Bin Laden Raid Book: First-Hand Account Of Navy SEAL Mission Will Be Released On Sept. 11

Status
Not open for further replies.
this makes SO Much sense now.

"Mr. President, we ask that you don't ask us which one of us killed bin Laden"

dum dum dum..
cus none of them did! the punk killed himself.

That really does make so much sense.



to the "im not touching this book" people on here - yeah fucking right!!!
 
Why would the Obama administration block a book about something they've been very publicly high-fiving themselves over for a year now?

Hell they approved the movie before anyone even mentioned the book.
 
I think 0Dark30 is set in stone.

Its in post production. All the actors are home or working on different projects.
 
to the "im not touching this book" people on here - yeah fucking right!!!


Some of us still have principles, morals and beliefs and stand by them. I know in this day and age, to most in the population, it's a foreign concept, but still exists within some of us. And to answer your statement, whether it turns out in print or goes to the big screen, I won't be reading or viewing either venue.

And not because it's a SEAL centered theme, it's because of how it came to be.
 
You may not read the book or watch the movie - but you will immerse yourself in the intelligence that comes out of it. Whether from book reviews or wikipedia article on the operation. At the end of the day - you WILL know how the hit went down because of the book.
 
I still haven't watched Act of Valor...

On the other hand, I will probably have to review an advance copy of No Easy Day before it is released for fact checking if nothing else.
 
I find some inconsistencies or ambiguities in the article:

". . . when I heard suppressed shots. BOP. BOP,"

". . . he was unarmed, writes Owen."

It is very hard to shoot yourself twice. It might be hard to shoot yourself and be "unarmed" depending on how you define "unarmed." Did the weapon fly from his hand after shooting himself, thus rendering him unarmed? If so, where is it? Or was he truly unarmed, meaning someone else (not a SEAL) shot him? These inconsistencies lead me to believe someone else shot him. His wife, the young girl or . . . ?

However:

"He hadn’t even prepared a defense. He had no intention of fighting. He asked his followers for decades to wear suicide vests or fly planes into buildings, but didn’t even pick up his weapon. In all of my deployments, we routinely saw this phenomenon. The higher up the food chain the targeted individual was, the bigger a pussy he was.”

This is stupid. First, UBL may not have anticipated the need to prepare a defense or engage in a fight. How long had he lived peacefully in PStan? Second, if the SEALs executed their mission properly, which apprently they did, then there would be no oportunity to fight; surprise, violence of action, volume of fire, all that shit. See below.

So, if the SEALs did not shoot him, and he did not shoot himself, and if he was unarmed, and if a search of the room disclosed only two unloaded weapons, and no defense was prepared, then WTF?

"And it wasn't true that bin Laden had "time to look into our eyes."

Yeah, so how is he going to mount a defense or fight?

As to the harsh words for the POTUS, if I were the POTUS I'd say, okay, next time SEALs won't get the call. I'll try dialing up someone who can keep their fucking mouths shut, keep their politics to themselves, honor their NDAs and keep their personality conflicts in the school yard. Oh, no such thing due to human nature? Well then, maybe we'll just send in a cruise missle next time.

I wonder if Mr. "Owen" is going to give us all some insight into the in-house problems he had, or is he all of a sudden so "professional" that he won't air team dirty laundry? LOL!
 
It is very hard to shoot yourself twice. It might be hard to shoot yourself and be "unarmed" depending on how you define "unarmed." Did the weapon fly from his hand after shooting himself, thus rendering him unarmed? If so, where is it? Or was he truly unarmed, meaning someone else (not a SEAL) shot him? These inconsistencies lead me to believe someone else shot him. His wife, the young girl or . . . ?

I must have missed it in the article, where does he assert that the SEALs did NOT shoot UBL?

The way I read it, the first guy through the door shot him and the author who was second did not witness the shots. If UBL was unarmed, the author just made it possible for some leftist, liberal d-bag to scream "murder!"
 
I must have missed it in the article, where does he assert that the SEALs did NOT shoot UBL?

The way I read it, the first guy through the door shot him and the author who was second did not witness the shots. If UBL was unarmed, the author just made it possible for some leftist, liberal d-bag to scream "murder!"

The first three paragraphs of the article make it clear (if the article is to be believed) the author is contending that UBL was dead already and not shot by SEALs. The plural in SEALs, plus the language of those paragraphs is not ambiguous.
 
cus none of them did! the punk killed himself.


The first three paragraphs of the article make it clear (if the article is to be believed) the author is contending that UBL was dead already and not shot by SEALs. The plural in SEALs, plus the language of those paragraphs is not ambiguous.

As the SEALS ascended a narrow staircase, the team's point man saw a man poke his head from a doorway,

"We were less than five steps from getting to the top when I heard suppressed shots. BOP. BOP," writes Owen. "I couldn't tell from my position if the rounds hit the target or not. The man disappeared into the dark room."

I dont know where you guys got he shot himself/was shot from someone else from.

He poked his head out, shots were fired, he went back inside the room.
Sounds like he got shot in the head when he poked it out to me!
 
Okay, I went and re-read it several times and, while it is a poorly written article, I guess it's possible they are saying a SEAL shot UBL with a suppressed weapon when he stuck his head out the door, leading to the inference that UBL fell back into to the room, to be found flopping when the SEALs entered the room.

The rest of my analysis stands.
 
SEALs going up staircase > UBL pokes head out > UBL takes 2 suppressed shots to the face from SEALs > SEALs enter room to find UBL (surprise, surprise) with 2 gun shot wounds, twitching

How is that difficult to glean from these articles?
 
SEALs going up staircase > UBL pokes head out > UBL takes 2 suppressed shots to the face from SEALs > SEALs enter room to find UBL (surprise, surprise) with 2 gun shot wounds, twitching

How is that difficult to glean from these articles?

The fact that more than one person didn't glean it lends support to the idea that the article was poorly written. The article does not say a SEAL (point man or otherswise) shot UBL (you have to infer that) and, with the whole lack of explanation regarding the room and the suppressed nature of the shots and the failure to actually see the shooting, it could also be infered the shooting took place inside the room.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top