HALO down a few dozen SF operators, sorround the area with less 'elite' units, and capture him using the operators. And a larger fast reaction force to be ready just in case things go bad. Have bombers on standby just in case.

Like others have been saying, HALO down the troops, get them in there... If there's kids there you can't possibly think of them as acceptable losses in a bombing raid - otherwise that makes us no better than bin Laden himself. To even stoop to his level in the smallest of ways is to lose what we are trying to protect. It's all about morals.

Rich

Originally Posted by ozmilman

Like others have been saying, HALO down the troops, get them in there... If there's kids there you can't possibly think of them as acceptable losses in a bombing raid - otherwise that makes us no better than bin Laden himself. To even stoop to his level in the smallest of ways is to lose what we are trying to protect. It's all about morals.

Rich

Yes I can think of them as acceptable losses as long as the numbers are minimal (from the way I read scenario-wise we are talking a family at the most), Bin Laden is some petty criminal that if you dont pick him up today well no big deal he is a man who's mission is to kill as many people as possible and because of that he needs to be taken out as soon as the opportunity arises and to a large degree regardless of cost (obviously if we were talking large numbers of innocents I wouldnt do it but if we are talking say 20 or less then go for it).

Boomb the building,kill eeryone,move ladens body to a cave. Then you have a realy big televised fire fight between him and the US army. Kill everyone who knows the truth. That could solve the problem right there but it would be a little messy for the US Government.

20 or less man? are you kidding me? One innocent death is one too many.

Maybe you're missing what i'm saying, okay... why bomb the darn building and kill innocent people, when you could go in there at night with all the wonderful technology that America posesses, and t ake him without killing ANYONE at all... That way at least you're ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that you have him.... It's the more moral, probable, and intelligent way to do it.

Rich.

Originally Posted by ozmilman

20 or less man? are you kidding me? One innocent death is one too many.

Maybe you're missing what i'm saying, okay... why bomb the darn building and kill innocent people, when you could go in there at night with all the wonderful technology that America posesses, and t ake him without killing ANYONE at all... That way at least you're ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that you have him.... It's the more moral, probable, and intelligent way to do it.

Rich.

I think you are over looking the original brief, it would appear that ground forces dont want to go or are incapable of getting there but the airforce can.

The question is do you bomb or let him go.

Given those options I would bomb.

HALO down a few dozen SF operators, sorround the area with less 'elite' units, and capture him using the operators. And a larger fast reaction force to be ready just in case things go bad. Have bombers on standby just in case.

Here is my answer to your scenario:

*SF jumpers get bumped as soon as they hit the deck, overwhelmed and undergunned they can't do anything but fight for their lives as the enemy bring the fight face to face
*your reaction force get's delayed by an ambush and IED and soon get lost in the mountainous terrain, with many wounded and they are therefore combat incapable and need to get out ASAP.
*your "Less" elite operators lose coms and can't be raised let alone be battle effective
*They then get bumped by a bigger opfor which is dug in with mortar and heavy machine gun support, and you troops are stuck without artillery, air, of casivac support due to lack of coms.

What do you do then?

--- ps: what are the bombers going to do? They can't help the lost and wounded reaction force, they can't help the "less elite" soldiers because they can't be raised, and the can't help your HALO jumpers because the enemy has got them by the belt buckle.

I think I have just blown your plan out of the water.

Urgh, this is why i hate stupid flawed hypothetical nonsense questions like this... I don't even know why i replied.

There are too many variables on both side. I honestly believe that if America found out where he is on a reliable source i think it would be an absolutely massive operation surrounding the entire place.

You've gotta have confirmation, reconnaisance, adequate troops, guarantee that he's not gonna get out before the bombs drops if you decide to bomb...

Have a little think about something though, and if anyone reading this has kids then look at them or a picture of them or something RIGHT now, and then decide whether or not you could handle losing them, then ask yourself are you willing to sacrifice your own kids? Do your kids deserve to be killed simply because they're in the wrong place at the wrong time? Maybe someone wants you dead with a passion and kills both you and your kids in the process.

Governments think of everything and everyone as dollar signs and not real people.

No i would not drop a bomb, obviously other people would, but i couldn't do it - there would have to be a better way than risking killing kids, there would just HAVE to be.

Rich

Osama Bin laden is one of those people who the US Government wants found dead or alive, they may surround the place in order to try to spare the innocent,however, it would most certainly end in some inncocent deaths. However in war there is no innocence.

How can there be no innocence in war? Sure the people fighting aren't innocent (to a point at least, i'm sure they don't want to fight and die), but there are always people caught in the middle who want nothing to do with what is going on.

How can kids NOT be innocent? Honestly... Who really agrees with the sentiment that "in war there is no innocence"???

Darcia, you can't honestly look at yourself and believe what you just wrote can you?

Seriously, everyone seems to think that killing someone is no big thing, like it's some kind of game.

Rich.