jump to last post 1-34 of 34 discussions (88 posts)

Does O'Bama OWE Bush Jr. more credit for the Bin Laden assassination

  1. Stevennix2001 profile image83
    Stevennix2001posted 5 years ago

    Okay, I know this probably isn't that big of a deal to some folks, but i thought i'd bring it up anyway.  On the radio the other day, I was listening to two political analysts, and one of them still insists on labeling O'Bama a moron for how he's handled things from day one of his presidency.  Anyways, his latest gripe was that O'Bama SHOULD'VE given more credit for the assassination of Bin Laden to George W. Bush; rather than take credit for himself. Why?  Well in his mind, it was Bush's initiative that led to Bin Laden's ultimate demise, and O'Bama was just conveniently there to give the order after gaining all the facts.  Personally I can see where he's coming from on this, but I would have to disagree.  However, what are you're thoughts on this?  Does O'Bama and America owe a great deal of thanks to George W. Bush for this small victory?  Or is the victory belonging squarely with O'Bama's administration?  What are your thoughts?

    1. 61
      33rdn8thposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      March 13, 2002 GW Bush "again, I don't lnow where he is, and I'm not truly too concerned with him" 

      That sums up who should get credit for this.  It is really funny that the same folks who want to give W credit for Osama"s demise, are the same folks who spent $3 trillion failing to kill or capture Bin Laden.  I have one question for that crowd: What can this President DO RIGHT?  According to my FACTUAL clock, he has accomplished more that any president has, in his first term, in the last 3/4 century.  The other side will try to refute this, but there really is no FACTUAL basis. 

      As of now the only chance for a successful challenge to a second term is a major misinformation campaign.

      1. Stevennix2001 profile image83
        Stevennix2001posted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Wow, your awfully emotional about this.  Well to be fair, I think most politics will often spread misinformation about their opponents to win elections.  Hell, how do you think W won his reelection when he went out to make John Kerry look like a freaking hypocritical traitor to his country?  Of course, Kerry didn't exactly help his cause by not being able to answer a straight question, and the fact that his war record was true!  But, you get what I mean.  Anyways, I just hope O'Bama pulls our troops out of pakistan and afghanistan soon then, in light of this news.  Besides, we need to focus our efforts on improving the domestic problems here.

        1. Doug Hughes profile image60
          Doug Hughesposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Last Friday, the factor which defined Wingnuts who are detached from reality was the determination with which they clung to birther conspiracy theories.

          Today, they identify themselves by suggesting President Obama shouldn't get credit for what he did. We should give credit to the white president who failed miserably.

          1. Mighty Mom profile image91
            Mighty Momposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            I see people being willing to give Obama "some" credit but only if the "infrastructure" put in place by Bush (and Bush himself) get "more." Crazy.

            Apparently Bush is not interested in sharing the credit. See thread by stclairjack in which Obama invited W to a ceremony at Ground Zero and ... he declined. Hmmmmm. Suddenly he's publicity shy?

            1. sn53Anon profile image60
              sn53Anonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Often people use the name of the President as a shortcut for his administration. Can you identify anything that the boy president did, other than agree, after some waffling, apparently, to this mission? Did he push hard for increased spending on CIA activities, or increase the size of the special operations community? Or even offer lessons in Arabic to people who were hunting OBL?

              Other than be there between golf outings what did he do?

              1. Mighty Mom profile image91
                Mighty Momposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                Now why would he increase staffs or budgets? Wouldn't that just invite more criticisms from the budget hacking right?
                He didn't need more resources to accomplish this mission. The team that did it was just right!
                Besides, anyone who can make Hillary Clinton react like this must be doing something right!!!


                P.S. Regarding Obama's treatment of the CIA, at least he hasn't outed any of his agents. Can we say Valerie Plame? sad

                1. sn53Anon profile image60
                  sn53Anonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Exactly. The increase is special operations staffing occurred under, drum roll please....President George Bush.

                  And who outed her? How about Colin Powell's second in command at the always treasonous State Department?
                  http://articles.cnn.com/2006-09-08/poli … M:POLITICS

                  1. Mighty Mom profile image91
                    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Ah yes, but who took the fall? Scooter Libby.
                    If you are at all bothered by the whole WMD charade it's best not to watch movies such as "Fair Game" and "The Green Zone."
                    Bushco + Iraq = LIE.

                2. sn53Anon profile image60
                  sn53Anonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Interesting picture. Today it was reported that this was a posed, staged picture, designed to give the American people the belief that these people were watching the raids live. It was a lie.

                  1. Jeff Berndt profile image92
                    Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    Cite a source, please?

              2. Doug Hughes profile image60
                Doug Hughesposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                The President set getting OBL as a priority, which Bush did not. The CIA delivered with actionable Intel. The President decided & authorized the mission, using Seals rather than a 500 lb bomb which meant we extracted & IDd the body. In short, the President made a series of decisions and they turned out to be correct decisions.

                1. N.E. Wright profile image78
                  N.E. Wrightposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  So true.

                2. hottopics profile image60
                  hottopicsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  Doug, thats what Obama claimed. But in later versions of the story that turned out to not be true

      2. Mighty Mom profile image91
        Mighty Momposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Excellent quotage! I'd forgotten that "...I'm truly not too concerned with him" line. In hindsight, now we know why, don't we?

        It's now almost Wednesday and this is already becoming old news (to the fickle American public). Yeah, okay, we'll grant him this one "little" success. But what about... the economy? Where are the jobs?

        You're so right. Obama has to work 3x as hard and get 100x the results as any other president and he STILL gets dissed on all sides.

        Misinformation campaign? Is there any other kind coming from the right?

        1. sn53Anon profile image60
          sn53Anonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          We don't like it when you lie about us. And you don't like it when we tell the truth about you.

        2. N.E. Wright profile image78
          N.E. Wrightposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Nope!  Misinformation is all they have.  Oh, and getting ride of Medicare and Medicaid.

      3. sn53Anon profile image60
        sn53Anonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        The truth is somewhat different:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PGmnz5O … r_embedded

        But then it nearly always is.

    2. N.E. Wright profile image78
      N.E. Wrightposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      So President Bush quits looking for Osama, because he wants to go into Iraq, and he should get the credit?  For what?  Getting it wrong all the time.  Also,   
      Lets pretend the CIA kept looking for Bin Laden even though the Commander in Chief stopped.  Who would they have given the information to?  Well, Bush, but he did nothing with the information about Bin Laden before 9/11.  He basically ignored it.

    3. GNelson profile image84
      GNelsonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      You get very little done if you worry about who gets the credit.  I am sure that those TV guys are expert at getting very little done.  It was an American victory!!  We did it!!!

    4. ThinkLoud profile image62
      ThinkLoudposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Give Bush credit for letting 9/11 happen on "his watch". The same way they give Bush credit for nothing happening "after 9/11" on his watch.

      Give Bush credit for getting everyone (except Obama) to agree with him to go to Iraq. Give him credit for the capture of "Saddam Hussein" (the wrong guy).

      Give 33rdN8th credit for posting the George Bush quote:  "again, I don't know where he is, and I'm not truly too concerned with him". However this man says that the world is a safer place now that Suddam is gone.

      Yea ignore Bush's failures and point out anything Obama does that you consider a failure. Then give Bush credit for Obama's success's, WOW.

      You have to listen to those radio station for "ENTERTAINMENT" value and not for "factual" information.

    5. hottopics profile image60
      hottopicsposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      No President deserves the credit The credit soley belongs to the Intelligence community and the Navy Seals. Dems and Repubs need to stop trying to take credit

  2. Mighty Mom profile image91
    Mighty Momposted 5 years ago

    Well, we had our brief bipartisan moment, with declared conservatives offering congratulations to Obama (see Billy D. Ritchie thread "giving credit where credit is due").
    I posted excerpts from a Washington Post/Pew poll.
    Apparently your political analyst is not alone in his thinking. A lot of Republicans polled think Bush should get credit.

    Personally, I think saying W deserves the credit for Obama taking out bin Laden is like saying Bush Sr. deserves the credit for W taking out Saddam Hussein.

    1. Stevennix2001 profile image83
      Stevennix2001posted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Oh I'm sorry. I didn't know there was a thread already on this topic. I do apologize for that.  However, I do agree with you MM completely on that, as I think the credit should go to the O'Bama administration.  After all, Bush didn't order the troops to go into Pakistan to investigate the Al Quaida like O'Bama did, so I don't see how you can argue that all the credit should go towards Bush Jr.  Unless you can cite evidence suggesting that Bush Jr. was going to do that all along before his presidency ended, and O'Bama was merely carrying out his plans.  However, that would beg the question on why didn't W. act on those plans then if that was the case...

    2. Jeff Berndt profile image92
      Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      "I think saying W deserves the credit for Obama taking out bin Laden is like saying Bush Sr. deserves the credit for W taking out Saddam Hussein."
      You mean Clinton, right?

      1. Mighty Mom profile image91
        Mighty Momposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        No, I mean Bush Senior, as W went into Iraq to finish his FATHER'S business. Not Clinton's.

        1. Jeff Berndt profile image92
          Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Yeah, I see what you mean, but it was never Bush Sr's goal to depose Saddam. After all, Cheney said it would end up a quagmire.

          1. Mighty Mom profile image91
            Mighty Momposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Quagmire is an understatement!

    3. DTR0005 profile image86
      DTR0005posted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Here's a real novel idea. How about everyone, both sides, gets a little credit. After all, we are ALL Americans. I hate to fly my "jingo" in the breeze here, but it was an American effort - not a "blue" or "red" effort.
      You know, this divisiveness on EVERYTHING is the precise goal of our enemies abroad. It looks as it, even in death, this "f**CK" is accomplishing his originally stated goal.

  3. Diane Inside profile image87
    Diane Insideposted 5 years ago

    I think Busch deserves some credit as well as Obama. It was a colaborative effort. There are so many more who should get the credit as well. Were it not for the seals it wouldn't have happened, at least not like this. Obama will I'm sure ride on this come election time. But at the end of the day, America is a little bit safer now that this man is dead. Although now I'm sure someone will rise up and take his place, Bin Ladin was one man who had to be stopped.

    So yes I give both Busch and Obama credit. Oh and I saw somewhere that some are already up in arms about him being unarmed.  I say this, he let his guard down, got a little to comfortable, and he never once thought about the lives of all those people who died in the 9/11 attacks as to whether they were armed. So while it seems so bad to be happy about the death of any human being I am sad to say I am happy.

    1. Stevennix2001 profile image83
      Stevennix2001posted 5 years ago in reply to this

      Well you do make an excellent point there, Diane.  Personally, I think the Navy SEALS that were on the mission should be honored as heroes for bringing one of the world's deadliest terrorists to justice.  I just hope this reestablishes faith in the military again, and that means this is a sign that war could be coming to an end soon. I doubt it, but one has to hope so.

  4. brimancandy profile image84
    brimancandyposted 5 years ago

    Whomever this political analyst was, he obviously hasn't been paying any attention to what Obama and others have been saying about the death of Bin Laden. This is a joint effort, with years of data collected from the CIA. Obama has never said he did it alone, as Bush did when he claimed mission accomplished on the war in Iraq when nothing was accomplished at all. No big banners, no showing up on an aircraft carrier and attempting to turn yourself into this big hero. Just a simple brief statement to say that the original mission to capture Bin laden ended in his death.

    If you watched Obama's speech, he mentioned the efforts of George Bush, 911, and claimed no victory for any party or president, but a victory for all of America and the safety of allies. To say that this is a victory for the republicans or the democrats is someone that is not looking at the whole picture, just more attempts by people who want him out of office to use the media in their endless attempts to make him look bad.

    There is even a report going around that Bin Laden has been dead for years and the CIA has been keeping it a secret, and that Bush new about it, but tried to keep it under wraps so he could look like this big terrorist hunter. They say he wanted to keep america afraid so that the republicans could continue to milk the fear of Bin Laden to keep people in favor of their wars.

    But, If that is the truth it would really piss people off. That would say that they tried to fool the american people twice, just like they did with the weapons of mass destruction. But, nothing they do would surprise me. Trying to make Obama look bad, seems to be their only platform.

    1. Stevennix2001 profile image83
      Stevennix2001posted 5 years ago in reply to this

      very interesting analogy there, and one that I could definitely agree with.  Personally, I'm more interested to see what happens AFTER this turn of events, as I'm wondering if the death of Bin Laden means the end of the war.  That's what I really want to know.

      1. Jeff Berndt profile image92
        Jeff Berndtposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Oh, of course not. This war won't really be over until Afghanistan and Iraq have stable governments that don't need to be propped up by our military.

        And we have to establish stable friendly governments in both countries since we need friendlies in charge so we can get the oil (in Iraq, and in Khazakstan, via a pipeline through Afghanistan).

        1. Terri Meredith profile image90
          Terri Meredithposted 5 years ago in reply to this


  5. Jaydeus profile image80
    Jaydeusposted 5 years ago

    Not at all.  Bush said  that chasing bin Laden was nothing more than ''swatting flies''.
    Obama told CIA instantly upon office to get him.  2 years later(Bush had 8 and even had intelligence from 8 years of Clinton).
    Bush didn't want troops on bin Laden that he could have securing oil in Iraq.

    1. Stevennix2001 profile image83
      Stevennix2001posted 5 years ago in reply to this

      hard to argue with that, as Bush really did drop the ball during his administration.

      1. cynthia50u profile image59
        cynthia50uposted 5 years ago in reply to this


    2. Paul Wingert profile image79
      Paul Wingertposted 5 years ago

      Bush said that catching Bin Laden is not a priority - Since the Bin Laden family and the Bush's are friends. I new that Bin Laden would be captured or killed under another president's watch.

      1. Stevennix2001 profile image83
        Stevennix2001posted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Hey now, lets not get into any type of government conspiracies here. wink  lol j/k

    3. brimancandy profile image84
      brimancandyposted 5 years ago

      Gee how people forget.

      Wasn't it the Bush Administration that attempted to tie Bin Laden to Saddam, as part of the reasons for going to war in Iraq almost immediately after 911? Along with the whole weapons of mass destruction lie, when they learned that they were wrong?

      Then, they almost instantly swept that under the rug, using Bin Laden to Justify going to war in Afganistan? Even though most everyone knows that both wars are about oil. With Libya once again added to the oil chain. I mean really, was anyone surprised that Bin Laden was not found in Afganistan? I wasn't.

      1. Mighty Mom profile image91
        Mighty Momposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        ... or in a cave?

        1. brimancandy profile image84
          brimancandyposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          My original thoughts were that Bin Laden was someplace warm sipping cocktails and watching the wars on television, and laughing the whole time. I knew he wasn't in a cave. The man was rich, why hide in a cave when you have enough money to hide anywhere you want and people who will take your money to hide you there as long as they get paid. No surprise.

          1. 61
            33rdn8thposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            You weren't far off.  It was warm, not sure about the cocktails, but it was a vacation town

          2. Mighty Mom profile image91
            Mighty Momposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            But who ever, ever would have suspected PAKISTAN?
            Helloooooo? Could he be any more obvious???? Could they be any more corrupt???

            1. 61
              33rdn8thposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Crawford would have been another warm place where I am sure he would have been welcomed.  Afterall he was the star of the Bush Presidency.

      2. Stevennix2001 profile image83
        Stevennix2001posted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Same here. It wouldn't surprise me if the conspiracy runs deeper than any of us know, as I don't buy into the Pakistan government claiming they knew nothing about Bin Laden hiding out there.  If you ask me, something sure does smell fishy about that whole situation, as I think many of their officials knew more than what they're telling our officials there.  Of course, I could be wrong, as I can't prove it, but it's just a theory.

    4. Jonathan Janco profile image81
      Jonathan Jancoposted 5 years ago

      If W deserves credit for taking out bin Laden, then that means our current president would not have had the chance to do this.
      If W had given the orders to take him out any of the several times he supposedly did, this wouldnt have been an issue once Obama was cic.

      And we're in Afghanistan and Iraq for oil???
      NO we are not.

      The DOD doesnt keep everything secret. And they've been clear for some time that we are looking to conquer and hold the Caspian Sea, due to the shrinking supply of fresh water.

    5. DannyMaio profile image60
      DannyMaioposted 5 years ago

      some of you people are either very dumb or just spinning nonsense! does Obama derserve credit for giving the OK to go in? YES absolutely! But just remember It was Bush who had the CIA get info from the prisoners! The second day in office Obama cancelled the CIA doing interrogating! This info would never have come to light if not for the Bush administration! that is a fact and any of you Obama a$$ kissers deny that your just ridiculous. Obama even said it has been going on for 4 years! he is only in office 2 1/2 years, you can do math...correct? Obama wants Guantanamo closed...remember? This was all started from the Bush Administration and Obama did give the correct orders. As far as Bush going to Ground Zero...why should he? He said way before this, he wasn't going to get involved anymore, he didn't help with campaigns and said many times he wants out of the spot light. I think he made great mistakes as president...Iraq the biggest! but lets not say GW didn't have a big part in this capture. If he was like bill Clinton he would have asked to go! he is a media whore!

      1. proudlib profile image58
        proudlibposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I knew someone would be chiming in with this nonsense.  1) There is no evidence that the information leading to this operation was the result of "enhanced interrogation" (torture.)  As a matter of fact, the raid was the result of many pieces of intel over a period of years, including (and probably mostly) in the past 2 1/2 years.  "That is a fact?"  Evidence?  Proof?  No one from the Bush administration, including those who are serial fabricators, have definitively stated that any key information leading to this raid was obtained during Bush's regime or from "enhanced interrogation."  So you must have evidence that all tyou say is true.   Please share it with us.

        1. DannyMaio profile image60
          DannyMaioposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          Of course most would be in the last 2 1/2 years because it suites you well! bottom line is and you know it! this man can not even release a dam pic! you know dam well this bleeding heart would have never even allowed certain operations to take place! enough with the BS already! He made the right decision here for once and I bet he had to be pushed into it! The info that was given came from 2003 and then they received much more in 2007 these are facts! your own messiah stated them, do you want to deny that also? please be real!

          1. proudlib profile image58
            proudlibposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            You have no evidence for anything that you say.  I do not "know damn well" and neither do you.  You presume to know what is inside the hearts and minds of me and of Obama.  You don't.  And you make up things you say my "messiah" stated.  He did not.   If he did, I am sure it is on the internet somewhere.  Point me to it.  Every time you say "these are facts" with no evidence, you decrease your credibility.  Right now you have none with me.

            1. DannyMaio profile image60
              DannyMaioposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Here you go! read it! After they caught some terrorist! read it and weep! 2005 and got the couriers name in 2007! Obama wasn't president! also he stopped the CIA from interrogating anyone anymore and the fool announced it and anyone caught now doesn't speak! if it wasn't for Bush Osama would still be out there. The link to the full article is at the bottom.

              The Intel

              According to the administration, the CIA had long been gathering “leads on individuals in bin Laden’s inner circle, including his personal couriers. Detainees in the post-9/11 period flagged for us individuals who may have been providing direct support to bin Laden and his deputy, Zawahiri, after their escape from Afghanistan.”

              The CIA focused on one courier in particular, whose nom de guerre was given up by detainees, who also identified him as both a protégé of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and a trusted assistant of Abu Faraj al-Libbi, the former number three of al Qaeda who was captured in 2005.

              The administration official said detainees also identified the man as one of the few al Qaeda couriers trusted by bin Laden. They also indicated he might be living with and protecting bin Laden. Still, for years, U.S. intelligence officials didn’t have his name or location.

              According to the official, the U.S. uncovered the courier’s identity in 2007, along with the areas in Pakistan where the individual and his brother operated, though they were unable to pinpoint a location. The official said the brothers maintained strong operational security, which only reinforced the idea that the Americans were on the right track.

              http://blog.reidreport.com/2011/05/behi … bin-laden/

    6. Mindtrapz profile image61
      Mindtrapzposted 5 years ago

      No I dont think Bush needs any credit. Im still mad at him for lying to my face that there was actually weapons of mass destruction in Iraq when he just wanted Saddam!

      1. Stevennix2001 profile image83
        Stevennix2001posted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Well to be fair, I'm sure Bush's Guantanamo Bay did open way to find out information from many terrorists captured, in regards to Bin Laden's true whereabouts.  However, I do think that the military and O'Bama's administration do deserve most of the credit for this, since W never had our troops investigate Pakistan.  that was O'Bama's orders to have our troops deployed there, and not W's. 

        As for Iraq, I completely agree with you there.  We had no business invading Iraq without proper evidence, and look where it got us.  From the way things are looking over there, i doubt we can pull out of there anytime soon.

    7. ForkArtJunkie profile image60
      ForkArtJunkieposted 5 years ago

      My views tend to lean more towards the right, many times I vote Republican. However, I'm extremely appreciative for the way in which President Obama handled this, and happy Osama is no longer free. It won't bring the 911 victims back, but it does bring a bit of relief and closure. I think we should all come together in this. Well done Obama, and of course, the Navy Seals.

    8. habee profile image92
      habeeposted 5 years ago

      I think a lot of people deserve credit for this. Obama did show some fortitude - it was a gutsy move. I'll sure give him credit for that!

    9. sunforged profile image68
      sunforgedposted 5 years ago

      Bin Laden was indicted for crimes against America as early as 1998. But, Bin Laden was never indicted for 9/11, there was never any hard evidence connecting Bin Laden and 9/11.

      It will be forgotten, but for those who like to keep their facts straight, (and as an unheard reminder to those who continue to parrot mass line) The assassination of Bin Laden in no way equals a success, vengeance or a solution to the 9/11 tragedy. (He had plenty of reasons to be considered a high priority target for crimes against America, but 9/11 was not the event linked)

    10. I am DB Cooper profile image66
      I am DB Cooperposted 5 years ago

      First of all, I didn't realize Obama was an Irish name. Second, I don't think George W. Bush deserves any more credit than he's getting. The mission that took down Osama bin Laden wasn't really the culmination of a decades worth of work in Afghanistan (except perhaps indirectly), it was the result of high level intelligence work, the tactical precision of the U.S. Navy Seals, and a president willing to make a gutsy call and order U.S. troops to take out a target on the soil of a sovereign nation -- something John McCain said he wouldn't do.

      To compare, I don't think the situation that led to the capture of Saddam Hussein was in any way similar to how Osama was brought down. Having a massive military presence in Iraq is what brought Saddam down. If you have enough people searching the haystack, eventually you'll find the needle. Osama was brought down without him even knowing we were getting close to him. Most of the legwork was done by tapping phones and examining satellite photos.

      Any way you look at this, it's a huge win for Obama. He made a campaign promise that if he was put in this situation this is what he'd do, and he did it. People were worried that Pakistan would be pissed. Some of them probably are, but not enough to sever relations with the United States. What can they really say? The way Osama was killed pretty much proves there were some pretty powerful people in Pakistan who were protecting him at the same time the country was receiving $1 billion a year in aid from the United States. They can either get pissed at the United States and have us cut off aid and possibly use force to send them back to the dark ages, or they can wipe the egg off their face and move on. It seems they are choosing the latter.

      1. proudlib profile image58
        proudlibposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I was wondering about that O'Bama MacSomething myself.  Black Irish, I guess.  (I know it's old, but someone had to say it.)
        I don't mind giving Bush a little credit here, but if any of this info was gained through torture, it wasn't worth the stain on our dignity.

    11. Maembe profile image60
      Maembeposted 5 years ago

      The Right has looked really silly the last couple weeks.  They'll say anything they can to save face.

    12. dutchman1951 profile image59
      dutchman1951posted 5 years ago

      Yes he owes Bush more than he is giving. But He is too busy grandstanding for the next election.

      Problem though, still no jobs, we are buying our own debt and we still have to deal in world markets that are closibng, so...

      The wounder Boy can parade in NYC all he wants to but he still has to explain no jobs, and an un-authorised war in Libya, and the obvious double standards of dealing with different countries rebellions. One kill does not make a foregin polocy viable.

      Its like dancing in the endzone when your still 60 points behind! No purpose to it.

      2012 guys, time for Dumbo and Cinderella to head home and stay there.

      1. proudlib profile image58
        proudlibposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        "wounder Boy", "Dumbo and Cinderella."  Are these examples of intelligent debate?

    13. pisean282311 profile image59
      pisean282311posted 5 years ago

      well he has already taken care of giving bush the credit...but we must remember osama was in pakistan for six years as reported and obama is president merely since 2.5 yrs...bush started what obama finished...so both should get equal credit...but considering obama delivered what he promise in his pre election speeches, he needs to be applauded ,irrespective of whether one is democrat or not...

    14. Greek One profile image80
      Greek Oneposted 5 years ago

      Obama should thank bush for looking at every single place possible for bin Laden....

      accept where he was most probably hanging out

      1. pisean282311 profile image59
        pisean282311posted 5 years ago in reply to this

        lollollollol ya thats true...that made things easy for obama

    15. Greek One profile image80
      Greek Oneposted 5 years ago

      "It is my pleasure to introduce my new head of Homeland secutiry, sitting to my left, Mr. Christian Whiteman.

      Mr Smith will lead the search for bin Laden, and has already uncovered a lead that makes us believe he is hiding out a Hershel's Deli in Brooklyn"


    16. Stevennix2001 profile image83
      Stevennix2001posted 5 years ago

      I have to agree with DTR here.  Plus, I think it's ridiculous that our country has been divided up politically for far too long, as I think now is the time that we should all put aside our petty differences and celebrate this achievement.  Granted, one might say that killing this man won't make a difference, but it certainly brings justice to all those that suffered during the whole 9/11 incident.

      1. Will Apse profile image89
        Will Apseposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Killing an unarmed man dead (whoever evil) and shooting his wife in the leg is something to celebrate?

        I live in this weird world where justice is associated with a trial not summary execution.

        1. Stevennix2001 profile image83
          Stevennix2001posted 5 years ago in reply to this

          You mean an unarmed man that orchestrated arguably one of the biggest mass murders in world history?  Look, I'm not a violent person, as I certainly don't believe in it to solve problems.  However, I do know we live in an unjust society, where sometimes extreme measures are the only way to ensure justice. 

          I know to you shooting an unarmed man, in your perspective, was wrong.  However, was it fair that this unarmed man and his Al Quaida followers celebrated the same day they killed many unarmed innocent civilians? 

          Were you among the same people complaining on how unfair it was on how our American soldiers treated their Al Quaida prisoners?  Even though, we all know what the Al Quaida do to our soldiers is far worse, and it's a war where the soldiers sometimes have to do things that may not seem morally just to you to survive.  Seriously, it's a damn war buddy.  People die in wars, and you can't always win by fighting fair.  This is why I still say the President should outlaw all media from ever going to war with our soldiers, as all they do is vilify them to liberals like yourself.

    17. Anolinde profile image88
      Anolindeposted 5 years ago

      "Osama bin Laden was a) killed by a unit overseen by what New Yorker reporter Seymour Hersh denounced as Vice President Dick Cheney's "executive assassination ring," which was b) sent into action based on intel derived from the now-outlawed "enhanced interrogation techniques," which were c) used on detainees captured during the George W. Bush administration, who were d) being held in now-outlawed "secret prisons" or in the intended-to-be-closed Gitmo."

      http://townhall.com/columnists/larryeld … the_credit

    18. ArtzGirl profile image82
      ArtzGirlposted 5 years ago

      Before celebrating the recent "death" of Bin Laden, do your homework.

      Multiple sources on youtube show that Bin Laden died several years ago.

      Here is one of the most convincing videos.  The woman who is stating this does not bat an eye.  She states the fact that Bin Laden is dead, just as easily as any other everyday fact.

      Unfortunately, this woman was later assassinated?  Was this mere coincidence?  Or, could she have been murdered to keep quiet about the fact that Bin Laden has been dead a number of years.


      Keep in mind, Bin Laden was a dialysis patient that was seriously ill.  It would have been quite a struggle for him to have survived years in the back caves of Afghanistan, or Pakistan-- without having the ability to have dialysis treatments.

      There is even a story circulating on youtube that Bin Laden was treated by an American doctor living over seas.  Apparently a CIA officer had visited him in the hospital. -- I'm sorry, I don't have that link, but I viewed it a few days ago.  It is circulating on youtube.com somewhere.


      Understanding the "TRUTH" behind 9/11 makes this false celebration of Bin Laden all the more sketchy.

      What are they trying to usher in?  They are now talking about the random terrorist threats that the USA will have on its railroads and bridges.  What are "They" up to now?

      Geez... analyzing all of the details of 9/11, and the CRAZY @ssed stories that they contrived on the media, only gives major question to ANYTHING that they announce further with this story.

      People, get your heads out of your @ss.  This stuff is contrived.  They are manufacturing lies and deception to push their ideas of Imperialism forward.  Look what has happened to America after 9/11.  Now we are ruled by this ridiculous control freak "Patriot Act" that is stripping our country of its very rights.  You can't even board a plane without making a choice to be x-rayed where it shows every ounce of body fat and your sexual organs... or making the choice to have someone "get more friendly with you-- than most people do on a first date".

      Wake the heck up!!!

      There is more to this story!

    19. ArtzGirl profile image82
      ArtzGirlposted 5 years ago

      Video where woman casually mentions that Bin Laden is already dead...


    20. ArtzGirl profile image82
      ArtzGirlposted 5 years ago

      PLEASE:  Do your homework!!! K?

      I have posted an article that goes into over 3 years of study into all of the events of 9/11.

      This hubpage features some of the BEST video information on the subject of 9/11 Truth.

      http://hubpages.com/hub/Questioning-the … ry-of-9-11

      Please take the time to educate yourselves.


      The entire "official story of 9/11" is fabricated.  There were people who made millions off placing stock option "puts" on several stocks, about 2-3 days BEFORE the planes hit the World Trade Center.

      Check out this story--
      The News has NOT reported this stuff---

      Because it blows the whole case that they contrived!


      You've got to see the videos that I posted.
      This will explain a number of things that you really need to know-- BEFORE celebrating this ridiculous death of Bin Laden.

      What?  Is he a cat with 9 Lives or something?  He's been dead for years!!!  They are just now announcing this to bring us one step closer to some form of "terrorist threat"... where they can gain more control over the "Sheeple".  Look for some type of movement closer to "Martial Law" after this. 

      They are almost following the Nazi Agenda to a "T".
      Do your homework.
      Stop believing EVERYTHING that you hear on your news.

      You are being spoon fed information that has no basis in REAL TRUTH!!!

    21. ArtzGirl profile image82
      ArtzGirlposted 5 years ago

      This is one of the most thorough investigations into the events of 9/11.

      Dr. Ray Griffin, brings up MANY details that have NOT been covered in the "original story" that was unraveling the day of 9/11.

      He appears to have a doctorate degree on this subject, amazing research and delivery of his findings:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXw3jJ30 … ure=fvwrel

    22. Greek One profile image80
      Greek Oneposted 5 years ago

      Bush doesn't need any credit from Obama.. he just announced his own triumph..


    23. psycheskinner profile image82
      psycheskinnerposted 5 years ago

      Bush isn't seeking credit and deliberately chose to keep a low profile after he left office.  That should be respected.

    24. roshall profile image81
      roshallposted 5 years ago


    25. JON EWALL profile image50
      JON EWALLposted 5 years ago

      Tom Donilon on Bin Laden Raid
      May 8, 2011
      - 13:59 -
      President Obama's national security adviser on 'Fox News Sunday'


    26. Hugh Williamson profile image90
      Hugh Williamsonposted 5 years ago

      We will probably never know the identity of the parties most responsible for getting Bin Laden. Someone doing a boring or dangerous job (actually it's more likely a bunch of people) provided vital information.

      Obama gets credit for good judgment since he made the correct decision to act on what they had...and for having the courage to launch the risky operation. GWB worked for most of his term trying to do the same thing.

      The Bin Laden issue won't define either president's legacy but the weight of all of their decisions, taken in total, will.

    27. melpor profile image89
      melporposted 5 years ago

      It doesn't matter who gets credit for killing Osama. He finally got what he deserved for killing thousands of innocent people simply because they are Americans. Hate is a strong emotion.

    28. 0
      Longhunterposted 5 years ago

      Bush isn't the kind of man to sit back and beat his chest over the killing of another human being no matter how much that man needed to be taken out. Bin Laden is dead and that's what matters.

      Given that Obama called Bush and told him himself as well as invited him to join him at Ground Zero, I think Obama has given Bush the credit that's appropriate.

      1. 0
        Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        The real credit goes to the brave SEALs who did their job without expecting anything but their pay. From me, they have my gratitude for a job well done.

    29. 0
      THAT Mary Annposted 5 years ago

      I just want to point out it's Obama, not "O'Bama" as is O'Neill or O'Keefe.  The president you dislike so much just proved he was born in Hawaii, bit Dublin.

      As far as the rest of your rant goes, This country owes George W. Bush NOTHING.  He owes all of US, especially the thousands of families who have lost loved ones in these two stupid wars he started, which have bankrupted the nation and destroyed the economy.

      1. 0
        Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        Liberalism is a disease caused by stupidity, immaturity, and a complete and total lack of patriotism for this country.

        It's time for some people to wake up and take responsibility. Two years in, this is now Obama's economy that he's only made worse with the help of a Dem-majority Congress, now only the Senate (Thank, God!).

        It's sad to say but my three year old son takes more responsibility for his actions than does Obama or any other Dem for that matter.

        1. Paul Wingert profile image79
          Paul Wingertposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          That's exactly what the liberals think of the conservatives.

          1. 0
            Longhunterposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            I'm sure that's true, Paul. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I just wish we had a president who would say, almost two and half years into his presidency, "This is our fault." or "What we're doing isn't working so lets try something else."

            Is Obama the first not to do this? Oh, hell, no. But wouldn't it be refreshing to have a person in the White House who cared more about the country and it's people than their poll numbers or the next election?

            Before anyone gets their back up, this easily applies to both parties and not just this president.

    30. BobbiRant profile image78
      BobbiRantposted 5 years ago

      YES he Does.  That's why Bush and his henchmen Could Not get the job done in 8 years They were so Good at what they did.   LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL  LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL