Osama Bin Laden Killed

Started by inimalist31 pages

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Yeah, spears too.

Dogs weren't used in combat since...probably around the time of Jesus. Ok, that's an over exaggeration, but they're no longer effective in combat, especially not in this day and age.

They can be and are used for tons of different military related things, but combat is no longer one of them - and especially not during covert super secret operations such as catching and/or killing the most wanted man on the planet that may or may not have an arsenal of weapons in his hideout and may or may not have 842759847289678924 billion mujahedeens with sinpers and/or bombs and/or nukes and other such dangerous and mysterious weaponry.

I'm sorry, but that is just factually incorrect...

YouTube video

Well, the important thing is that he was killed before he could record an obscure record to be prized by future hipsters, like Charles Manson, Jim Jones, and Louis Farrakhan did.

Al Qaida have apparently admitted their "leader" was killed in the events reported. The question now is "who are Al Qaida now, who is their leader etc." Or did some upset nut or government spook just write something on some terrorist forum and it got reported as being from AL Qaida.

Every tom dick and harry terrorist group nowadays seems to be "have ties " to Al Qaida, or claims to be come cell of this group, so who speaks for them?

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Yeah, spears too.

Dogs weren't used in combat since...probably around the time of Jesus. Ok, that's an over exaggeration, but they're no longer effective in combat, especially not in this day and age.

They can be and are used for tons of different military related things, but combat is no longer one of them - and especially not during covert super secret operations such as catching and/or killing the most wanted man on the planet that may or may not have an arsenal of weapons in his hideout and may or may not have 842759847289678924 billion mujahedeens with sinpers and/or bombs and/or nukes and other such dangerous and mysterious weaponry.

'My Father was a K-9 handler in Viet Nam and in Panama I dont know where you get your facts. A Dog trained can be more stealthy than a human.

Originally posted by Samurai4Hire
'My Father was a K-9 handler in Viet Nam and in Panama I dont know where you get your facts. A Dog trained can be more stealthy than a human.

And has a stronger element of suprise and fear producing.

Dogs are excellent for patrolling ie guard duty for example, they can smell an intruder far earlier than any human, even with night sights.

In tight areas they are particulary usefull, especially if the enemy has big machine guns as apposed to pistols in some urban setting, they are fast, have the element of suprise, fearless and damn vicous if trained properly.

Originally posted by inimalist
I'm sorry, but that is just factually incorrect...

Please, do offer examples as to what modern armies use dogs in combat.
I have heard of interrogation dogs, dogs used for detecting explosives, mines, people and such and I have heard of dogs set to keep a look out for the enemy, but not of dogs being used for combat today.
It clearly states in the article that these dogs have been given titanium fangs - they're therefore suggesting those dogs are trained for combat, not detection, prevention or whatever.

Dogs thus, must be close enough to the enemy to use their 'weapons' and as WWII military personnel found out, they tend to be gunned down before they can even come close to begin sniffing out the enemy.

So, this is why, this whole bin Laden story of his capture is super holywoodized that is bordering absurd. It started off with ''they killed him'' and it got more and more outrageous and weird.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
So, this is why, this whole bin Laden story of his capture is super holywoodized that is bordering absurd. It started off with ''they killed him'' and it got more and more outrageous and weird.
Hey, give the government a chance to field-test its spin. How will Hollywood otherwise know what to put on the big screen (and in 3D!).

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Please, do offer examples as to what modern armies use dogs in combat.
I have heard of interrogation dogs, dogs used for detecting explosives, mines, people and such and I have heard of dogs set to keep a look out for the enemy, but not of dogs being used for combat today.
It clearly states in the article that these dogs have been given titanium fangs - they're therefore suggesting those dogs are trained for combat, not detection, prevention or whatever.

Dogs thus, must be close enough to the enemy to use their 'weapons' and as WWII military personnel found out, they tend to be gunned down before they can even come close to begin sniffing out the enemy.

So, this is why, this whole bin Laden story of his capture is super holywoodized that is bordering absurd. It started off with ''they killed him'' and it got more and more outrageous and weird.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogs_in_warfare

Modern uses

U.S. Army military working dog searches among rubble and trash outside a target building in Rusafa, eastern Baghdad, Iraq.
Contemporary dogs in military roles are also often referred to as police dogs, or in the United States as a Military Working Dog (MWD), or K-9. Their roles are nearly as varied as their ancient cousins, though they tend to be more rarely used in front-line formations. As of 2011, 600 U.S. Military dogs were actively participating in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.[21]
Traditionally, the most common breed for these police-type operations has been the German Shepherd; in recent years there has been a shift to smaller dogs with keener senses of smell for detection work, and more resilient breeds such as the Belgian Malinois and Dutch Shepherd for patrolling and law enforcement. All MWDs in use today are paired with a single individual after their training. This person is called a handler. While a handler usually won't stay with one dog for the length of either's career, usually a handler will stay partnered with a dog for at least a year, and sometimes much longer.
In the 1970s the US Air Force used over 1,600 dogs worldwide. Today, personnel cutbacks have reduced USAF dog teams to approximately 530, stationed throughout the world. Many dogs that operate in these roles are trained at Lackland Air Force Base, the only United States facility that currently trains dogs for military use.[22]
Change has also come in legislation for the benefit of the canines. Prior to 2000, older war dogs were required to be euthanized. Thanks to a new law, retired military dogs may now be adopted,[22] the first of which was Lex, a working dog whose handler was killed in Iraq.
There are numerous memorials dedicated to war dogs, including March Field Air Museum in Riverside, California;[23] the Infantry School at Fort Benning, Georgia;[23] at the Naval Facility, Guam, with replicas at the University of Tennessee College of Veterinary Medicine in Knoxville;[24] the Alfred M. Gray Marine Corps Research Center in Quantico, Virginia;[25] and the Alabama War Dogs Memorial at the USS Alabama Battleship Memorial Park in Mobile, Alabama.[26]

*******

the reference about 600 dogs in use currently:

Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of United States forces in Afghanistan, said last year that the military needed more dogs. “The capability they bring to the fight cannot be replicated by man or machine,” he said.

Maj. William Roberts, commander of the Defense Department’s Military Working Dog Center at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas, said the dog on the raid could have checked the compound for explosives and even sniffed door handles to see if they were booby-trapped.

...

“Dogs are very good at detecting people inside of a building,” Major Roberts said.

Another use may have been to catch anyone escaping the compound in the first moments of the raid. A shepherd or a Malinois runs twice as fast as a human.

Tech Sgt. Kelly A. Mylott, the kennel master at Langley Air Force Base in Virginia, called dogs ideal for getting someone who is running away without having to shoot them. “When the dogs go after a suspect, they’re trained to bite and hold them,” Sergeant Mylott said.

Some dogs are big enough that, when they leap on a suspect, the person tends to drop to the ground, Sergeant Mylott said. Others bite arms or legs. “Different dogs do different things,” she said. “But whatever they do, it’s very difficult for that person to go any further.”

Finally, dogs can be used to pacify an unruly group of people — particularly in the Middle East. “There is a cultural aversion to dogs in some of these countries, where few of them are used as pets,” Major Roberts said. “Dogs can be very intimidating in that situation.

...

There are 600 dogs serving in Afghanistan and Iraq, and that number is expected to grow substantially over the next year, Ensign Brynn Olson of the United States Central Command said. Particularly popular with the troops are the growing number of Labrador retrievers who wander off-leash 100 yards or more in front of patrols to ensure the safety of the route. A Silver Star, one of the Navy’s highest awards, was awarded posthumously in 2009 to a dog named Remco after he charged an insurgent’s hide-out in Afghanistan.

The training of dogs in Navy Seal teams and other Special Operations units is shrouded in secrecy. Maj. Wes Ticer, a spokesman for United States Special Operations Command, said the dogs’ primary functions “are finding explosives and conducting searches and patrols.”

“Dogs are relied upon,” he continued, “to provide early warning for potential hazards, many times, saving the lives of the Special Operations Forces with whom they operate.”

Last year, the Seals bought four waterproof tactical vests for their dogs that featured infrared and night-vision cameras so that handlers — holding a three-inch monitor from as far as 1,000 yards away — could immediately see what the dogs were seeing. The vests, which come in coyote tan and camouflage, let handlers communicate with the dogs with a speaker, and the four together cost more than $86,000. Navy Seal teams have trained to parachute from great heights and deploy out of helicopters with dogs.

The military uses a variety of breeds, but by far the most common are the German shepherd and the Belgian Malinois, which “have the best overall combination of keen sense of smell, endurance, speed, strength, courage, intelligence and adaptability to almost any climatic condition,” according to a fact sheet from the military working dog unit.

so..... ummmm.... ya......

EDIT: emphasis added

oh, and this one from national geographics, 2003:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/04/0409_030409_militarydogs.html

The base is the only facility in the country that trains dogs for the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps. Canines are dual certified in explosive detection and patrol, which means they will attack on command, or, to protect themselves or their handler. After training, they are posted to military installations worldwide.

the article does talk about the lack of dogs in combat situations, but from the articles above, it is pretty easy to see why they would be playing a larger role in combat operations in Iraq/Afghanistan [ieds, booby traps] or the raid on Bin Laden...

EDIT: remember, this article is from 8 years ago, april 2003, before a lot of the ieds started in Iraq/Afghanistan

Ive heard geese are also quite good in the military, used to guard some bases from what some US marine told me once, mind you he might have been winding me up.

http://www.ehow.com/how_6179608_use-goose-home-security.html

I wouldn't doubt it

we've been using animals for military stuff since we started going to war

YouTube video

this is inane to me

I don't understand what benefit there would be for the Obama administration to not just tell the straight up story... like, none of the legal issues change, the outcome doesn't change, and it just leaves huge areas up for criticism and distrust...

Originally posted by inimalist
YouTube video

this is inane to me

I don't understand what benefit there would be for the Obama administration to not just tell the straight up story... like, none of the legal issues change, the outcome doesn't change, and it just leaves huge areas up for criticism and distrust...

Well inimalist you have to take into consideration that no administration would give 100% of the details about one of the most covert operations in recent history. We've known since they started doing war coverage that there were details that were purposely excluded if for no reason other than the obvious danger of compromising the safety of soldiers that need secrecy to function as efficiently as possible. The idea that every detail is an outright lie though is ridiculous and would never be a logical gamble to take for anybody. The release of news that Bin Laden was alive would make everyone who said he was dead a laughingstock. That should be extremely obvious. 😮‍💨

he ain't dead that was an imposte. a pretender look-a-like. the dna taken was his sister's.

the real bin laden's in dubya's basement living in the lap of luxury while watching all this on cnn laughing his arse off..

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
he ain't dead that was an imposte. a pretender look-a-like. the dna taken was his sister's.

the real bin laden's in dubya's basement living in the lap of luxury while watching all this on cnn laughing his arse off..

Or he had a face change, and IS OBAMA!!!

Originally posted by Bicnarok
Or he had a face change, and IS OBAMA!!!
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
dun dun dunnnn.

😄

05-31-11......New youtube vid burns up the net. Osama, holding the days edition of the newspaper, smiling and loling.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
05-31-11......New youtube vid burns up the net. Osama, holding the days edition of the newspaper, smiling and loling.

this is getting odder by the day. Check out the live ticker on this news, announcing his death before it happened 0:20 sec.

Hp8rJVWC2a0&lc

Originally posted by The MISTER
Well inimalist you have to take into consideration that no administration would give 100% of the details about one of the most covert operations in recent history. We've known since they started doing war coverage that there were details that were purposely excluded if for no reason other than the obvious danger of compromising the safety of soldiers that need secrecy to function as efficiently as possible. The idea that every detail is an outright lie though is ridiculous and would never be a logical gamble to take for anybody. The release of news that Bin Laden was alive would make everyone who said he was dead a laughingstock. That should be extremely obvious. 😮‍💨

what I mean are the details like, was he captured before they caught him? was there a gunfight? etc

like, I would disagree morally and pragmatically if they had killed him after capture, but they look so much worse as this comes out from lying about it than from saying it straight out, and they gain nothing...

its not like this was some villager whose home they did a random raid on and they are looking for some justification, OBL was a military target, if the military wanted to kill him, that seems logical and defensible... I don't see the need for the lie, even if some peace-nics like myself might not appreciate targeted assassinations