Osama Bin Laden reported dead

[ginnyfizz]

I think you miss my point. I didn't say that it was effective, and I didn't say that two wrongs make a right. I make the point that it is ridiculous to say that Dresden was a war crime when the Luftwaffe equally flattened British cities. And also that the attitude of the British public was mostly indifferent to what was going on in Dresden, with some actually expressing the sentiment that if they couldn't get the enemy on the battlefield, they'd get him in his bed. Particularly since Hitler was at the time lobbing not very accurate rockets with scant regard to civilian targets. With that wonderful hindsight that sounds appalling. An attitude perhaps akin to the celebrating of the death of Bin Laden.

 

Incidentally, Dresden may not have been a military target per se but it had factories turned over to war production and was a communications centre. so it not being of strategic importance is questionable. Also Churchill, great man though he was, was a politician and got rather sensitive to a spot of the usual journalistic hyperbole and questions in the House. It was then that he started to distance himself. He sent a memo to Harris to which Harris replied rather robustly, and was supported by the Chiefs of Staff who actually got Churchill to withdraw.

[dazzerfong]

I think you miss my point. I didn't say that it was effective, and I didn't say that two wrongs make a right. I make the point that it is ridiculous to say that Dresden was a war crime when the Luftwaffe equally flattened British cities. And also that the attitude of the British public was mostly indifferent to what was going on in Dresden, with some actually expressing the sentiment that if they couldn't get the enemy on the battlefield, they'd get him in his bed. Particularly since Hitler was at the time lobbing not very accurate rockets with scant regard to civilian targets. With that wonderful hindsight that sounds appalling. An attitude perhaps akin to the celebrating of the death of Bin Laden.

 

Incidentally, Dresden may not have been a military target per se but it had factories turned over to war production and was a communications centre. so it not being of strategic importance is questionable. Also Churchill, great man though he was, was a politician and got rather sensitive to a spot of the usual journalistic hyperbole and questions in the House. It was then that he started to distance himself. He sent a memo to Harris to which Harris replied rather robustly, and was supported by the Chiefs of Staff who actually got Churchill to withdraw.

 

To be honest, I have to both disagree and agree with both of you.

 

Yes, Germany did flatten cities (a more accurate term would be bombed, not flatten), but no-where near the scale of Dresden (if I'm not wrong, around 25,000 casualties), a lot more than the Battle of Britain's casualties. Dresden was 90% destroyed, a lot more than England itself.

 

I know you have British ancestral roots, but you must accept that it is a war time scenario where impulsive actions are being made every second. But, to defend you, it's nothing compared to Josef Mengiel.....

[Harbringe]

I think you miss my point. I didn't say that it was effective, and I didn't say that two wrongs make a right. I make the point that it is ridiculous to say that Dresden was a war crime when the Luftwaffe equally flattened British cities. And also that the attitude of the British public was mostly indifferent to what was going on in Dresden, with some actually expressing the sentiment that if they couldn't get the enemy on the battlefield, they'd get him in his bed. Particularly since Hitler was at the time lobbing not very accurate rockets with scant regard to civilian targets. With that wonderful hindsight that sounds appalling. An attitude perhaps akin to the celebrating of the death of Bin Laden.

 

Incidentally, Dresden may not have been a military target per se but it had factories turned over to war production and was a communications centre. so it not being of strategic importance is questionable. Also Churchill, great man though he was, was a politician and got rather sensitive to a spot of the usual journalistic hyperbole and questions in the House. It was then that he started to distance himself. He sent a memo to Harris to which Harris replied rather robustly, and was supported by the Chiefs of Staff who actually got Churchill to withdraw.

 

To be honest, I have to both disagree and agree with both of you.

 

Yes, Germany did flatten cities (a more accurate term would be bombed, not flatten), but no-where near the scale of Dresden (if I'm not wrong, around 25,000 casualties), a lot more than the Battle of Britain's casualties. Dresden was 90% destroyed, a lot more than England itself.

 

I know you have British ancestral roots, but you must accept that it is a war time scenario where impulsive actions are being made every second. But, to defend you, it's nothing compared to Josef Mengiel.....

 

More like 100,000 plus ,even the atomic bombs failed to kill as many<br><br>Well apparently by a report put out  by the city of Dresden (2010 Report) they can confirm no more than 25,000 people died in the Dresden Bombing , I stand self corrected on the number,mind you also noted in report was that the industrial infrastructure that was there suffered much less damage than the populated areas.<br>

Edited May 8, 2011 by Harbringe

[ginnyfizz]

Yes, Germany did flatten cities (a more accurate term would be bombed, not flatten), but no-where near the scale of Dresden (if I'm not wrong, around 25,000 casualties), a lot more than the Battle of Britain's casualties. Dresden was 90% destroyed, a lot more than England itself.

I know you have British ancestral roots, but you must accept that it is a war time scenario where impulsive actions are being made every second. But, to defend you, it's nothing compared to Josef Mengiel.....

 

Actually some of the British cities were every bit as badly damaged as Dresden was, and flatten WAS the term to describe what happened to cities like Plymouth, for example. I have also repeatedly made clear that it is not the fact that both sides bombed each other is what I take issue with, it is the fact that Dresden is called by many a war crime, when the blitz in London, Coventry, Sheffield, Plymouth et al isn't.

[SilverDNA]

Yes, Germany did flatten cities (a more accurate term would be bombed, not flatten), but no-where near the scale of Dresden (if I'm not wrong, around 25,000 casualties), a lot more than the Battle of Britain's casualties. Dresden was 90% destroyed, a lot more than England itself.

I know you have British ancestral roots, but you must accept that it is a war time scenario where impulsive actions are being made every second. But, to defend you, it's nothing compared to Josef Mengiel.....

 

Actually some of the British cities were every bit as badly damaged as Dresden was, and flatten WAS the term to describe what happened to cities like Plymouth, for example. I have also repeatedly made clear that it is not the fact that both sides bombed each other is what I take issue with, it is the fact that Dresden is called by many a war crime, when the blitz in London, Coventry, Sheffield, Plymouth et al isn't.

Oh let us speak of Operation Gomorrah and Operation Chastise and the Battle of the Ruhr Campain .... and by fact more German cities where bombed during WW2 than British... if this is a childish comparison battle ... and what does it have to do with OBL ? Not much, but if you look at the situation. You might take more notice what brought Hitler to reign in the 1st place and see the duality of history repeating itself...in more than one STRANGE ways...

I noticed you all see the only what you want to see but not what you don't want to see... better get back on YOUR topic

Edited May 8, 2011 by SilverDNA

[ginnyfizz]

Since I have repeatedly referenced and compared how the attitude prevalent during WWII, of one enemy to another as regards the business of death and destruction, relates to how people are dancing in the streets about the death of Osama bin Laden, your eruption baffles me. Please don't ask me to look up history, I lived in Plymouth for some years and I can SEE how few pre-1939 buildings are there, for example. It is nothing to do with childish comparison, but it IS a fact that not only were British strategic targets bombed, but Hitler ordered the Baedeker raids to destroy cities for no other reason than their beauty (Exeter, for example). Both sides did it, but we only hear of Dresden as a war crime.

 

I need no lectures on what Hitler brought to bear, since two members of my family were killed in action fighting him and some more distant relatives were destroyed like vermin by him in the camps and death pits. To bring it back to Bin Laden, shooting him in the head has gone some way precisely to prevent history repeating itself, to prevent Bin Laden becoming an Arab Hitler and gaining actual power. We get involved in Middle Eastern conflicts, rightly or wrongly, to take out dictators and yes, it goes horribly wrong and we are sometimes far too selective about which dictators we allow and which we don't. But if you are trying to say that the current Western alliance bears any resemblance to Hitler, then i do not know where you are looking.

[SilverDNA]

You might follow this : "Germans in Czechoslovakia"

Waht is not mentioned there is that the fleeing to Germany consisted mostly of old, women and children there where instances where Czech Double Decker's throwing Granades on the fleeing people aside from murder and an rape witch was LATER legalized by the Potsdam Agreement...looking away in this the allied did ! My grandmother was in such a convoy one dud grenade landed 2m away from here while she was lying below here cart of belongings.... oh and see how the lawsuit was bended to deal with it ?

I personalty agree the Intrusion upon Pakistan airspace witch resulted in the killing of OBL shall be measured by the UN and and an independent law ethics commission...otherwise America cant trust its enemy's more than it's allies anymore because and unpredictable allied can be worse than and downright enemy or vice versa in the opposite direction American cant be trusted I see the different angles and there the political damage went now with more actions against international law bending and human rights violations there will be still the Terror in this world because there is no end to it witch ever the side is.. and it is strange coincidence that always when it is a time where it gets narrow for an US president measures that are taken to create through political means a diversion that plays in to the hands of that party since I don't believe in strange coincidence .... I remain to have serve doubts about all things in question and those questions have to be answered by independent installed officials

... so consider me neutral as the Swiss or Liechtenstein in that matter...till we get a word on the matter of independent Investigation Commission(s)

Edited May 8, 2011 by SilverDNA

[ginnyfizz]

And what a waste of time that would be, commissions here and commissions there. I hadn't noticed either the French or the Israelis waiting to ask permission before taking out terrorists, some of whom (in the case where the French took out some environmentalists) were nowhere near as "Bang to rights" guilty and dangerous as Bin Laden. As for commissions after the event as in this case, why? Do you want to have to have a public debate before action in these cases in the future, thereby giving the Osamas of the future chance to leg it and hide again? Aut feri nil feriare. The USA did the right thing, they are bungling the aftermath, but the fact is that the Pakistanis are more humiliated by the exposure of the fact that they failed to nail Bin Laden themselves (and the fact that it has been exposed as inconceivable that no-one high up there knew he was in Abbotabad), than they are angry about the incursion.

 

No, cutting off one of the Hydra's heads will not stop the others plotting evil and executing it. It has stopped this particular one though, and it has sent a message that the so called soft and decadent West are prepared to be ruthless, and disregard the Queensberry rules and hit below the belt at times. Or even a couple of feet above it in Osama's case.

[SilverDNA]

"Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges" / "In times of war, the law falls silent." Acceptable? Why have international laws when they are only lips services...I still say let the experts have their word on the matter.. sometimes that what not goes to the public is more interesting than than what is worked out before the public curtain... And I can only speculate but openly i will not do it, so i remain highly doubtful...

On the other hand giving OBL martyrdom was way too much. It gave the recruitment of Tali ban and Al Quadia a boost.. I would have preferred having OBL (especially the those who lost a family member in 9/11 to spit down on him) in a trial. that would have ended the myth of Al Quadia in the Islamic countries and give a boost to the creditability of America's righteousness. and see the rift in the Eu Politics ... most politicians agree on three things

1. Getting OBL was good!

2. How it was done is the great bias on more than one level that is still on the debates here. (even a symbolic charge against Merkle was made by"§ 140: Rewarding and approving crimes. Outlaws rewarding or approving of crimes "publicly, in a meeting or through dissemination of writings […], and in a manner that is capable of disturbing the public peace". This only applies to crimes where failure to report is an offense (§ 138), among them preparation of a war of aggression (§ 80), murder, robbery, treason, and counterfeiting money." by a judge.)

3. Most agree that the American public reaction was ... (put euphemistic) not well.

Edited May 8, 2011 by SilverDNA

[Lisnpuppy]

Well Silver I am glad you were able to dust off your Latin and show it off for us, but you have wasted it on me as I am too tired to figure it out.

 

Now if you think for a moment that the same people that will make him out to be a martyr will not also have made huge waves with him going through some trial and given him just as much focus and a possible pulpit on which to speak, then I have to ask...will you share what you been smoking?

 

The U.S. neither grains or loses credibility as compared to a trial as all would have cried foul from the moment the judge heard opening statements to the reading of a death sentence. Would those who lost loved ones on 9/11 have preferred this? I don't know but I certainly would not be so presumptuous as to say one way or another.

 

This world is not the same one as existed after WWII. Unlike Osama who admitted his deeds and was proud of them, the Nazi's denied, denied, denied to the end. If it wasn't for their fastidious paperwork I doubt many (of the few that stood trial) would have gotten any of their just desserts. If you also recall many Nazi's were taken by the United States away from persecution to gain intel of one sort or another which as horrid as it was, actually made a good deal of sense.

 

Only a long away 20/20 vision, looking back on these times will tell us if this was this best idea. Those that are bitching and moaning are the same ones that will cry to be saved when such a man darkens their doorstep. Like Ginny I am also glad that this particular serpent can no longer have any personal effect upon the world.