It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why I think announcing Bin Laden's death was a mistake.

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 9 2011 @ 03:00 PM
link   
With the treasure trove of materials that were gleaned at Bin Laden's "compound", I personally think that it was a HUGE mistake to announce that they got him, then also announce a huge intel find.

Had they covered it up and waited for a couple of weeks/months, the terrorists would not know that we had this information, and the CIA could then start picking people up, instead of them now running for cover.

I mean, I know this place would be running around like crazy trying to figure out what happened that night, but it certainly would have been better from an anti-terrorist angle.

Thoughts?




posted on May, 9 2011 @ 03:05 PM
link   
They just got rid of the goose that lays the golden egg. No Bin Laden means there is no reason to continue the wars. The wars were fought on a hazy reason to begin with, and now the mastermind is disposed of, why continue the fight?



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 03:10 PM
link   
I agree to extents.

If I were the president, at the very least, I may have made some sort of announcement that he was dead. Then tell everyone that we would release the details once the team had been debriefed and the report completed. I think they got their cart in front of the horses here and has led to too much speculation and backtracking, doing nothing but creating confusion, imagine if the Seal team operated like that. I am not saying the things they told us were lies, but more likely inaccurate and incomplete information. Doing it the way they did gave the MSM too much leeway for speculation. Or maybe I would not have said anything at all until the report was final.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by matadoor
 


It's all a big show done with no mistake. They needed support to add to their "Story" so people would believe it. Jusification for raising terror level and increasing security, it all part of the the build up for the second act of the story. They even found marijuana, so now all marijuana users support terrorism apparently. Back in the Clinton days he would have just took a hit and "not inhaled" and nothing would have been reported. So is this the first caught terrorist that smoked marijuana or is this just a convenient coincidence? The story just reeks of BS, like a bad reality TV show.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by mileslong54
 


They found pot at Bin Laden's compound? Had not seen that.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Skewed
 


I think I would have announced that a major blow to terrorism has taken place, and further news will be forthcoming once the details emerge.

Keep it vague.

Since Bin Laden only spoke to people through couriers, it would take the terrorists weeks to find out on their own. Imagine the number of terrorists they could find in that time.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by matadoor
 


Here's the Thread about it if your interested!

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by matadoor
 


From the pictures that I saw, it was growing on the outside of the wall with other small patches of crops.

There was not a lot of it from what I saw, also, other countries do not view marijuana like the US and does not go around up rooting every plant they come across.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by mileslong54
 


Oh man, you know, you just can't make up stuff like that!



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 05:12 PM
link   
There's a huge problem with that.

If they did not release the information, yet Al Jazeera released an announcement, THEN images of destroyed and modified blackhawks started showing up, there would be no way for the US Government to recover from that.

They had no choice but to tell the truth. And with an upcoming election, it sure doesn't hurt matters.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by matadoor
 


What seems backward to me is; Barack Obama claimed they would not reveal evidence, because they wished to remain civilised - They didn't want to promote the image as a trophy".

If they didn't want to cause incredible lashbacks from Osama's supporters world-wide, if they didn't want to create rage towards the U.S.....

....why did they even bother mentioning it?

To please the public? Should the U.S people be happy about revenge? Uncivilised, unlawful?

If the U.S and the "Western World" are so civilised surely the U.S should have been able to bring him back alive? Surely, THAT would be the civilised thing to do? And try him under a proper procedures? Or at least keep it quiet....

I'd like to get some other people's point of view because i'm from the United Kingdom so perhaps i don't have the best idea of what's going on.

In essence, i agree with the OP...
edit on 9/5/11 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)

edit on 9/5/11 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join