Breaking News Alert-NYTimes- U.S. Braced for Fights With Pakistanis in Bin Laden Raid, Officials Sa

The New York Times
Mon, May 09, 2011 -- 9:11 PM ET
-----

U.S. Braced for Fights With Pakistanis in Bin Laden Raid, Officials Say

President Obama insisted that the assault force hunting down
Osama bin Laden last week be large enough to fight its way
out of Pakistan if confronted by hostile local police
officers and troops, senior administration and military
officials said Monday.

In revealing additional details about planning for the
mission, senior officials also said that two teams of
specialists were on standby: One to bury Bin Laden if he was
killed, and a second composed of lawyers, interrogators and
translators in case he was captured alive. That team was set
to meet aboard a Navy ship, mostly likely the aircraft
carrier Carl Vinson in the North Arabian Sea.

Mr. Obama's decision to increase the size of the force sent
into Pakistan shows that he was willing to risk a military
confrontation with a close ally in order to capture or kill
the leader of Al Qaeda.

Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/10/world/asia/10intel.html?emc=na

I like to post without comment, but I can't help it

WOW - just WOW
I like it when a job is well planned, and well done. It brings us some much needed Glory.

big but, the only he was to be taken alive was if the was no way to justify not killing him - such as being bed ridden and unable to move, asleep when they found him, unconscience but alive, etc, etc, etc .....

The main plan was to kill him and look for any way possible to call it justifiable.

It amazes me that no one asks why 70+ men who are highly trained, heavily armed, highly intelligent, and in perfect physical condition could not arrest an unarmed senior citizen.

Although that would indicate a serious weakness in intel

thought he would be. He was 54, but still, I am interested in knowing how 70+ men can't take down one single unarmed guy in his 50s. And while we're at it, not to excuse what he did, but let's state the facts, he didn't plan 9/11. His #2 guy did the planning, Bin Laden gave the go ahead. People give him way too much credit for what they THINK he did, and fail to realize what he ACTUALLY did.

I could give is needed.

separate sources) that the SEALs were sent on a mission with order to 'kill, not capture' OBL. All this ex post facto ass covering should be seen for exactly what it is, a pathetic attempt to defend the indefensible.

all along was not to blow bin Laden's head off on sight.

They had questions when Bush was president also. Why are you attributing bad motives to people who have every right to question their government's actions, and who don't remain quiet just because it is their party now in power?

And why are people here advocating that it is somehow wrong to question the government? I know that was the case with Bush supporters, but this is not FR.

We have a right and a duty to question the actions of our government. If they have nothing to hide, if they are not doing anything wrong, they should welcome those questions. We are not a monarchy, yet, are we? And some of us want to make sure we never are.

life. We really just don't feel for him. at all. Does that explain it? Would feel the same way if it were Bush. simply nothing. When people are that evil, they are really no longer human beings. in my humble opinion. When you purposefully cause thousands of innocent deaths, be it for greed or religious fanatisicm, I think you get from other humans is deserved.

need to do a thing like that, and what is that person doing here?

the meat of the story and with posting it.
Swiping at me in view of that is as weird as my comment, I think.
So we're even.

not interested in continuing this 'conversation', anyway. good night, and no offense (taken or meant).

Sid

Sure thing dude.

They took the body with them. This report smells fishy. Why would they claim to have a burial detail ready to go and then take the body? DId they decide at the last minute to grab the corpse? Also, it seems odd that the SEAL team would plan on staying around long enough to dig a hole to "bury" OBL.

sources, the US had contacted Saudi Arabia and the Bin Laden family to ask if they would want the body. Both declined and hence the reason for burial at sea.

There's only one possibility that makes sense on why they changed their mind.

spot. They may have seen the intelligence laying around and decided getting that was more important than digging a hole for bin Laden.

two rooms that were slightly larger than prison cells.

The only thing that does make sense was losing the helicopter. Stick with me here, but this is the only plausable explanation I can think of. I think the main plan was to go in and kill Bin Laden and bury him and collect the intel and get out without anyone knowing that it was the US who went in. But when the helicopter went down, the plan had to be changed since there was no way to deny the fact that the US had illegally entered Pakistani air space. After-all, we left behind the corpse of an entire helicopter that had to be trucked away.

inquiring minds would like to know.

20 per helicopter. Tight fit, but it can be done.

24 is the number mentioned.

"The identities of all 80 members of the American commando team who thundered into Abbottabad, Pakistan, and killed Osama bin Laden are the subject of intense speculation, but perhaps none more so than the only member with four legs. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/05/science/05dog.html/?_r=3&smid=fb-nytimes

was a regular guy/citizen who lived a normal life, right?

1 helicopter went down and another one, on standby, went in to get the SEALs out. The other one stayed on standby. Only 24 went in, not 70. Listen to the people who give their names....not the many unnamed who screw up the details just enough to make the wary go "aha!".

the bunch of unnamed officials are sending them ballistics, they're like headless chicken running
around looking for something to bury their body in.

The idea that President Obama would do such a major action and then try to keep it secret - along with getting OBL is just ridiculous.

They took 70 men because President Obama didn't like the smaller plan that he felt put the Seals at risk.

People want to concoct conspiracies where there are none.

This was a HUGE, extremely popular achievement. The idea that they were going to hide it is crazy.

Get a grip.

shout out to Watergate buffs out there.)

Glad you point out that the US had illegally entered Pakistani air space. Get ready to be thrown under the DU bus by the MPRoW crew.

funeral/rally for OBL's sympathizers by burying the body at sea. I don't understand why they'd be even thinking about burying the body before leaving, though. That doesn't make much sense to me.

It just says it was a burial team. It could easily have been in place to exam and prepare the body for burial.

I read it as the plan was to bury Binny at sea, the detail was to examine the body and prepare it for dumping.

That they had a team ready for burial doesn't mean that they ever intended to bury him on the property.

From the article:

:rofl: like they were gonna bury him in the back yard or something???? Hahaha

Psst. He was buried at sea.

the longer Atlantic Monthly story understand that this was an extra-judicial assassination, completely outside the bounds of any U.S. or international statute. So what you're reading in the NY Times smells fishy becuase it's standard bureaucratic ass covering by people who have broken the law.

:rofl:

The huge ever expanding ignore list.

Send in enough force to insure success, that's the way to do it.

Take that Palin, who's pussyfootin' now?

The Pakistanis are NOT our friends, they can't even seem to stay bought.

I applaud the President for doing what he had to do to complete this mission, and if it pisses off the Pakis, so the fuck what.

job well planned is SUCH an understatement. He left no detail to chance.

GOBAMA.

Yes He DID.
:dem:

but willing to start a conflict with them if they called us on it? WTF? Is this kind of thing simply the norm, now?

had an agreement with the Pakistanis that we would be allowed to come in and take him out. As a matter of fact this very thing is on discussion at the Ed show right now and corroborated.

and 80 guys on the ground for 40 minutes in the middle of a Pakistani military garrison town? Without being engaged at all by police or military?

:shrug:

the damaged one when they left. The extra troops weren't needed (and never got off their helicopters, it sounds like) - they didn't have to fight their way out - but they did end up using a third bird because the other one was damaged & then they blew it up as they were leaving.

I don't understand why this is so hard to follow.

my point is... they still had a bunch of guys on the ground, gunshots going off, choppers landing, etc... and they were there for 40 minutes. Why were they not engaged by local forces of any kind? They were in the middle of a heavily secured military garrison town. 40 minutes?

annoyed by the helicopters. It does say that the CIA or JSOC or whoever for the US government was monitoring the Pak local police and military to be ready in case either started to move on the compound.

that the local authorities didn't respond to reports of gunfire and helicopters 1/2 mile away for 40 minutes.

I will guarantee you that every soldier on those helicopters got off of them, except for the pilots. The rest were more than likely used to secure the outside of the building and to hold each part of the inside of the building after it was cleared.

The initial reports were stating that 24 SEALS went in, but after 48 hours and several revised briefings, the WH changed their story. Originally they said 24 SEALS went in and that Osama Bin Laden was armed. Since then, the amount of troops used has been corrected along with the fact that Bin Laden was not armed.

Every report I've seen since the WH revised their story shows that 70+ men were in on the raid. If you have proof to the contrary, then please post it.

I don't understand why this is so hard for you to follow.

that perhaps they did not mind all that much, and were not about to engage US special forces over this. I don't know, but it is a theory.

because I just couldn't take the demeanor of either him or his guests. I don't normally watch the tv news-opinion stuff, but good lord I can't take that Ed guy. I guess I missed that part?

Why would we be attacked, then, if they had agreed to it?

I don't give a shit what country he was in; wherever he was, if we found him, they'd have to know we'd come and get him. I realize people like to pontificate on 'what this means', but this was a VERY specific situation dealing with pretty much the most wanted dude on the planet.

since the middle of the Bush administration, and I understand generally with their help.

if there were not so many conflicting stories about what happened and when it happened and how it happened,
then there wouldn't be so many questions!.........just sayin'