Osama bin Laden is Dead

[Oregonaut]

Bury him at Gitmo, see if Al-Qaeda will invest in a Navy.

I imagine they decided to bury him at sea when they dusted of the "What to do when you kill Bin Laden, by Colin Powell" manual and skipped to the end. It just seems like the kind of thing someone thought up a while ago as the least-bad solution.

And what better solution for his body? Everest and Antarctica are fun mental images, but hauling his corpse up everest or across the arctic ice shelves would be time consuming and expensive, not to mention internationally controversial (I'm sure the Nepalese and Chinese governments would have a few choice words about interring the world's most wanted terrorist in their territory).

... And Gitmo? Are you -trying- to piss off the large portions of the middle east, Africa and Indonesia that saw him as a freedom fighter?

The body was baggage, and nobody wanted to have to put it on ice to ferry it somewhere around the world. I see no problem with his body being Cthulhu-treats.

The ship would have had a freezer for bodies.

[Angua]

I rather think they would have preferred to bury (or whatever - cremation works too) the body themselves. So, they should be happy that they don't have it because otherwise the US military would have decided to desecrate it (which would be pretty bad anyway). Sure, the US doesn't want somewhere for the extremists to go (though I don't really see why they [the extremists] can't make a memorial or something - a lot of Christians manage to honour Jesus without knowing where he was buried), but surely you can see how dumping a body in the ocean might not go down well with the family of the deceased.

[sourmìlk]

I rather think they would have preferred to bury (or whatever - cremation works too) the body themselves. So, they should be happy that they don't have it because otherwise the US military would have decided to desecrate it (which would be pretty bad anyway). Sure, the US doesn't want somewhere for the extremists to go (though I don't really see why they [the extremists] can't make a memorial or something - a lot of Christians manage to honour Jesus without knowing where he was buried), but surely you can see how dumping a body in the ocean might not go down well with the family of the deceased.

You would be surprised how much a body matters to some people. It's the reason why, hundreds of years after the war, Oliver Cromwell's head's location is known by only two people.

[Aikanaro]

The reason for burying him somewhere hard to get to was because for us, it's a one-time expense. For AQ and other organizations, it's one they have to pay again and again and again, every time they want to make a pilgrimage, with their less advanced resources. Couple this with just the random lone-wolf types who want to make a pilgrimage before they do something crazy, and the odds of them dying off along the way.....

It was half-joking.

[IcedT]

I'm with Heisenberg on this one. I think we buried him at sea because any tomb or headstone we put up for the guy would be constantly vandalized and desecrated. I mean, if extremists want a shrine to him, they can just... build a fucking shrine to him? Anywhere? Even in multiple places? And I'm reasonably sure that the people who think he was a bastard greatly outnumber the people who saw him as a hero anyway, so even if the shrine/desecration options were equivalent, there'd still probably be more desecration than respect.

[jestingrabbit]

Probably the most sensible place they could have buried him, logistically and practically, was Diego Garcia. That would have almost certainly ended in desecration of the corpse.

[Zamfir]

What was wrong with an anonymous grave? There was a bit of an excuse how burial at sea is a muslim custom, but that's hardly true outside of exceptional circumstances. That made it the sort of action that alienates normal muslims, for little gain.

[Angua]

I'm with Heisenberg on this one. I think we buried him at sea because any tomb or headstone we put up for the guy would be constantly vandalized and desecrated. I mean, if extremists want a shrine to him, they can just... build a fucking shrine to him? Anywhere? Even in multiple places? And I'm reasonably sure that the people who think he was a bastard greatly outnumber the people who saw him as a hero anyway, so even if the shrine/desecration options were equivalent, there'd still probably be more desecration than respect.

Surely if we had given the body to the family, then they could have worried about the desecration problem. The family had no say in this process - the US military decided how to dispose of their father without even consulting them

How annoyed would you be if an American soldier was killed in combat, and the enemy decided to throw him into the ocean because they couldn't bury him without the people in that country desecrating his grave.

[Dream]

Apparently in Saudi, his particular sect don't like marked graves. They see it as a form of idolatry. By burying at sea, the US could follow through an entirely proper burial program without having to either provocatively bury him somewhere unmarked, but known to some small number of people who did the burying, or risk enhancing his martyr status by ignoring his presumed religious desire by marking his grave in somewhere secure, like a military base.

How annoyed would you be if an American soldier was killed in combat, and the enemy decided to throw him into the ocean because they couldn't bury him without the people in that country desecrating his grave.

If they were sincere, if they had good reason to believe the desecration would happen, and if the proper religious observance took place, that would be fine by me. I'd like everybody to keep bodies for repatriation, but considering how ugly war often gets, I can see a situation where that isn't as good an idea as burial at sea.

[Oregonaut]

Apparently in Saudi, his particular sect don't like marked graves. They see it as a form of idolatry. By burying at sea, the US could follow through an entirely proper burial program without having to either provocatively bury him somewhere unmarked, but known to some small number of people who did the burying, or risk enhancing his martyr status by ignoring his presumed religious desire by marking his grave in somewhere secure, like a military base.

How annoyed would you be if an American soldier was killed in combat, and the enemy decided to throw him into the ocean because they couldn't bury him without the people in that country desecrating his grave.

If they were sincere, if they had good reason to believe the desecration would happen, and if the proper religious observance took place, that would be fine by me. I'd like everybody to keep bodies for repatriation, but considering how ugly war often gets, I can see a situation where that isn't as good an idea as burial at sea.

QFT.

[Dream]

Question: They had a customary 24 hours to get the body into the water. As soon as the death was confirmed, why didn't a US diplomat knock on the doors of a few close bin Laden family members and say, "Your Dad's dead. Funeral in 14 hours. Come with me if you want to attend." Maybe a religious leader or two also, though presumably the man's own sect would have nothing to do with the whole thing. I don't see why the family couldn't have been involved in a passive capacity. Imagine the propaganda victory if the on-side members of the bin Laden clan started telling people about the careful observance and sensitive handling of the funeral. Like the Pakistani agreement for the unilateral use of force within their territory, this could have been worked out years ago, in consultation with the family, and would have knocked all of this teeth gnashing on the head immediately.

[Oregonaut]

Where were his sons again?

[broken_escalator]

As for Osama's son Omar, "He is believed to now live in Qatar with a British wife." The article I pulled that tidbit from isn't really unbiased at all, so take what you will from it.

[IcedT]

Surely if we had given the body to the family, then they could have worried about the desecration problem. The family had no say in this process - the US military decided how to dispose of their father without even consulting them

My understanding is that he's been thoroughly disowned by his family. Doesn't make it right that they weren't consulted, but I think it's unlikely that they would have taken much interest.

How annoyed would you be if an American soldier was killed in combat, and the enemy decided to throw him into the ocean because they couldn't bury him without the people in that country desecrating his grave.

Actually, not very. I don't think burial at sea is a bad way to go, but I can't speak for anyone else in that regard.

[broken_escalator]

His family as far as parents and siblings go have disowned him and probably want to distance themselves from Osama as much as possible.

However, at least one of his sons has been very public about his distaste for how things went down. Last I heard he questions why they couldn't have taken him to trial, why they had to shoot some of the people they did, and whether or not Osama is actually dead. The article I linked talked about it a little bit. I think hes trying to get the Hague or the UN to investigate?

[Dark567]

How annoyed would you be if an American soldier was killed in combat, and the enemy decided to throw him into the ocean because they couldn't bury him without the people in that country desecrating his grave.

Actually, not very. I don't think burial at sea is a bad way to go, but I can't speak for anyone else in that regard.

Compared to slowly sawing off our soldiers heads and then desecrating the body, I wished Al-Qaeda would do burials at sea instead.

[LaserGuy]

In a related story, noted terrorist Obi-Wan Kenobi was also killed this week.

[Radical_Initiator]

In a related story, noted terrorist Obi-Wan Kenobi was also killed this week.

Old news. Happened a long time ago...

[Dauric]

In a related story, noted terrorist Obi-Wan Kenobi was also killed this week.

Old news. Happened a long time ago...

But it happened so far far away that we're only getting the news now.

The comments on that page are great though.

[Zamfir]

This was my favourite:

Why won't lord Vader show us HIS body?!

[KrO2]

The AP says that according to Bin Laden's journal, he was still in command of Al Qaida. I hope this is true, because it means they're without a leader and we've accomplished something beyond a moral and motivational victory. But still--no named sources.

[LtNOWIS]

Plus, where is "somewhere extremists couldn't get to"? Some of these extremists have a fair amount of money, and pretty much most places on land are accessible, with the possible exception of dropping him in the middle of the Himalayas (maybe not a bad idea) or sticking him under the floorboards of Longwood House. If it can be reached, it's possible someone will try to bring him back. Then, you have to think about whether it's worth guarding the site. Or, on the opposite side of the coin, as you mentioned, if you leave him on land, it's just as possible that someone will try to find his remains and do something to them (I might suggest you can't really "desecrate" such a man's remains more than his soul did while he was alive). Deep ocean fixes both problems.

One idea would have been to bury him on an inaccessible island that we own. Perhaps Jarvis Island, best known for Guano mining. It's still on land, but it's pretty hard to make a shrine there. The only problem is that someone could still grab a boat and repatriate the body, unless it was sealed in concrete Eva Peron-style.


Anyways, apparently Senator Inhofe hasseen the photos, along with House Intelligence committee members Mike Rogers and Michele Bachmann. Key quote: “It was hard to tell if the bullet went through his ear and out the eye socket or vice versa. There was head matter, appearing to be brains, coming out of the socket.”

[Radical_Initiator]

He had a salt-and-pepper beard, his chest was exposed and he was wearing an “undergarment.”

Bin Laden was a secret Mormon?

[LaserGuy]

He had a salt-and-pepper beard, his chest was exposed and he was wearing an “undergarment.”

Bin Laden was a secret Mormon?

No, people wearing the Mormon undergarment are immune to bullets.

[broken_escalator]

Haha, I like this quote:

“There was no doubt before” that bin Laden was dead, “but now there is no doubt,” Inhofe said.

[Zamfir]

I think one of the main lessons has been that assault teams need more training in media-friendly shooting. Don't aim for the head when you still need to take pictures afterwards.

[Eyat]

I think one of the main lessons has been that assault teams need more training in media-friendly shooting. Don't aim for the head when you still need to take pictures afterwards.

They needed the extra points to level.

[SummerGlauFan]

Clearly, the best solution for the body would have been to go Reaver and display it on the hull of a U.S. warship...

[el_loco_avs]

Well. That's retaliation bombing number one. 80 dead.

[Box Boy]

Well. That's retaliation bombing number one. 80 dead.

100 injured as well, and the death toll is expected to increase.

Fuck.

[Randomizer]

Link?

Where? By who? How do we know it's retaliation and not part of the normal course of the ongoing wars we're engaged in?

[Box Boy]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/ma ... stan-bombs

[el_loco_avs]

Link?

Where? By who? How do we know it's retaliation and not part of the normal course of the ongoing wars we're engaged in?

Should've posted a link, my bad. I just read the news from a dutch source and didn't think about finding one in english.

This fucking sucks, although it's pretty much to be expected. The question is how much more is to come. And where will the blame fall in the eyes of those affected?

[LtNOWIS]

Deadly terror attacks are sadly routine in Pakistan, although that one's especially bad.

[Chen]

Considering the number of bombings and other terrorist acts that have been going on in Pakistan just this year this does just seem like par for the course. Even if Bin Laden hadn't been found and killed I don't think bombings in Pakistan would have stopped.

[Dauric]

Considering the number of bombings and other terrorist acts that have been going on in Pakistan just this year this does just seem like par for the course. Even if Bin Laden hadn't been found and killed I don't think bombings in Pakistan would have stopped.

This does seem like a "Repackaging" job for an otherwise typical bombing. Take a normal bombing, add a spokesman on CNN claiming it is "Retaliation for Osama's Shooting", target completely the wrong group of people for an actual retaliation (considering the Pakistani army was completely unaware of the operation until it was well underway), and continue bombing as normal.

[Oregonaut]

The only way it could have been more bass-ackwards was if they bombed themselves in retaliation.

[Hawknc]

On a (slightly) lighter note, Al-Qaeda apparently had a proposal to modify trucks to mow down pedestrians in various cities, which bin Laden rejected because of its "indiscriminate slaughter" (link).

[Oregonaut]

We don't mindlessly kill people in my terrorist organization, damn it. We mindfully kill people. Someone shoot this guy.

[Chen]

On a (slightly) lighter note, Al-Qaeda apparently had a proposal to modify trucks to mow down pedestrians in various cities, which bin Laden rejected because of its "indiscriminate slaughter" (link).

That seems a tad inconsistent. Bombing planes or running them into buildings is pretty indiscriminate too. I gotta wonder at the effectiveness of cars with swords on them. Cars are pretty good at killing without adding blades to them. Seems like a bit of overkill.