If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   With the help of high level Pakistani officials, Bin Laden hid in Pakistani cities except for 8 months after the 9-11 attacks. Thanks Pakistan   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 127
    More: Fail, Osama bin Laden, Pakistani, Pakistan, Pakistani officials, Lesson Learned, Abbottabad, Peshawar, fish food  
•       •       •

14686 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Apr 2012 at 2:32 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



127 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-05 03:54:05 PM
 
2012-04-05 03:54:11 PM
Shabash
I have to defend Pakistan here. That country is no more of a monolith than the U.S. is, and we're sharply divided in many areas. Internally, they have lots of different opinions and different ideas. But most of them are damned good people, just like most Americans.

Of course.

I truly don't believe any officials in the Pakistani government were officially helping UBL. Possibly a few unofficially, but as you can imagine, they have less control over their rogues there than we do.

That's harder to buy, but let me know what you think. My information is largely from the work of Pakistani journalist Ahmed Rashid, but he's far from the only one to assert that Pakistani intelligence aided and continues to aid the Taliban.

At the least some in Pakistani intelligence probably knew about OBL. It's well known that their intelligence service has been aiding the Taliban for many years and continues to do so. They welcomed Afghan Taliban fleeing across the border after the US invasion following 9/11 and provided safe haven and routes for those same Taliban to keep entering Afghanistan for attacks then withdrawing back to Pakistan to flee pursuit. You have to know that. They are playing both sides.

Now Pakistan has their own Taliban problem and they've been willing to fight against the Pakistani Taliban. At the same time they're still providing assistance to the Afghan Taliban.

We're stuck in the position of aiding a country who's intelligence service helps those who are attacking us in Afghanistan, but we won't stop the aid because we can't allow Pakistan to be taken over by the fundamentalists there.
 
2012-04-05 03:55:07 PM

Flakeloaf: Shabash: Pakistan is a country where money talks. And if a couple of bros pay enough rupees to construction workers, contractors, landlords, city officials, and town elders, they're going to successfully buy privacy in a house in an isolated lot, and minimize anyone snooping into their affairs who might suspect some "cousin" and his wives and kids who came to stay with them for a few months or years.

My own personal opinion follows:

And if Benazir Bhutto and the ISI pay enough rupees to to Mohd Omar so he and his band of idiots can take over some highways and lead a band of fundamentalist whackjobs from Pakistani madrassas to take over their poor cousin so the Afghans can continue being subhuman to Isbad, and they just happen to foster a relationship with UBL who happens to use some of their shared resources to murder a few thousand civilians...

How many times does money have to change hands before there's no more blood on it?


Banazir Butto is dead. Blown up by Muslim extremists.

Just how stupid are you?
 
2012-04-05 03:59:11 PM
starsmedia.ign.com
 
2012-04-05 04:06:54 PM
img824.imageshack.us
 
2012-04-05 04:08:09 PM
Yeah, i MIGHT agree with the statements of a few farkers here about supporting India instead of Pakistan, except for the fact that India is RIGHT ON CHINAS BORDER. How do you think THAT'LL work out?
 
2012-04-05 04:12:21 PM
Well, of course they did. CIA assets are far too valuable to allow to go unprotected, duh.
 
2012-04-05 04:13:56 PM

Rev.K: Yeah, that's a politically defensible idea with absolutely no threat of consequence whatsoever.


On the bright side, our friendship with India would shine brightly for the remainder of human civilization.
 
2012-04-05 04:18:14 PM

Philip J. Fry: [4.bp.blogspot.com image 565x635]

America lost its grip on reality.


lol.

This was supposedly built... by a nation who's national sport of choice is dragging a goat carcass behind a horse?

/insert "I don't think so, Tim" jpg here
 
2012-04-05 04:22:50 PM

MythDragon:


Came here for this. Thanks.
 
2012-04-05 04:23:21 PM

Rev.K: King Something: scorched earth, till salt into the farmlands, raze every building without letting people escape first, annihilate every last square inch of the country

Yeah, that's a politically defensible idea with absolutely no threat of consequence whatsoever.


The consequence is 190 million dead Pakistanis. I'm fine with that and taking my daily iodine pill. No one cries for Carthage, and they at least did shiat that was interesting. No one from the future will ever wonder what might have become of Pakistan.
 
2012-04-05 04:28:31 PM
Philip J. Fry
America lost its grip on reality.

I would like to see that image reworked to include Escher inspired staircases.
 
2012-04-05 04:31:31 PM
Subby: "Thanks Pakistan"

Thakistan.

img85.imageshack.us
 
2012-04-05 04:33:06 PM

gweilo8888:
Thakistan.


Stabbed-In-The-Backistan?
 
2012-04-05 04:35:04 PM
If theirs one thing the Bush Adminstration DID do, it was tighten up teh Canadien border, but might not have been enough. Secret OPS and takedowns of Pakistanis in major citys like Toronto would keep everyone safe from those natural born terrorists. Put 'em in Guano Bay, Cuba with no trial.
 
2012-04-05 04:35:25 PM
Personally thankful that those in this thread calling for the destruction of Pakistan have no say in the matter. Pretty sure that they are not serious (this IS Fark) but if any of them ARE serious they should seek help from mental health professionals and be kept away from sharp objects.
 
2012-04-05 04:40:13 PM

Smoking GNU: Yeah, i MIGHT agree with the statements of a few farkers here about supporting India instead of Pakistan, except for the fact that India is RIGHT ON CHINAS BORDER. How do you think THAT'LL work out?


If ever there was a country that needed a counterbalance in that region, it is China. Japan's economy is going to hell and they have not been a military power since WW2. It'll work out great if the two countries play nice together. MAD and all that.
 
2012-04-05 04:40:41 PM

umad: depmode98: Remember when Republicans had a shiatstorm when Obama said we'd unilaterally act within Pakistan if we had actionable intelligence? Yea. Bin Ladin would still be alive today if McCain was the president. If you're serious about being strong on terror, you have to vote for Democrats. Anything less is pandering bullshiat.

And who do we vote for if we think the WOT is a load of shiat?

I guess I'm just boned.


you could argue that the dems are killing less americans than the goptards were.
certainly spending less money.

do I feel safer with obama as prez? fark YES
would I have felt safe with mcpalin as prez? FARK NO
 
2012-04-05 04:43:10 PM

Philip J. Fry: Forgot a link where Rumsfeld endorsed the idea that there were multiple underground super fortresses (new window)


what did the bush administration know? and when??
how did obama have this great intel and then acted on it

did bush have similar intel and do nothing?
was he even ASKING the question "where ELSE could osama be hiding??"

farker wasted so many lives and so much time ...
 
2012-04-05 04:46:20 PM
Does anybody really think those douches in Pakistan are friends of the US, not that the anybody would ever listen to me, but I said for years he was in Pakistan. Christ a 3 year old could have figured it out. Not that the US disdn't know where he was I firmly believe they knew where he was, just that the politicians were playing footsy with each other and would not let special forces go get him. makes me sick that we have to play nice with any of these Dbag countries
 
2012-04-05 04:53:55 PM
So, why are we still in Afghanistan?
 
2012-04-05 04:55:22 PM
False flag.
 
2012-04-05 04:59:49 PM
Don't be so quick to judge, the problem was the intelligence shared with Pakistani officials being misleading or incomplete, especially the portrait of the target.

murphyod.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-04-05 05:09:02 PM

King Something: And thanks, Bush, as well, for giving up the search for him 2 or 3 months before bin Laden went into Pakistan.

/it's high time we evacuate the US Embassy in Islamabad and just go full Sherman And Nobunaga on Pakistan
//scorched earth, till salt into the farmlands, raze every building without letting people escape first, annihilate every last square inch of the country


I wonder why they weren't included in Bush's Axis of Weasles?
 
2012-04-05 05:11:07 PM

wee: Rev.K: Yeah, that's a politically defensible idea with absolutely no threat of consequence whatsoever.

Indeed. But I think it might be a nice time to stop giving those duplicitous bastards $3 billion a year in aid. We're basically paying the terrorists...


We r paying them to keep their nukes away from the crazies who would like to use them

Gotta be a better way
 
2012-04-05 05:18:56 PM
Pakistan hid Bin Laden so invade Iran. That's what Bush would do.
 
2012-04-05 05:28:56 PM

Flakeloaf: Picking a fight with a nuclear country never ends well. That's why we've had to spend the last decade trying to kill a snake by cutting pieces off of its tail.


A nuclear weapon is a lot easier to come by, apparently, then an effective means to deliver it. Of the 900 aircraft in the PAF, I don't think there are any capable of penetrating U.S. airspace while carrying a nuclear warhead.

There's also the issue of what size the warhead is. I'd imagine that their technology is likely not capable of "suitcase" nuke size.
 
2012-04-05 05:30:29 PM
The Pakistanis use Sunni terror groups as strategic assets. They are useful weapon systems to the Pakistanis. So that's why they interpreted the Bin Laden hit as follows:

Pakistan: "I has a top secrit weapon."
US: "*yoink!*"
Pakistan: "*frownie face*"

Pakistan is on Pakistan's side. Ditto with the US, China and India. Islamic terror groups are a very interesting and effective weapon system in Pakistan's arsenal. So, naturally, they're going to be protective of them. The US killing Bin Laden would be like the Pakistanis destroying a top secret US prototype weapon.

And about paying the Pakistanis to search for Bin Laden, some astute observer said this: "If we're paying the Pakistanis 10 billion a year to search for Bin Laden, why would they ever find him?"

So they pretty much had zero motivation to turn over Bin Laden, and in fact wanted to cultivate use of his organization/weapon system for their own purposes. And keep the search money coming.
 
2012-04-05 05:36:29 PM

foo monkey: Can we gtfo of there already? There is no reason for us to be there. None.


But terrorism!
 
2012-04-05 05:39:27 PM

Philip J. Fry: [4.bp.blogspot.com image 565x635]

America lost its grip on reality.


Damn, I need one of those for the zombie apocalypse.
 
2012-04-05 05:41:57 PM

JungleBoogie: The Pakistanis use Sunni terror groups as strategic assets. They are useful weapon systems to the Pakistanis


not to target you specifically... but i think we need to stop thinking of pakistan as a single political entity. pakistan, politically, is about 10 different countries with different goals, leadership and allegiances. the military alone is its own seperate government, and is split into several competing factions.
 
2012-04-05 05:43:33 PM

Flakeloaf: Sun Worshiping Dog Launcher: Either we can't keep this up due to the costs required to constantly start shiat, or someone is going to punch our collective ticket one of these days.

First the former, then the latter.

Picking a fight with a nuclear country never ends well. That's why we've had to spend the last decade trying to kill a snake by cutting pieces off of its tail.


North Korea and North Vietnam seem to have done OK.
 
2012-04-05 05:48:35 PM

wee: Rev.K: Yeah, that's a politically defensible idea with absolutely no threat of consequence whatsoever.

Indeed. But I think it might be a nice time to stop giving those duplicitous bastards $3 billion a year in aid. We're basically paying the terrorists...


The glass parking lot idea was more humane Letting everyone starve seems barbaric.
 
2012-04-05 06:01:57 PM
It's been said already but Pakistan is more worried about internal matters and is using the Taliban to offset indias influence in Afghanistan.

It goes without saying that it sure would be a disaster if any of the more fringe groups were to get their hands on pakistans nuclear material.

That being said, it sure would be nice if we didn't have to prop up their government
 
2012-04-05 06:10:48 PM

xevian: wee: Rev.K: Yeah, that's a politically defensible idea with absolutely no threat of consequence whatsoever.

Indeed. But I think it might be a nice time to stop giving those duplicitous bastards $3 billion a year in aid. We're basically paying the terrorists...

The glass parking lot idea was more humane Letting everyone starve seems barbaric.


Well then, they should probably learn how to support a population without the goodwill of other nations. Not trying to sound like a callus asshole but it's pretty obvious that if there ever is a world food crisis, the countries receiving aid will be the first ones to suffer and the hardest ones hit.
 
2012-04-05 06:19:57 PM

umad: depmode98: Remember when Republicans had a shiatstorm when Obama said we'd unilaterally act within Pakistan if we had actionable intelligence? Yea. Bin Ladin would still be alive today if McCain was the president. If you're serious about being strong on terror, you have to vote for Democrats. Anything less is pandering bullshiat.

And who do we vote for if we think the WOT is a load of shiat?

I guess I'm just boned.


Move to Sweden.
 
2012-04-05 06:43:39 PM

tlchwi02: JungleBoogie: The Pakistanis use Sunni terror groups as strategic assets. They are useful weapon systems to the Pakistanis

not to target you specifically... but i think we need to stop thinking of pakistan as a single political entity. pakistan, politically, is about 10 different countries with different goals, leadership and allegiances. the military alone is its own seperate government, and is split into several competing factions.


Oh, you mean sorta like here in USA.
 
2012-04-05 06:45:36 PM

snocone: Oh, you mean sorta like here in USA


yeah, but with a little more organized violence
 
DeQ
2012-04-05 06:52:15 PM

Avery614: Not trying to sound like a callus asshole but it's pretty obvious that if there ever is a world food crisis, the countries receiving aid will be the first ones to suffer and the hardest ones hit.


But if there's ever a world food crisis everyone will just eat
unrealitymag.com
 
2012-04-05 06:54:35 PM

tlchwi02: snocone: Oh, you mean sorta like here in USA

yeah, but with a little more organized violence


Just needs more media and cowbell.
 
2012-04-05 07:10:21 PM

Shabash: I have to defend Pakistan here. That country is no more of a monolith than the U.S. is, and we're sharply divided in many areas. Internally, they have lots of different opinions and different ideas. But most of them are damned good people, just like most Americans.

I truly don't believe any officials in the Pakistani government were officially helping UBL. Possibly a few unofficially, but as you can imagine, they have less control over their rogues there than we do.

Pakistan is a country where money talks. And if a couple of bros pay enough rupees to construction workers, contractors, landlords, city officials, and town elders, they're going to successfully buy privacy in a house in an isolated lot, and minimize anyone snooping into their affairs who might suspect some "cousin" and his wives and kids who came to stay with them for a few months or years.

The bottom line: UBL and those around him were exceptionally disciplined when it came to OPSEC.

/retired US Army combat arms officer
//lived in Pakistan 4 years
///still work in national security
////still have many Pakistani friends who I cherish, and who I'd mourn the rest of my life if the U.S. ever embarked on some misguided scorched earth policy there


That's why it will be laser guided.
 
2012-04-05 07:18:15 PM

Mart Laar's beard shaver: Flakeloaf: Shabash: Pakistan is a country where money talks. And if a couple of bros pay enough rupees to construction workers, contractors, landlords, city officials, and town elders, they're going to successfully buy privacy in a house in an isolated lot, and minimize anyone snooping into their affairs who might suspect some "cousin" and his wives and kids who came to stay with them for a few months or years.

My own personal opinion follows:

And if Benazir Bhutto and the ISI pay enough rupees to to Mohd Omar so he and his band of idiots can take over some highways and lead a band of fundamentalist whackjobs from Pakistani madrassas to take over their poor cousin so the Afghans can continue being subhuman to Isbad, and they just happen to foster a relationship with UBL who happens to use some of their shared resources to murder a few thousand civilians...

How many times does money have to change hands before there's no more blood on it?

Banazir Butto is dead. Blown up by Muslim extremists.

Just how stupid are you?


Oh, because there is only one kind of Muslim extremist and they are all on the same side. Gotcha.

I'm positive I wasn't the only person paying attention when she and her cronies started this ball rolling. The fact that it squashed her doesn't absolve her government of responsibility for it. But hey, keep farkin that chicken.
 
2012-04-05 07:22:45 PM

Vegemite: That sounds like a good defense policy. The destruction of an entire country would show that we take terrorism seriously. On the downside though, it might come up at a meeting in Geneva Target Bravo.


I mean, really, if you're gonna be genocidin'...
 
2012-04-05 07:24:53 PM

OSULugan: Flakeloaf: Picking a fight with a nuclear country never ends well. That's why we've had to spend the last decade trying to kill a snake by cutting pieces off of its tail.

A nuclear weapon is a lot easier to come by, apparently, then an effective means to deliver it. Of the 900 aircraft in the PAF, I don't think there are any capable of penetrating U.S. airspace while carrying a nuclear warhead.

There's also the issue of what size the warhead is. I'd imagine that their technology is likely not capable of "suitcase" nuke size.


True. I was thinking more of a reverse Cuban Missile situation - a country that allows US troops to launch an attack on Pakistan from within their borders is basically committing an act of war against Pakistan themselves. Let's pick Jordan. American troops set up there, Pakistan threatens Jordan - and that is a country they can reach - and the threat of the inevitable nuclear counterattack drags China, India and Russia into play. Then Isbad either plays the That Was A Bad Idea card and puts UBL on a bus or we hire a bunch of consultants from Pripyat to figure out what the fark we should do next.
 
2012-04-05 07:50:51 PM

Hot Rod Zoidberg: Meanwhile, with the help of high-level American officials, Donald Rumsfield hid in U.S. cities for 9 years following the invasion of Iraq.

/shrug


Just like Osama bin Laden, Mr. Rumsfeld occasionally released video appearances while in hiding.

Here's one. On a video aired on CBS, November 15, 2002, Mr. Rumsfeld proclaimed the United States' beef with Iraq has "nothing to do with oil, literally nothing to do with oil." Nope, not oil. Never had and never will have anything to do with oil.

As Mr. Rumsfeld's Deputy Secretary of Defense, Paul Wolfowitz said, "We had virtually no economic options with Iraq because the country floats on a sea of oil." Oil? Never heard of it. (new window)
 
2012-04-05 07:54:44 PM
new details emerged about bin Laden's last days in his compound in Abbottabad where he was caught between two feuding wives

So it was a mercy killing.
 
2012-04-05 08:03:35 PM

Surool: So, why are we still in Afghanistan?


Surge. Surge. Surge. According to Gen. John Allen, the top commander in Afghanistan, we are still doing the 2010 surge. Bonus: Leon Panetta pic, "When can I retire this asshole?" (new window)
 
2012-04-05 08:04:41 PM

wambu: new details emerged about bin Laden's last days in his compound in Abbottabad where he was caught between two feuding wives

So it was a mercy killing.


He begged the SEALs to put him out of his misery.
 
2012-04-05 08:24:59 PM

wee: Rev.K: Yeah, that's a politically defensible idea with absolutely no threat of consequence whatsoever.

Indeed. But I think it might be a nice time to stop giving those duplicitous bastards $3 billion a year in aid. We're basically paying the terrorists...


The purpose of that money is to stabilize the government we prefer, against the many theocratic would-be usurpers. Because Pakistan has nukes, it is very important that the government remains stable... or else those nukes will disappear (onto the black market) faster than you can say "humans are shortsighted venal lying scammers".
 
2012-04-05 08:58:47 PM
four wives, a divorce, bunch of rug rats, and wives feuding...
definitely sounds like a mercy killing, or suicide by soldier...

as to total destroying anyone, the easiest would be to nuke north america, clean up a ton of problems we are having with the rest of the world...
and we wouldn't need to pay anyone anymore...
and no need to worry about who will ruin the country after that!
 
Displayed 50 of 127 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report