The Man Who Killed Osama bin Laden. - Esquire: UPDATE - it's all BS.

[JMS]

Oh for god's sake JMS. Don't jump down the Alex Jones rabbit hole.

check, I'll try to pull up.

[Bliz]

Bottom line... I don't think Osama was shot by this guy... It has just never made an ounce of sense to me. Why we would send a team of seals in there to kill the dude, and spend 20 minutes collecting intelligence; when the richest source of intelligence was unarmed, naked, afraid, and hiding behind a young woman who we also shot ( in the leg)... Why wouldn't we throw a net on that dude, and interrogate him at our leassure for the next decade if need be? Then of coarse it was odd that we disposed of the body over open water before anybody had a chance to inspect it. Didn't release any pictures of the body... The sole independent source that we shot him was his young wife, herself in shock at the time of the shooting because we shot her first. Don't we always bring bodies back to the ship to have them disposed of and receive a ceremony or some such? I can never remember us taking a body and dropping it in the ocean off a helicopter like that.. never.

I can never remember us committing a handful of troops to fly hundreds of miles away from support to murder somebody like this either.

Finally, every time I hear about one of these seal team six guys going off reservation or appealing for some sort of special treatment, I think the same thing... One guy writes a book, or is super critical of Obama during the election, now this guy is sobbing over not having completed his requirements for retirement.... To me they've got a secret and they are looking to be taken care of. That's what I think anyway...

Not that I have an evidence of anything.

So what are you saying here? That UBL is alive and we're holding him? That he was killed years ago? What?

Bottom line... I don't think Osama was shot by this guy... It has just never made an ounce of sense to me. Why we would send a team of seals in there to kill the dude, and spend 20 minutes collecting intelligence; when the richest source of intelligence was unarmed, naked, afraid, and hiding behind a young woman who we also shot ( in the leg)... Why wouldn't we throw a net on that dude, and interrogate him at our leassure for the next decade if need be?

Off the top of my head, among the many possibilities, suppose intelligence assesses that we are unlikely to get any solid information from him whatsoever, and that holding him will inspire additional attacks and recruiting while killing him will help demoralize and defeat the enemy.

Then of coarse it was odd that we disposed of the body over open water before anybody had a chance to inspect it. Didn't release any pictures of the body... The sole independent source that we shot him was his young wife, herself in shock at the time of the shooting because we shot her first. Don't we always bring bodies back to the ship to have them disposed of and receive a ceremony or some such? I can never remember us taking a body and dropping it in the ocean off a helicopter like that.. never.

You have no clue what we typically do and neither do I. Think about how rarely you hear ANYTHING about any of these missions. Maybe if there's a dramatic rescue of US hostages (like from the Somali pirates). But extremely rarely. But our guys are running ops probably every day, or most every day. Pictures were released to certain Congressmen, many of them no friend of Obama's. Also there is independent evidence that we lost a black hawk at that compound. So that's something.

I can never remember us committing a handful of troops to fly hundreds of miles away from support to murder somebody like this either.

Finally, every time I hear about one of these seal team six guys going off reservation or appealing for some sort of special treatment, I think the same thing... One guy writes a book, or is super critical of Obama during the election, now this guy is sobbing over not having completed his requirements for retirement.... To me they've got a secret and they are looking to be taken care of. That's what I think anyway...

Seals have missions all the time. You wouldn't hear about it. And this isn't just any guy that got taken out (obviously). Wouldn't he justify a unique approach?

Seems like a lot of grasping at straws to me.

[Elessar78]

If you've been in the situation, you cam empathize. If you haven't, you can only sympathize.

em·pa·thy [em-puh-thee]

noun

1. the intellectual identification with or vicarious experiencing of the feelings, thoughts, or attitudes of another.

[Mad Mike]

Bottom line... I don't think Osama was shot by this guy...

Congrats on joining the conspiracy theory mindset. Remember to sign up for the Alex Jones newsletter to receive your official Captain Conspiracy secret decoder.

[JMS]

So what are you saying here? That UBL is alive and we're holding him? That he was killed years ago? What?

That he left the compound in Pakistan alive in May 2, 2011. That we didn't send the seals in to kill him as we could have and have done that with a predictor or bomber run.

That we always meant to capture him and that's exactly what we did. That Seal Team Six was founded and trained after the failure of Operation Eagle Claw, 1979 (iranian hostage) specifically for live extraction not for killing folks.

• They were used in Granada for live extractions. dropped in to protect the Governor and secure students.
  
• In Somalia, Operation Gothic Serpent to capture the warlord Mohamed Farrah Aidid
  
• In Bosnia, tasked with finding and apprehending persons indicted for war crimes
  
• In Afghanistan..

• Rescue of Linda Norgrove,
  
  
• Rescue of Dr. Dilip Joseph, 8 December 2012
  
  
• Rescue of British-Afghan Aid Workers, 28 May 2012
  
  
• Wardak Province, capture a senior Taliban leader in the Tangi Valley August 2011.
  
  

• Again Somalia hostage rescue, 24 January 2012
  

So we used the guys trained for live recovery, in order to conduct a live recovery because that was the only reason to send in ground forces, on such a dangerous mission.

Finally that the stated reasons for sending in ground forces, intelligence gathering, were likely accurate as the greatest source of intelligence able to be obtained in the narrow window of the operation(20 minutes) was Bin Laudin himself.

Off the top of my head, among the many possibilities, suppose intelligence assesses that we are unlikely to get any solid information from him whatsoever, and that holding him will inspire additional attacks and recruiting while killing him will help demoralize and defeat the enemy.

Why would anybody think "we were unlikely to get any intelligence" out of the father and primary funder/fund raiser of Al Quada? Hell man he's likely the richest source of intelligence ever on the mercurial organization. So I would call that "belief" or assertion highly suspect. The rest of your post however is spot on... holding him could have inspired additional attacks and recruiting...even more than martyring him. So that's why nobody is supposed to know we are holding him; if we are.

You have no clue what we typically do and neither do I. Think about how rarely you hear ANYTHING about any of these missions. Maybe if there's a dramatic rescue of US hostages (like from the Somali pirates). But extremely rarely. But our guys are running ops probably every day, or most every day. Pictures were released to certain Congressmen, many of them no friend of Obama's. Also there is independent evidence that we lost a black hawk at that compound. So that's something.

Absolutely right... We have no history of committing ground forces ( commando squad) hundreds of miles inside of a potentially hostile country to kill somebody... We have a rich history of killing folks in such an instance with Drones and bombers from the air, (Operation Vengeance 1942, Operation El Dorado Canyon 1986, and numerous bombings targetting Saddam and various AQ "senior leadership"). Likewise we have some history of committing forces in such a manor to retrieve live assets. Task Force Baum, 1945; Raid at Cabanatuan, 1945; Son Tay 1970, Iranian hostage raid 1980, Argo, We've used Seal Team six for such purposes in Bosnia, Somalia, Afghanistan including the rescue of Dr. philip Joseph, Linda Norgrove and British-Afghan Aid Workers ).

Seals have missions all the time. You wouldn't hear about it. And this isn't just any guy that got taken out (obviously). Wouldn't he justify a unique approach?

Why? You don't think all throughout this war we have targeted folks for death.. folks we really really wanted dead? If all we wished to do is whack somebody I don't think it would have required anything "special"... If however you wanted to capture him, and Osama was well worth capturing.. then I can see it requiring something special.

besides, why do you think the seals have felt so empowered this time to go so very far off the reservation. Talking about the operation against orders within a year of it occurring? publishing books, video games, political speeches, even movies? All over the strong objections of the Pentagon. At times the Pentagon has even threatened criminal prosecution.

Seems like a lot of grasping at straws to me.

Too your point....

Well we did run Phoenix Program during Vietnam. That was forty years ago. Coarse oddly enough that program remained classified for decades after the fact. Where as the Seals started coming forward after the Bin Laudin raid within months.

Too my point...

We run different seal teams to train for different jobs... Some are trained to kill folks, some are trained for live extractions... Seal team six was founded in the wake of Operation Eagle Claw, 1979.. It's entire purpose was to train for live extractions. Why send that team on the assassination run given you had choices available to you?

[airborneskins]

Wow. This thread took a turn.

[Dan T.]

Another ****amamie conspiracy theory?

[Popeman38]

Wait a sec. When did this happen?

They did not out their identities. But the TV stations were broadcasting in their neighborhood, showing houses and stating that tmembers of ST6 lived there. It won't take a rocket scientist to start cross referencing public information to determine who in the Navy lives in the neighborhood and start gathering information as to who is who. Once you have the address, you can pretty much find out names. All from public information.

[JMS]

If you've been in the situation, you cam empathize. If you haven't, you can only sympathize.

Empathize is being able to place yourself in someone else's shoes.. even abstractly. You can empathize with Holocaust victims, or a POW without having been either.

Empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of another. It doesn't not require a common experience.

Sympathy is simple feelings of pity or sorrow for someone else’s misfortune.

[Predicto]

They did not out their identities. But the TV stations were broadcasting in their neighborhood, showing houses and stating that tmembers of ST6 lived there. It won't take a rocket scientist to start cross referencing public information to determine who in the Navy lives in the neighborhood and start gathering information as to who is who. Once you have the address, you can pretty much find out names. All from public information.

Really. I admit that I was not aware of this.

I mean, if they were just showing general pictures of the Va Beach - Norfolk area, then that is pretty meaningless. Of course the Seals are there, along with the other hundreds of thousands of Naval personnel. If they were showing particular streets or something, then that is a problem.

[Bliz]

That he left the compound in Pakistan alive in May 2, 2011. That we didn't send the seals in to kill him as we could have and have done that with a predictor or bomber run.

That we always meant to capture him and that's exactly what we did. That Seal Team Six was founded and trained after the failure of Operation Eagle Claw, 1979 (iranian hostage) specifically for live extraction not for killing folks.

• They were used in Granada for live extractions. dropped in to protect the Governor and secure students.
  
• In Somalia, Operation Gothic Serpent to capture the warlord Mohamed Farrah Aidid
  
• In Bosnia, tasked with finding and apprehending persons indicted for war crimes
  
• In Afghanistan..
  

Rescue of Linda Norgrove,

Rescue of Dr. Dilip Joseph, 8 December 2012

Rescue of British-Afghan Aid Workers, 28 May 2012

• Again Somalia hostage rescue, 24 January 2012
  

...

Why would anybody think "we were unlikely to get any intelligence" out of the father and primary funder/fund raiser of Al Quada? Hell man he's likely the richest source of intelligence ever on the mercurial organization. So I would call that "belief" or assertion highly suspect. The rest of your post however is spot on... holding him could have inspired additional attacks and recruiting...even more than martyring him. So that's why nobody is supposed to know we are holding him; if we are.

Absolutely right... We have no history of committing ground forces ( commando squad) hundreds of miles inside of a potentially hostile country to kill somebody... We have a rich history of killing folks in such an instance with Drones and bombers from the air, (Operation Vengeance 1942, Operation El Dorado Canyon 1986, and numerous bombings targetting Saddam and various AQ "senior leadership"). Likewise we have some history of committing forces in such a manor to retrieve live assets. Task Force Baum, 1945; Raid at Cabanatuan, 1945; Son Tay 1970, Iranian hostage raid 1980, Argo, We've used Seal Team six for such purposes in Bosnia, Somalia, Afghanistan including the rescue of Dr. philip Joseph, Linda Norgrove and British-Afghan Aid Workers ).

Regarding the assessment, it would be reasonable if it were based on results of interrogations of previously captured high-level people. If what we got from them was a whole lot of "eff yous", red herrings, made up "plots" and nothing concrete. Or if we were confident that he was pretty much a figurehead and insprational leader at that point who wasn't so much involved in the actual planning. One thing for sure is he wasn't just going to roll over and start spilling his guts (except to the extent he was shot in the gut). It's all speculation anyway...

As for the drone scenario, the company line on why they didn't go that route was:

On March 29th, McRaven brought the plan to Obama. The President’s military advisers were divided. Some supported a raid, some an airstrike, and others wanted to hold off until the intelligence improved. Robert Gates, the Secretary of Defense, was one of the most outspoken opponents of a helicopter assault. Gates reminded his colleagues that he had been in the Situation Room of the Carter White House when military officials presented Eagle Claw—the 1980 Delta Force operation that aimed at rescuing American hostages in Tehran but resulted in a disastrous collision in the Iranian desert, killing eight American soldiers. “They said that was a pretty good idea, too,” Gates warned. He and General James Cartwright, the vice-chairman of the Joint Chiefs, favored an airstrike by B-2 Spirit bombers. That option would avoid the risk of having American boots on the ground in Pakistan. But the Air Force then calculated that a payload of thirty-two smart bombs, each weighing two thousand pounds, would be required to penetrate thirty feet below ground, insuring that any bunkers would collapse. “That much ordnance going off would be the equivalent of an earthquake,” Cartwright told me. The prospect of flattening a Pakistani city made Obama pause. He shelved the B-2 option and directed McRaven to start rehearsing the raid.

Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/08/110808fa_fact_schmidle#ixzz2KuLKzsV8

[JMS]

Regarding the assessment, it would be reasonable if it were based on results of interrogations of previously captured high-level people. If what we got from them was a whole lot of "eff yous", red herrings, made up "plots" and nothing concrete. Or if we were confident that he was pretty much a figurehead and insprational leader at that point who wasn't so much involved in the actual planning. One thing for sure is he wasn't just going to roll over and start spilling his guts (except to the extent he was shot in the gut). It's all speculation anyway...

As for the drone scenario, the company line on why they didn't go that route was:

Remember this guy?

The book on Khalid Sheik Mohammed was he rolled over in 15 minutes and told us everything he knew...

Implicated himself in 911 and other terrorist attacks and gave up the entire AQ franchising model.

Of coarse then we water boarded him 200 times after he talked just to make sure.

The simple facts are we really have never had many high ranking AQ leadership in custody... Khalid is really about it.

At the CIA leadeers confirmation one senator brought up the fact the CIA had only ever captured Osama's driver when he

was leading the effort against AQ.

No I think Osama would have been a huge intelligence prize.

As for the drone scenario, the company line on why they didn't go that route was:

We "shot bin Laudin" in his second story bedroom above ground... we could have taken him out with a predator hellfire missile... Hell we do that almost daily certainly weekly in Pakistan and Afghanistan to whack others.. Saying it would have required leveling a city is horse hockey... I find the suggestion insulting, as you should too.

[Elessar78]

So many things are so easy to Say in hindsight. But there was no way for the planners to know that it would go so smoothly. They were expecting booby traps, suicide vests, secret escape routes, etc. they could not have known they would be able to get back to the helo or get off the ground etc. too many variables. They could not have known if one of the wives was capable of blowing up the whole building or if there was a fighting unit nearby that was now alerted and on their way. Get it done.

Holding UBL captive increases the risk of Americans worldwide being taken hostage in exchange. How many would they kill or take captive to make a point?

[renaissance]

em·pa·thy [em-puh-thee]

noun

1. the intellectual identification with or vicarious experiencing of the feelings, thoughts, or attitudes of another.

Right but my understanding is that you can't well empathize with someone if you haven't been in their shoes. You can feel bad for them, but you can't really begin to feel what they have felt. So I believe it makes more sense to say that a former military member can empathize with a current military member while a civilian is more likely to sympathize.

---------- Post added February-14th-2013 at 04:07 PM ----------

Empathize is being able to place yourself in someone else's shoes.. even abstractly. You can empathize with Holocaust victims, or a POW without having been either.

Empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of another. It doesn't not require a common experience.

Sympathy is simple feelings of pity or sorrow for someone else’s misfortune.

I see the distinction you are making. My argument is that someone who hasn't been in a military environment probably has a really difficult time truly understanding and thus feeling what a member of the military feels.

[Elessar78]

Right but my understanding is that you can't well empathize with someone if you haven't been in their shoes. You can feel bad for them, but you can't really begin to feel what they have felt. So I believe it makes more sense to say that a former military member can empathize with a current military member while a civilian is more likely to sympathize.

---------- Post added February-14th-2013 at 04:07 PM ----------

I see the distinction you are making. My argument is that someone who hasn't been in a military environment probably has a really difficult time truly understanding and thus feeling what a member of the military feels.

My editor friend who I was having the empathize/sympathize discussion with says I've taken on an unhealthy interest in the differences between the two. So I will refrain from commenting further.

[renaissance]

My editor friend who I was having the empathize/sympathize discussion with says I've taken on an unhealthy interest in the differences between the two. So I will refrain from commenting further.

Haha, it's cool. I have always understood empathy as you can feel what someone else is feeling, which I don't think you can do unless you've been in a similar situation.

[JMS]

So many things are so easy to Say in hindsight. But there was no way for the planners to know that it would go so smoothly. They were expecting booby traps, suicide vests, secret escape routes, etc. they could not have known they would be able to get back to the helo or get off the ground etc. too many variables. They could not have known if one of the wives was capable of blowing up the whole building or if there was a fighting unit nearby that was now alerted and on their way. Get it done.

Holding UBL captive increases the risk of Americans worldwide being taken hostage in exchange. How many would they kill or take captive to make a point?

Booby traps, suicide bombers, uncertainty about a trap... all sound like excellent reasons to bomb him from on high.. Those don't sound like reasons to send in the live recovery specialist to whack him.... just saying.

And to be clear, my thought isn't that we should have abducted the guy... my unfounded suspicion is we did for the reasons given..

---------- Post added February-15th-2013 at 12:27 AM ----------

[/color]

My editor friend who I was having the empathize/sympathize discussion with says I've taken on an unhealthy interest in the differences between the two. So I will refrain from commenting further.

I got that same question on a med school interview... It's a good question.

---------- Post added February-15th-2013 at 12:29 AM ----------

I see the distinction you are making. My argument is that someone who hasn't been in a military environment probably has a really difficult time truly understanding and thus feeling what a member of the military feels.

You are probable correct. But I'm thinking it might depend on the person, and what specifically they are empathizing about, perhaps.

[Prosperity]

Unless he has mental health issues he is going to make an excellent living. Former SEAL, security clearance, fame... Yeah I think he'll manage

[Elessar78]

Booby traps, suicide bombers, uncertainty about a trap... all sound like excellent reasons to bomb him from on high.. Those don't sound like reasons to send in the live recovery specialist to whack him.... just saying.

And to be clear, my thought isn't that we should have abducted the guy... my unfounded suspicion is we did for the reasons given..

.

But the bomb approach leaves you no way to be 100% sure a) it was him and we got him and c) you prob can't take full credit for it.

Yes it's super sketchy that they dropped the body in the ocean, but the rationale makes sense. Would I put it beyond reasonable doubt that he's being held at a "black site"—no. I think like Uday and Qusay (Saddam's sons) if he was "whole" then they may have released the photos. But head split open and brains draining out prob not for public consumption and would rile up his fanatic supporters.

[JMS]

But the bomb approach leaves you no way to be 100% sure a) it was him and we got him and c) you prob can't take full credit for it.

(1) Sure you can. DNA testing. Same way all our high value targets are confirmed.

Remember this guy?

Iraq awaits verdict of DNA test on Zarqawi 'corpse'

The US administration, which had offered a $25m (£15m) reward for the leader of al-Qa'ida in Iraq, played down the reports. But Mr Zebari, during a visit to Moscow, said: "American and Iraqi forces are investigating the possibility that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's corpse is among the bodies of some terrorists who died in the special military operation in Mosul."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iraq-awaits-verdict-of-dna-test-on-zarqawi-corpse-8036457.html

or these guys?

Uday and Qusay ?

How Saddam’s sons were identified

Samples were taken from the bodies for DNA testing after they were flown from Mosul, the Associated Press quoted unidentified officials as saying.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/3077200/#.UR5N92eN6So

As for credit? Who else gets partial credit if we drop a bomb on his house?

Yes it's super sketchy that they dropped the body in the ocean, but the rationale makes sense. Would I put it beyond reasonable doubt that he's being held at a "black site"—no. I think like Uday and Qusay (Saddam's sons) if he was "whole" then they may have released the photos. But head split open and brains draining out prob not for public consumption and would rile up his fanatic supporters.

Yeah but we did release the photo's of Uday and Qusay. Hell there wasn't even talk about using DNA testing against Osama to confirm.

[Popeman38]

JMS, Uday and Qusay were killed by direct fire. It was a targeted ground assault. No bombs were used.

[Elessar78]

Well they did say they cross referenced DNA with a relative and had 99% certainty it was him.

But can you drop a bomb in a sovereign country who also happens to be an ally? I guess it's not much of a diff sending it a hit squad.

[JMS]

JMS, Uday and Qusay were killed by direct fire. It was a targeted ground assault. No bombs were used.

Ok, but as I remember it they used TOW Missiles, AT4 Rockets, Mark 19 Grenade Launchers, and additional ordinance from helicopters against the townhouse Uday and Cuscus were hiding out in. All but one of the people in the house were killed by the TOW Missiles... We were tipped off to their location, we sent in ground troops to verify it. The moment they came under fire we used air assets and stand off weapons and pounded the snot out of them.

Senior al Qaeda and Taliban leaders killed in US airstrikes in Pakistan, 2004 - 2013

2013

• Atta Ullah
  
• Rata Khan -senior
  
• Mullah Nazir
  
• Faisal Khan
  

2012

• Mohammad Ahmed al Mansoor
  
• Khalid bin Abdul Rahman al Husainan - senior
  
• Abdul Rehman al Zaman Yemeni
  
• Sheikh Abdul Bari
  
• Abu Yahya al Libi - senior al Qaeda
  
• Abu Usman Adil
  
• Badr Mansoor
  
• Aslam Awan
  

2011

• Hazrat Omar,
  
• Khan Mohammed, - senior al Qaeda
  
• Miraj Wazir, - senior al Qaeda
  
• Ashfaq Wazir -senior al Qaeda
  
• Abu Miqdad al Masri
  
• Abd al Rahman al Yemeni - senior al Qaeda
  
• Jan Baz Zadran
  
• Haleem Ullah
  
• Abu Hafs al Shahri - senior al Qaeda
  
• Atiyah Abd al Rahman - senior al Qaeda
  
• Ilyas Kashmiri - senior al Qaeda
  
• Abu Zaid al Iraqi - senior al Qaeda
  

2010

• Ibn Amin - senior al Qaeda
  
• Sheikh Fateh al Masri - senior al Qaeda
  
• Saifullah Haqqani
  
• Qureshi
  
• Inayatullah
  
• Abu Ahmed
  
• Sheikh Ihsanullah
  
• Ibrahim
  
• Osama bin Ali bin Abdullah bin Damjan al Dawsari - senior al Qaeda
  
• Mustafa Abu Yazid - senior al Qaeda
  
• Sadam Hussein Al Hussami - senior al Qaeda
  
• Qari Mohammad Zafar
  
• Mohammed Haqqani
  
• Sheikh Mansoor
  
• Abdul Haq al Turkistani
  
• Abdul Basit Usmanusman
  

2009

• Haji Omar Khan - senior al Qaeda
  
• Abdullah Said al Libi
  
• Zuhaib al Zahib
  
• Saleh al Somali
  
• Abu Musa al Masri - senior al Qaeda
  
• Najmuddin Jalolov
  
• Maulvi Ismail Khan
  
• Mustafa al Jaziri - senior al Qaeda
  
• Tahir Yuldashev
  
• Baitullah Mehsud - senior al Qaeda
  
• Kifayatullah Anikhel
  
• Mufti Noor Wali
  
• Khwaz Ali Mehsud - senior al Qaeda
  
• Abdullah Hamas al Filistini - senior al Qaeda
  
• Osama al Kini (aka Fahid Mohammed Ally Msalam)
  
• Sheikh Ahmed Salim
  

2008

• Abu Zubair al Masri
  
• Abu Jihad al Masri
  
• Khalid Habib
  
• Abu al Hasan al Rimi - senior al Qaeda
  
• Abu Ubaidah al Tunisi
  
• Abu Musa
  
• Abu Qasim
  
• Abu Hamza
  
• Abu Haris - senior al Qaeda
  
• Abu Wafa al Saudi
  
• Abdul Rehman
  
• Abu Khabab al Masri
  
• Abu Mohammad Ibrahim bin Abi al Faraj al Masri
  
• Abdul Wahhab al Masri
  
• Abu Islam al Masri
  
• Abu Sulayman Jazairi - senior al Qaeda
  
• Dr. Arshad Waheed (aka Sheikh Moaz)
  
• Abu Laith al Libi - senior al Qaeda
  

2006

• Liaquat Hussain
  
• Imam Asad
  

2005

• Abu Hamza Rabia
  

2004:

• Nek Mohammednek - senior Talaban
  

http://www.longwarjournal.org/pakistan-strikes-hvts.php

---------- Post added February-15th-2013 at 10:47 AM ----------

But can you drop a bomb in a sovereign country who also happens to be an ally? I guess it's not much of a diff sending it a hit squad.

(1) Seal team six isn't a hit squad, it's a live asset recovery squad... we have both we chose to use the former.

(2) We do it several times a week and have for 12 years.

US Drone Strike statistic in Pakistan

(As of 10 January 2013)

• Total strikes: 362
  
• Total reported killed: 2,629 – 3,461
  
• Civilians reported killed: 475 – 891
  
• Children reported killed: 176
  
• Total reported injured: 1,267 – 1,431
  
• Strikes under the Bush Administration: 52
  
• Strikes under the Obama Administration: 310
  

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

[Mad Mike]

Update in the OP.

[renaissance]

ABC News: Mystery SEAL, Who Could Settle Bin Laden Controversy, Won't

Despite renewed controversy over who actually killed Osama bin Laden, the one member of SEAL Team Six who could settle the whole thing -- and the man who may have actually pulled the trigger that fateful night -- may never speak out, according to new reports and a former member of the elite unit.

"You're never going to hear from him," the ex-SEAL Team Six member told ABC News. "I've spoken to him. He's just the type that doesn't care about it... [He] doesn't think he did anything special. He simply pulled the trigger when he was supposed to. That's why he'll never go public."