one can do the oil fields, that US cant technologically neutralize.

Buddy that's my whole point : Saddam didn't want to destroy oil wells but only harm infrastructure so to scare Koweitis. Like all Iraqi nationalists Saddam thought of Koweit as Iraq's 19th province. Why would he want to destroy oil resources worth billions potentially his own ? On the other hand, if Arabs see that the US would launch nukes - as per you it's easier to launch nukes than freebies -, then they won't use Saddam's restrain, but destroy everything - and you know well how it will impact world economy, that's why the US prefers to have its local collaborators than do war there (Quincy pact).

They can't deal with Afghans because US is civilized and restrained. If they wanted to have a military solution to the middle east with total war on the table, the US wins. They can quite easily deal with Afghan or any other such middle eastern problem by going 'see an afghan, shoot an afghan'.

You know the irony ? That's exactly what general James Mattis said during the battle of Fallujah in Iraq, "kill anything that moves" - and you know another irony ? Well, let's me quote you an excerpt from a book on the Vietnam war, with an explicit title :

"The dark humor in the opening stanzas of a song composed by soldiers from 1st Cavalry Division caught the anything-goes attitude perfectly.

We shoot the sick, the young, the lame,
We do our best to kill and maim,
Because the kills count all the same,
Napalm sticks to kids.
Ox cart rolling down the road,
Peasants with a heavy load,
they’re all VC when the bombs explode,
Napalm sticks to kids.

The piling up of Vietnamese bodies to be counted—and in a sense discounted—was facilitated by the contempt that Americans generally had for the country and its people. To President Johnson, Vietnam was “a piddling ****-ant little country.” To McNamara, a “backward nation.” President Nixon’s national security adviser Henry Kissinger called North Vietnam a “little fourth-rate power,” later downgrading it to “fifth-rate” status. Such feelings permeated the chain of command, and they found even more colorful voice among those in the field, who regarded Vietnam as “the outhouse of Asia,” “the garbage dump of civilization,” “the ******* of the world.” A popular joke among GIs went: “What you do is, you load all the friendlies [South Vietnamese] onto ships and take them out to the South China Sea. Then you bomb the country flat. Then you sink the ships.”Others swore that the best solution to the conflict was to pave the country over “like a parking lot.” An even simpler proposal was commonly offered: “Kill ’em all and let God sort ’em out.”

The deeply ingrained racism that helped turn the Vietnamese countryside into a charnel house was summed up in a single word: the ubiquitous “gook.” That epithet evidently entered the military vocabulary in an earlier conflict, the eerily similar campaign in the Philippines at the turn of the twentieth century, where American troops began calling their indigenous enemies “goo-goos.” The pejorative term then seems to have transmuted into “gook” and was applied over the decades to racially dissimilar enemies in Haiti, Nicaragua, and Korea before returning to Southeast Asia. From the beginning of the war to the end, it was uttered ad infinitum. “The colonels called them gooks, the captain called them gooks, the staff all called them gooks. They were dinks, you know, subhuman,” recalled one veteran.

The notion that Vietnam’s inhabitants were something less than human was often spoken of as the “mere-gook rule,” or, in the acronym-mad military, the MGR. This held that all Vietnamese—northern and southern, adults and children, armed enemy and innocent civilian—were little more than animals, who could be killed or abused at will."

Nick Turse, Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam, chap. 2

^I hope one day you would be ashamed to have called all these acts "humanism". I can send you such sources about everything Americans have down, from tracking down natives in their own lands to modern day expeditions in the Middle East, which will make the British and their 1857 mutiny or Amritsar massacres look like hippies' meetings.

To go back to Fallujah... do you know what happened ? Do you know US embargo (and infrastructure destruction) killed off 500 000 Iraqi children, "25 percent of their age group" as Ward Churchill put it ? Which empire in the whole of history has sponsored the death 500 000 children in roughly a decade ? But as lady Albright said, they were worth the sacrifice, anyway.

But USA has not imposed de-facto or de-jure rule on anyone else. So that does make them better.

lmao I told you imagine you're hypothetically into the 1850s, when the US was a minor imperialist, you seem to have had a dozen of reincarnations to be able to judge US actions into a wider metahistorical perspective, try to be in the 1850s and think how you'd welcome the British, who were soooo gentle and humanists.

And the US doesn't impose its rule because it can't thanks to the post WWII world order, where domination is more decentralized (read the works of Toni Negri on new imperialism), but look at that :

^keep in mind majority of those brought civil unrest and obviously thousands of deaths.

Never claimed it did. Education means information and given the information, i am fine with the proclamation. I cannot see a single great power or superpower in human history that has been as humane as the USA to its non-citizens.

Why human history ? History. Point. I don't think since the Big Bang such a generous superpower has been witnessed by the stars.

I don't think i am alienated at all because i think Bin Laden was a worse human being than Churchill. I doubt you will find any Indian who thinks Binny was a better man.

Buddy, you just flattered a man who considered you "beastly" and was laughing at the death off hunger of millions of your - not mine, not he's, ... yours - compatriots. Let me bring a Godwin point, but that's literally like a Jew saying that Hitler was a good man because he could have killed off more Jews and loved dogs.

 

[Subaltern]

Buddy that's my whole point : Saddam didn't want to destroy oil wells but only harm infrastructure so to scare Koweitis. Like all Iraqi nationalists Saddam thought of Koweit as Iraq's 19th province. Why would he want to destroy oil resources worth billions potentially his own ? On the other hand, if Arabs see that the US would launch nukes - as per you it's easier to launch nukes than freebies -, then they won't use Saddam's restrain, but destroy everything - and you know well how it will impact world economy, that's why the US prefers to have its local collaborators than do war there (Quincy pact).

My point is, you don't know what you are talking about. Torching oil wells is the most one can do to put an oil field out of commission. Nothing else puts it out of commission for as long and for as much a technical challenge as an oil-head fire. And thats what Saddam did, yet the Americans were able to bring it under control inside a couple of years.
So point is, if US decided to nuke their way into Saudi, there is nothing the Saudis can do to the oil wells that can't be reversed.

You know the irony ? That's exactly what general James Mattis said during the battle of Fallujah in Iraq, "kill anything that moves" - and you know another irony ? Well, let's me quote you an excerpt from a book on the Vietnam war, with an explicit title :

^I hope one day you would be ashamed to have called all these acts "humanism". I can send you such sources about everything Americans have down, from tracking down natives in their own lands to modern day expeditions in the Middle East, which will make the British and their 1857 mutiny or Amritsar massacres look like hippies' meetings.

Nonsense. The USA has done nothing that compares to open warfare of the British to conquer middle east. the only times USA went to war in the middle east, it did it for its allies and did not conquer any land. That, by default, makes it better than any other great/super power in history.

To go back to Fallujah... do you know what happened ? Do you know US embargo (and infrastructure destruction) killed off 500 000 Iraqi children, "25 percent of their age group" as Ward Churchill put it ? Which empire in the whole of history has sponsored the death 500 000 children in roughly a decade ? But as lady Albright said, they were worth the sacrifice, anyway.

Worse has been done by every single great power when they commit open warfare of conquest.

lmao I told you imagine you're hypothetically into the 1850s, when the US was a minor imperialist, you seem to have had a dozen of reincarnations to be able to judge US actions into a wider metahistorical perspective, try to be in the 1850s and think how you'd welcome the British, who were soooo gentle and humanists.

And the US doesn't impose its rule because it can't thanks to the post WWII world order, where domination is more decentralized (read the works of Toni Negri on new imperialism), but look at that :

It can't because US respects the rule of law and is signatory to treaties that call for refrain from annexation. It can, if it chose to, to conquer entire middle east inside of 2 years, by any means necessary. Ie, launch nukes, kill everything that moves, including millions of civillians- that would put US in the same footing as British, Arabs, Chinese and other great powers in history.

Buddy, you just flattered a man who considered you "beastly" and was laughing at the death off hunger of millions of your - not mine, not he's, ... yours - compatriots. Let me bring a Godwin point, but that's literally like a Jew saying that Hitler was a good man because he could have killed off more Jews and loved dogs.

It was yours too- because Pakistan = India under Churchill. Who is the more evil man, is a question of means versus accomplishment. A coward terrorist who did his utmost, is a worse person than a nonchalant premier. That was my whole point, that people's moral integrity is not an absolute comparison, since not everyone has the same decisive power.

 

[enkidu_]

You're beyond redemption, it's honestly incredible, I doubt even Trump thinks like that.

Would you welcome an hypothetical US invasion of India ?

 

[Subaltern]

Doesnt India treat Kashmiris better? Yes or No?

Look at Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Vietnam, Korean war, Iraq , Afghanistan , countless interventions to change regimes all across the globe, creating Taliban ,ISIS and supporting dictators that oppress their own people. But of course you wont realize if you yourself dont bear the wrath of american supremacist plans. Will you ever wish to change your opinion to what is truth in reality ? I certainly dont want you to realize because in that case your future is bleak considering you will only change when things personally affect you.

Kashmiris are Indian citizens. Compare India's treatment of foreigners with US treatment of foreigners.

 

[Subaltern]

You're beyond redemption, it's honestly incredible, I doubt even Trump thinks like that.

Would you welcome an hypothetical US invasion of India ?

There are plenty of people worldwide that view US as the most benevolent great power/super power in history of mankind.
And if USA is not interested in invading a troublesome ally like Pakistan or a hated enemy like Iran, i highly doubt they'd want to invade one of their strongest friends, aka India.

 

[enkidu_]

There are plenty of people worldwide that view US as the most benevolent great power/super power in history of mankind.
And if USA is not interested in invading a troublesome ally like Pakistan or a hated enemy like Iran, i highly doubt they'd want to invade one of their strongest friends, aka India.

There are many crazy peoples in the world, thank you for the breaking news.

Why don't you ever answer simple questions ?

An hypothetical US invasion of India, would you welcome it ?

 

[Subaltern]

There are many crazy peoples in the world, thank you for the breaking news.

Why don't you ever answer simple questions ?

An hypothetical US invasion of India, would you welcome it ?

Ofcourse i wouldn't welcome it.
But your hypothetical question is irrelevant to my statement that there hasn't been a great or super-power in the world that has been as humane as the USA.
That doesn't mean USA is saintly pacifistic, it simply means they are the best we've had so far, in terms of humane treatment of foreigners and enemies. And that deserves respect.