Photo of bin Laden???? When??

[Dlbdonn]

The thing that bothers me the most about all of this is that so many are lining up on the opposite side of where they would probably be if the other sides leader was in place.

 

I disagreed with Bush going into Iraq and I disagree with Obama going into Libya. I have seen so many people here and elsewhere who supported Bush for Iraq and railed against Obama for Libya, also people who railed against Bush for Iraq but supported Obama for Libya. IMO you should have been for both or against both.

 

I did not think that pics from Abu Ghaib should be released and I don't think pics of Bin Ladin should be released. Libs were calling for the release of A.G. photos and cons were against it. Now with OBL pics we have the opposite. And, IMHO it only because of who is or is not POTUS.

 

You either believe in something or you don't. Too many folks out there who are justifying their beliefs.

Finally the truth from someone on this board !!

[jericho]

Good for you why don't you post them then .

 

boo hoo, sorry no one feels for you. Obama only invited 50 select families for the WTC event. Does he think killing Bin Laden and laying a wreath is going to help the families. He is doing it for his own publicity.

 

The pict will eventually come out.

[mcpapa]

The thing that bothers me the most about all of this is that so many are lining up on the opposite side of where they would probably be if the other sides leader was in place.

 

I disagreed with Bush going into Iraq and I disagree with Obama going into Libya. I have seen so many people here and elsewhere who supported Bush for Iraq and railed against Obama for Libya, also people who railed against Bush for Iraq but supported Obama for Libya. IMO you should have been for both or against both.

 

I did not think that pics from Abu Ghaib should be released and I don't think pics of Bin Ladin should be released. Libs were calling for the release of A.G. photos and cons were against it. Now with OBL pics we have the opposite. And, IMHO it only because of who is or is not POTUS.

 

You either believe in something or you don't. Too many folks out there who are justifying their beliefs.

 

Spot on.

[True blue (and gold)]

The thing that bothers me the most about all of this is that so many are lining up on the opposite side of where they would probably be if the other sides leader was in place.

 

I disagreed with Bush going into Iraq and I disagree with Obama going into Libya. I have seen so many people here and elsewhere who supported Bush for Iraq and railed against Obama for Libya, also people who railed against Bush for Iraq but supported Obama for Libya. IMO you should have been for both or against both.

 

I did not think that pics from Abu Ghaib should be released and I don't think pics of Bin Ladin should be released. Libs were calling for the release of A.G. photos and cons were against it. Now with OBL pics we have the opposite. And, IMHO it only because of who is or is not POTUS.

 

You either believe in something or you don't. Too many folks out there who are justifying their beliefs.

 

Finally the truth from someone on this board !!

 

Spot on.

 

:thumb:

[SportsGuy41017]

The thing that bothers me the most about all of this is that so many are lining up on the opposite side of where they would probably be if the other sides leader was in place.

 

I disagreed with Bush going into Iraq and I disagree with Obama going into Libya. I have seen so many people here and elsewhere who supported Bush for Iraq and railed against Obama for Libya, also people who railed against Bush for Iraq but supported Obama for Libya. IMO you should have been for both or against both.

 

I did not think that pics from Abu Ghaib should be released and I don't think pics of Bin Ladin should be released. Libs were calling for the release of A.G. photos and cons were against it. Now with OBL pics we have the opposite. And, IMHO it only because of who is or is not POTUS.

 

You either believe in something or you don't. Too many folks out there who are justifying their beliefs.

Agreed! For the most part! I am a Democrat, and think we needed to go into Iraq! We may have said it for the wrong reasons, but Saddam needed to go! A little bit before we went back into Iraq, the human shields who then left because they were being placed in military areas, said such people as taxi drivers were telling them to tell Bush to hurry up and come get Saddam! Plus who can forget the scene after we took over Baghdad! The problem was the insurgents came in from other countries. My problem with how we went into Iraq was we needed a lot more troops, General Shinseki said this from the begining, and he was worried we would not have enough troops as well as protecting the borders and key locations and preventing looting. He was basically told to retire as he really let it out there on his thoughts. We were just not as prepared as we should have been. But I do think we needed to go into Iraq! I also think we should have went into Sudan.

[jericho]

There are a lot of bad leaders who need to go, I just wish that it didnt always seem like the US was the only country trying to get rid of them. We can not be the only police force in the world.

 

As for the picture of OBL, I do not need to see it to believe the truth, although I would like to see it, but do not need to see it for proof. UBL is dead.

[coldweatherfan]

Agreed! For the most part! I am a Democrat, and think we needed to go into Iraq! We may have said it for the wrong reasons, but Saddam needed to go! A little bit before we went back into Iraq, the human shields who then left because they were being placed in military areas, said such people as taxi drivers were telling them to tell Bush to hurry up and come get Saddam! Plus who can forget the scene after we took over Baghdad! The problem was the insurgents came in from other countries. My problem with how we went into Iraq was we needed a lot more troops, General Shinseki said this from the begining, and he was worried we would not have enough troops as well as protecting the borders and key locations and preventing looting. He was basically told to retire as he really let it out there on his thoughts. We were just not as prepared as we should have been. But I do think we needed to go into Iraq! I also think we should have went into Sudan.

 

That is what I'm saying. You believe what you believe, and it didn't matter who was in office. That is how it should be.

[Colonels_Wear_Blue]

boo hoo, sorry no one feels for you. Obama only invited 50 select families for the WTC event. Does he think killing Bin Laden and laying a wreath is going to help the families. He is doing it for his own publicity.

 

The pict will eventually come out.

 

Fact is, Obama is a politician, and as a politician, he has a certain amount of expectation on him that he should appear publicly. In the light of the fact that he just gave orders for a mission to be carried out that killed Bin Laden (the man responsible for giving the order to carry out a mission that killed those people's family member), I don't think it's anything but appropriate that Obama made an appearance at Ground Zero.

 

Make no mistake, I'm not an Obama fan whatsoever. However, I would expect any President to do the same thing he did. He exacted revenge for the dead and their loved ones on the man who was behind their murder, and he was going back to spend a little time telling them that he has done what he could for them. I wouldn't think this to be much different from a police officer going and talking to the family of a murder victim once the murderer has been brought to justice. The fact that Obama is the President of the United States is what caused the publicity. Especially in the day and age of 24/7 news coverage, the President can hardly do anything without having cameras and live news feeds covering it. Give him a break.

[jericho]

I guess his "Spike the ball" wasnt so spikey after all with the WTC families. I mean as much as Obama is defended on this site amazes me at the apparent lack of knowledge by those defending him.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1384070/Osama-Bin-Laden-death-9-11-families-angry-Obamas-Ground-Zero-ceremony.html

[Colonels_Wear_Blue]

I guess his "Spike the ball" wasnt so spikey after all with the WTC families. I mean as much as Obama is defended on this site amazes me at the apparent lack of knowledge by those defending him.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1384070/Osama-Bin-Laden-death-9-11-families-angry-Obamas-Ground-Zero-ceremony.html

 

There's no way that the President is going to be able to please everyone in the United States with his every move. Are you really surprised that, especially in the current extraordinarily polarized political climate, people are upset with his actions regarding 9/11 - one of the most universally impacting events in American history?

 

I, for one, (as a staunch critic of Obama) didn't have any problems with his speech on May 2nd, or the way he refused to make a scene when being poked and prodded by the loved one of a 9/11 victim. As a matter of fact, I would say that her actions were more in the wrong when she tried to use a memorial service of sorts to be her own personal soapbox.

[Voice of Reason]

Well, I guess we can see why our elected officials are so partisan and divisive. If these people are going to be that way, then how could we expect someone whose job is on the line to be any different. I lost a lot of respect for some of the 9/11 members as I read that article. I am sure if Obama didn't reach out to them, we would be reading an article denouncing Obama for ignoring them.

[jericho]

Danged if you do, danged if you dont.

[westsider]

Some of the same people criticizing Obama for not releasing the photo would find some reason to hammer him if he did.

 

Personally, I don't care either way because I have no burning desire to see it. There are plenty of good reasons not to release it, more than there are to let the public see it.

 

Bottom line ... justice was served.

[SportsGuy41017]

Well, I guess we can see why our elected officials are so partisan and divisive. If these people are going to be that way, then how could we expect someone whose job is on the line to be any different. I lost a lot of respect for some of the 9/11 members as I read that article. I am sure if Obama didn't reach out to them, we would be reading an article denouncing Obama for ignoring them.

Same here. And now we know why 10 years later there is still nothing completed on the site! There were always some of them stepping in the way to move forward.

 

She was making a memorial service political, as CWB stated, using the situation for her own personal soapbox.

[westsider]

The thing that bothers me the most about all of this is that so many are lining up on the opposite side of where they would probably be if the other sides leader was in place.

 

I disagreed with Bush going into Iraq and I disagree with Obama going into Libya. I have seen so many people here and elsewhere who supported Bush for Iraq and railed against Obama for Libya, also people who railed against Bush for Iraq but supported Obama for Libya. IMO you should have been for both or against both.

One difference ... we declared a full-scale war on Iraq. Our actions in Libya don't meet the same standard.

 

I did not think that pics from Abu Ghaib should be released and I don't think pics of Bin Ladin should be released. Libs were calling for the release of A.G. photos and cons were against it. Now with OBL pics we have the opposite. And, IMHO it only because of who is or is not POTUS.

I don't think the situations are comparable here, either. At Abu Ghraib, it was our wrongdoing, and there were crimes committed. That isn't the case with the raid on bin Laden's hideaway.