Implications of Bin Laden's death?

darkman2 · 02-05-2011 4:18am #1

He is dead. Oh yes he is. Obama to announce it soon.

MAJOR news really. His body is in US custody.

southsiderosie · 02-05-2011 4:24am

Bin Laden was announced dead (still waiting for Obama's comments).

What does this mean for the "War on Terror"?

While this must be tremendously cathartic for the 9/11 victims, how much does this really change on the ground? It doesn't seem like this is a situation where cutting off the head kills the snake. And I shudder to think of the kind of absurd chest-thumping that will be all over the news tomorrow morning (Fox is already reporting that people are chanting "U-S-A" outside of the White House).

As a side note, the media coverage of this in the US is absolutely dire.

Chuck Stone · 02-05-2011 4:26am

I don't think it will change much except that if he was killed by the US he will be an eternal martyr.

amacachi · 02-05-2011 4:26am

southsiderosie wrote: »

Bin Laden was announced dead (still waiting for Obama's comments).

What does this mean for the "War on Terror"?

While this must be tremendously cathartic for the 9/11 victims, how much does this really change on the ground? It doesn't seem like this is a situation where cutting off the head kills the snake. And I shudder to think of the kind of absurd chest-thumping that will be all over the news tomorrow morning (Fox is already reporting that people are chanting "U-S-A" outside of the White House).

As a side note, the media coverage of this in the US is absolutely dire.

Fox is hilarious, was amazed Geraldo managed to keep both hands above the desk level.

I don't imagine it'll make a massive difference overall. Wouldn't be too surprised to see a few quick bombings somewhere in the Arab world over the next few days and then it'll settle and simmer down again.

southsiderosie · 02-05-2011 4:34am

amacachi wrote: »

Fox is hilarious, was amazed Geraldo managed to keep both hands above the desk level.

I don't imagine it'll make a massive difference overall. Wouldn't be too surprised to see a few quick bombings somewhere in the Arab world over the next few days and then it'll settle and simmer down again.

I wouldn't be surprised to see attempted bombings/reprisals in Europe against US/Western targets - it's easier to hit US interests there than in the Middle East.

deise go deo · 02-05-2011 4:40am

I'll believe it when Osama mentions it in his next tape release.;)

southsiderosie · 02-05-2011 4:46am

Watching the speech now...he's striking a bit of an odd note I think.

amacachi · 02-05-2011 4:50am

Awfully hard to predict but I'm not saying they'll go after specifically American targets in the Middle East. Just about anything is a "legitimate target" to them.

Chuck Stone · 02-05-2011 4:50am

What the hell are they going to do with the body?

jank · 02-05-2011 5:02am

Implications is that now we are at the end of the beginning of the war on terror. What this new phase will bring is anyones guess.

One thing for sure, huge PR coup for Obama. If he can just give the economy a bit more puff then re-election is a sure thing.

Byron85 · 02-05-2011 5:03am

Chuck Stone wrote: »

What the hell are they going to do with the body?

Use it to replace Oscar the Grouch on Sesame Street.

In all seriousness though, expect serious reprisals over the coming weeks and months. I wouldn't be surprised to see a major urban centre in Europe being one of the targets.

amacachi · 02-05-2011 5:03am

jank wrote: »

Implications is that now we are at the end of the beginning of the war on terror. What this new phase will bring is anyones guess.

One thing for sure, huge PR coup for Obama. If he can just give the economy a bit more puff then re-election is a sure thing.

This is the end of the war on terror? How do you figure?

Einhard · 02-05-2011 5:14am

southsiderosie wrote: »

Bin Laden was announced dead (still waiting for Obama's comments).

What does this mean for the "War on Terror"?

While this must be tremendously cathartic for the 9/11 victims, how much does this really change on the ground? It doesn't seem like this is a situation where cutting off the head kills the snake. And I shudder to think of the kind of absurd chest-thumping that will be all over the news tomorrow morning (Fox is already reporting that people are chanting "U-S-A" outside of the White House).

As a side note, the media coverage of this in the US is absolutely dire.

How do you feel about it is an American?

I think this will be a huge boost for Obama. It's significant that this isn't just a lucky break, but the result of Obama's policy of targetting AQ in Pakistan, but physically, and in intelligence terms.

I don't know how much it will change things on the ground. Bin Laden was a figurehead more than anything else. His death won't necessarily disrupt operations that are being planned, or impact AQ's technical capacity as it stands. Killing al Zawahiri would have been more beneficial in that sense. However, I think it will be a major bodyblow to the morale of an orgainisation which has been significantly degraded over the past few years.

On an aside- it's absolutely incredible that he was living in the middle of Islamabad. One always pictured him hiding out in some remote valley, not in a compound in the capital of all places. Is there he possibility that he was receiving some aid from the ISI?

Exile 1798 · 02-05-2011 5:15am

Not much of an effect as far as international terrorism goes.

A political effect in America perhaps.

Will be interesting is to see what Pakistani involvement, if any, there was in the operation.

jank · 02-05-2011 5:15am

amacachi wrote: »

This is the end of the war on terror? How do you figure?

Read it again!

Exile 1798 · 02-05-2011 5:24am

Einhard wrote: »

On an aside- it's absolutely incredible that he was living in the middle of Islamabad. One always pictured him hiding out in some remote valley, not in a compound in the capital of all places. Is there he possibility that he was receiving some aid from the ISI?

Without wanting to sound like a hindsighter, I'm not surprised at all. I've always suspected he was in a Pakistani city.

Hiding in a house in a major city is a lot more discreet then being in a cave, or a remote valley or village. If you're in a rural place everyone in the area knows of your presence. In a major city all you need is one sympathiser sheltering you, providing you with food, couriering messages. You never have to leave the house. The only problem is if you are discovered you are within reach of the authorities.

darkman2 · 02-05-2011 5:25am

It would be hard to over estimate what this means to Americans.

amacachi · 02-05-2011 5:26am

Exile 1798 wrote: »

Without wanting to sound like a hindsighter, I'm not surprised at all. I've always suspected he was in a Pakistani city.

Hiding in a house in a major city is a lot more discreet then being in a cave, or a remote valley or village. If you're in a rural place everyone in the area knows of your presence. In a major city all you need is one sympathiser sheltering you, providing you with food, couriering messages. You never have to leave the house. The only problem is if you are discovered you are within reach of the authorities.

Not to mention his dialysis machines.

Manic Moran · 02-05-2011 5:27am

I think this will be a huge boost for Obama. It's significant that this isn't just a lucky break, but the result of Obama's policy of targetting AQ in Pakistan, but physically, and in intelligence terms

This isn't something you can credit to Obama. This is something for which the credit goes to the CIA and the military. Mahatma Ghandi could have been President, and this would still have occurred.

To answer the question, it doesn't make much of a difference in the large scale. Remember, it's the War on Terror, not the War on Bin Laden/Al Qaeda. He was just a very prominent target. The only large-scale effect of Bin Laden's death is remind other targets that a full decade on, the US will still come for you, so it should at least make them sleep a little less easily at night. However, that doesn't mean that this was not a good thing.

NTM

Exile 1798 · 02-05-2011 5:35am

Manic Moran wrote: »

This isn't something you can credit to Obama. This is something for which the credit goes to the CIA and the military. Mahatma Ghandi could have been President, and this would still have occurred.

Off course not, because Obama is a Democrat.

southsiderosie · 02-05-2011 5:40am

Einhard wrote: »

How do you feel about it is an American?

I think this will be a huge boost for Obama. It's significant that this isn't just a lucky break, but the result of Obama's policy of targetting AQ in Pakistan, but physically, and in intelligence terms.

I don't know how much it will change things on the ground. Bin Laden was a figurehead more than anything else. His death won't necessarily disrupt operations that are being planned, or impact AQ's technical capacity as it stands. Killing al Zawahiri would have been more beneficial in that sense. However, I think it will be a major bodyblow to the morale of an orgainisation which has been significantly degraded over the past few years.

On an aside- it's absolutely incredible that he was living in the middle of Islamabad. One always pictured him hiding out in some remote valley, not in a compound in the capital of all places. Is there he possibility that he was receiving some aid from the ISI?

I don't feel much about it to be honest. While there is a lot of symbolic importance around Bin Laden, and I see how this is quite cathartic for a lot of people, I don't think this is going to change much on the ground (and I'd expect an eruption of violence in the region). Strategically, I think this is the kind of approach that the US should have taken against Al-Qaeda in the first place, rather than wholesale invading other countries. But I don't think this will have the effect of cutting the head off of a snake; rather I worry that it will be more akin to slamming ones fist into a hornet's nest.

I am also not surprised that they found him being sheltered by wealthy Pakistanis. From what I have read, there are a lot of Bin Laden sympathizers among the Pakistani elite, and that includes the military. It will be interesting to see their reaction tomorrow.

At the end of the day, I still have friends and relatives who are in the military and directly in harm's way. The last time I went home, I spent hours listening to one of my best friends describing his experiences as an Army medic in a forward operating base in Afghanistan. Bin Laden's death won't take away his PTSD or fix his broken marriage or bring back the people that Al-Qaeda killed in the US and beyond. But hopefully it will bring some closure to the 9/11 victims, and I guess that's the best that could be said about it at this point.

Einhard · 02-05-2011 5:59am

Exile 1798 wrote: »

Hiding in a house in a major city is a lot more discreet then being in a cave, or a remote valley or village. If you're in a rural place everyone in the area knows of your presence. In a major city all you need is one sympathiser sheltering you, providing you with food, couriering messages. You never have to leave the house. The only problem is if you are discovered you are within reach of the authorities.

Only hearing now that it wasn't actually in Islamabad. 160 km outside the city according to CNN. I'd take your point, except he doesn't seem to have been living the discreet life, but in a massive walled compound, with significant security. I'd be very surprised if he could have hidden for so long in plain view without some help from elements of te Pakistani authorities.

Manic Moran wrote: »

This isn't something you can credit to Obama. This is something for which the credit goes to the CIA and the military. Mahatma Ghandi could have been President, and this would still have occurred.

From what I understand though, Obama has emphasised operations in Pakistan, including drone strikes, which have dramatically increased since he came to power. Surely it's not unreasonable to infer a concomitant increase in intelligence operations?

To answer the question, it doesn't make much of a difference in the large scale. Remember, it's the War on Terror, not the War on Bin Laden/Al Qaeda. He was just a very prominent target. The only large-scale effect of Bin Laden's death is remind other targets that a full decade on, the US will still come for you, so it should at least make them sleep a little less easily at night. However, that doesn't mean that this was not a good thing.

NTM

southsiderosie wrote: »

I don't feel much about it to be honest. While there is a lot of symbolic importance around Bin Laden, and I see how this is quite cathartic for a lot of people, I don't think this is going to change much on the ground (and I'd expect an eruption of violence in the region). Strategically, I think this is the kind of approach that the US should have taken against Al-Qaeda in the first place, rather than wholesale invading other countries. But I don't think this will have the effect of cutting the head off of a snake; rather I worry that it will be more akin to slamming ones fist into a hornet's nest.

I have to disagree with you and MM here. Osama was far from irreplaceable for AQ, and I don't think his death will degrade AQ's capabilities as they currently stand. They haven't lost a brilliant tactican or planner. However, it is a major physcological to the organisation. Osama was an asset for AQ. They valued him as a figurehead. Taking him out will, I think, have an impact on AQ's ability to inspire and motivate impressionable young Muslims.

I am also not surprised that they found him being sheltered by wealthy Pakistanis. From what I have read, there are a lot of Bin Laden sympathizers among the Pakistani elite, and that includes the military. It will be interesting to see their reaction tomorrow.

Not surprised that he might have had assistance, rather that it was apparently so blatant.

At the end of the day, I still have friends and relatives who are in the military and directly in harm's way. The last time I went home, I spent hours listening to one of my best friends describing his experiences as an Army medic in a forward operating base in Afghanistan. Bin Laden's death won't take away his PTSD or fix his broken marriage or bring back the people that Al-Qaeda killed in the US and beyond. But hopefully it will bring some closure to the 9/11 victims, and I guess that's the best that could be said about it at this point.

But it might degrade AQ's ability to attract and inspire support, and thus bring the wars that this man is involve in a step closer.

jank · 02-05-2011 6:05am

Manic Moran wrote: »

This isn't something you can credit to Obama. This is something for which the credit goes to the CIA and the military. Mahatma Ghandi could have been President, and this would still have occurred.NTM

Bush was president for 8 years and it didn't happen. It is well known that Bush didn't want to appear too eager to go into Pakistan.

Obama made covert operations into Pakistan a priority. He has to get some credit. No one is saying he did it John Rambo style but a change in policy led to results. So some credit if small is due.

Chuck Stone · 02-05-2011 6:07am

Any psychological gain will have to be balanced against the 'The great Martyr Osama died fighting the Infidels' effect.

nesf · 02-05-2011 6:36am

Obama's speech: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2011/05/01/sot.obama.bin.laden.dead.cnn?hpt=C2

Manic Moran · 02-05-2011 7:46am

jank wrote: »

Bush was president for 8 years and it didn't happen. It is well known that Bush didn't want to appear too eager to go into Pakistan.

It is. It is also well known that that didn't stop Bush from conducting operations in Pakistan. The CIA was in on the capture of Khalid Mohammed in Islamabad in 2003, for example. US/Pak relations started taking a nosedive in 2005 as a result of US operations in Pakistan. And then things really ramped up starting early 2008. The 25 or so strikes between Aug and October 2008 was as high-tempo a period as anything under the Obama adminsistration.

See, for example:
http://www.channel4.com/news/cia-pakistan-drone-strikes-what-the-experts-say

This really started up under President Bush in the summer of 2008. Before, my understanding is that it had to go up to the office of the president to approve the strikes. Now, with their increased frequency, my understanding is that that's gone away. It's become part of the battle rhythm.

It is true that drone strikes almost doubled in Obama's first year in office compared to Bush's last year. It is also true that drone production was ordered ramped up in 2008, thus allowing, in conjunction with the Iraq drawdown, the capability for increased strikes. http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2008/12/drone-war-conti/

Meanwhile, General Atomics, the main U.S. killer drone manufacturer, continues to ramp up its UAV production. "The new schedule will take us up to 15 per month; that is close to a 70 per*cent increase in production facility capacity

Bin Laden was a priority target for the US Government no matter who was in charge. You'd expect him to be found eventually.

NTM

blinding · 02-05-2011 7:57am

Bin Laden had not been doing much himself lately so I suppose he will be a bit of a martyr but also a good example that you can be got in the end no matter who you are !

irishh_bob · 02-05-2011 8:05am

southsiderosie wrote: »

Bin Laden was announced dead (still waiting for Obama's comments).

What does this mean for the "War on Terror"?

While this must be tremendously cathartic for the 9/11 victims, how much does this really change on the ground? It doesn't seem like this is a situation where cutting off the head kills the snake. And I shudder to think of the kind of absurd chest-thumping that will be all over the news tomorrow morning (Fox is already reporting that people are chanting "U-S-A" outside of the White House).

As a side note, the media coverage of this in the US is absolutely dire.

wont make any difference to anyone other than obama who will undoubtabley see a bounce in support , something quite distastefull about how events like this play out in the world of politics and media

Predator_ · 02-05-2011 8:35am

Now we can feel safe:rolleyes:

Poccington · 02-05-2011 9:05am

The real implication should be that the world will see the Pakistani's ISI for what it really is.

It certainly isn't the end of the GWOT but let's be honest, it's a hell of a morale boost for the US.

Jonny7 · 02-05-2011 9:14am

Al Qaeda is fairly loose and far flung anyway, its not like they were taking orders and liaising daily with the worlds most wanted man.. keep the figurehead alive somewhere was prob only aim.

Just saw it mentioned that they buried his body as sea... oh sweet jesus, don't be true.. all the retard conspiracy theorists will have a field day with that

Implications of Bin Laden's death?

Comments