Death Photos of Unidentified Men in Osama bin Laden Compound Leaked (WARNING, GRAPHIC)

Originally posted by monkofmimir
I hope I never have to see war...

I can understand where you're coming from but unfortunately the human race hasn't evolved to the point where war can be avoided.

The photos shown on the link of the OP are just a reminder of the results of our human instinct.

Originally posted by here4awhile

I don't get it...not a single one of these guys looked like they were armed...they almost look caught off guard...there's even a squirt gun next to the one...this looks like cold blooded killing

Maybe, maybe not. I tend to agree the killings weren't justified by arms (I don't tend to believe they were armed much at all, at least Bin Laden), but I'm not going to lie and say I can tell from the pictures that were shot at least an hour after the SEALS team left and at close range (hence weapons might be elsewhere).

Originally posted by michaelmcclen

If they said he had no internet then why do i see a vga cable in the backround? Laptops are pointless with no internet also they say Osama dident like tech.

The really big question is if there is a VGA cable there will be a laptop or computer, wonder what on the harddrives?

Umm...a VGA cable is for connecting computer monitors to the PC. You have absolutely no clue about anything regarding computers to make such a ridiculous mistake.

Laptops are not pointless with no Internet. Also network and network cables do not require Internet access surprisingly.

The fact that I have to explain this to you is proof enough that at a minimum you are plain wrong...

Originally posted by stealthyone

Firefight - no
Asassination - yes

Look at the photos, where is there any body damage? They are all headshots. Some look to even be from behind as there is no damage to to face or side of the head visible.

There was no firefight, none at all. If they were resisting, there would not be all headshots in my opinion.

I and others see marks indicative of possible entry wounds. Highly likely they were shot facing the SEALS teams as their positions and the blood pools seem to indicate large exit wounds from the back of the head/neck in addition to body shots.

Entry wounds are typically a lot smaller than exit wounds. If they were shot in the back of the head they would most likely be lying on their faces or sides and have very nasty open facial wounds. Also how easy is it to sneak up and shoot four people in the back of the head without any of them turning to face you. I tend to believe they were shot in the front or side and the evidence seems to confirm that. It's possible of course they were shot multiple times (likely actually) so a wound to the back of the head might be possible as well.

I agree, there probably wasn't much of a firefight, but I'd hardly call it an assassination. More like taking all precautions and just shooting them as they scrambled to either run away or get weapons. Keep in mind how tense of a scene that must have been in the dead of night.

Originally posted by monkofmimir

This kind of begs the question, what happened.

As I underrstand it, they stormed the place and killed everyone inside, then they took only one(some?) of the bodies for a sea burial but left the rest behind. then announced they'd killed osama.

Every honest senario I can play out in my mind as to why they would take osama's body to despose but not these mens fails.

either the men incharge of this operation were bizarly and illogically moronic or this is a conspiracy.

You have a very limited imagination. But that's kind of typical...

It's unfathomable to you that the U.S.A. would ONLY take the body of the most wanted man in the world and not the three other nobodies in a helicopter that has a weight capacity given one helicopter already failed?

Wow...

Originally posted by Evanescence

I can see your point, and if you have any experience in the field it trumps that fact I have none..

What I do find strange is as I was watching a 9/11 special on NatGeo (seems like everyone has a 9/11 special these days)... The covered a bit of the raid, and described it as a "45 Minute Firefight".

Is this bad info? Disinfo? Was this thrown together at the immediate onset of the raid and based it upon what was known at the time?

I have seen non other corroborating evidence that there was any firefight, let alone a "45 minute firefight".