Osama bin Laden

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

Seeing that it was recently the first-year anniversary of the raid in Pakistan that successfully killed Osama bin Laden, I have been wanting to create a thread about the issue. Well, here it is.

I have two central questions:

1. Do you support the killing of Osama bin Laden? Explain your position, please. Talk about all the related topics (i.e. torture of terrorists) you feel need to be addressed in the discussion. Don't hold back, because I am very curious about what you guys all think.

2. If your nation becomes a dictatorship of the proletariat after a socialist revolution, but the rest of the world has not yet joined you in socialist revolution (let's all pretend that we believe in socialism in one country, just for this one exercise) and your major cities begin being endlessly attacked by foreign terrorists, what would you do?

Well, that's about it. If you feel like you want to add anything else related to the topic into the discussion, knock yourself out.

I have yet to formulate my own opinion on the second issue, but I do agree with the killing of Osama bin Laden. I actually did lose some family members on September 11th (I don't really remember them that well, except for my aunt), so last September, I actually went back to my home city of New York City with an American flag (I am not ashamed; it was a very emotional moment for me and my family) to pay my respects at Ground Zero.

So, yay, you heard my little sob story, now please discuss. :)

[#FF0000]

I'm p. much ambivalent

[Ostrinski]

I don't really have an opinion, but I voted yes anyway. Certainly no one's shedding any tears.

[#FF0000]

oh great we got osama at the cost of the lives of hundreds of thousands of workers lol

[Manic Impressive]

I don't support state sanctioned murder

[Comrade Samuel]

oh great we got osama at the cost of the lives of hundreds of thousands of workers lol

If they had let him live he would of continued to plot to kill as many people in the west as possible and he dident only want the ruling class ones either.

Either way you look at this the workers are getting the bad end of this war so there's hardly much room to work with when you want us to discuss it.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

I don't support state sanctioned murder

I don't support terrorism.

[Manic Impressive]

I don't support terrorism.
I never said you did and neither do I. But not supporting terrorism =/= State sanctioned murder. I'm against the death penalty, I'm even more opposed to the death penalty without a trial.

[Anarcho-Brocialist]

Me and Work-Control-Over-Prod had a conversation about this yesterday, ironically.

1) Yes, I support the killing of UBL. He's responsible for the deaths of many innocent civilians. He's also a religious fanatic, and anti-Semite. He oppressed women, and anyone who disagreed with him.

2) I would indeed sanction the assassination against anyone who wanted to harm the people of our society. I can't let people murder my fellow comrades without avenging them. Additionally, a socialist society, not state, wouldn't have a reason to be attacked by any terrorists.

That's my opinion.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5102/5678309793_2148a857df.jpg

[#FF0000]

If they had let him live he would of continued to plot to kill as many people in the west as possible and he dident only want the ruling class ones either.

More civilians died from American bombs in the 'war on terror' than osama bin laden could have ever hoped to have killed in his entire life.

[#FF0000]

1) Yes, I support the killing of UBL. He's responsible for the deaths of many innocent civilians. He's also a religious fanatic, and anti-Semite. He oppressed women, and anyone who disagreed with him.

unlike the us army lol

[Yazman]

It blows my mind people would vote yes. Regardless of what he may or may not have been responsible for, there should always be a trial. Always. Justice was not done when Osama bin Laden was killed.

[#FF0000]

It blows my mind people would vote yes. Regardless of what he may or may not have been responsible for, there should always be a trial. Always. Justice was not done when Osama bin Laden was killed.

yo even that is a dumb thing, i think.

what, we're a bunch of communists who have faith in the existing institutions? really now?

[roy]

1. idk if killing him has yielded a more positive outcome than the situation that would exist if he was alive today. it seems he was more figurehead than mastermind by that stage, and now he's a martyr. anyway, i'm definitely not sad that he's dead. i'm more concerned about the civilians/workers killed as a result of the war.

2. i would try not to get killed by said terrorists

[Anarcho-Brocialist]

unlike the us army lol
Did I say I supported the Army, NATO, or ISAF? Please, don't put words in my mouth. If I'd want to get rid of the causes of death and destruction, why would I give the main contributors sanctuary?

[Manic Impressive]

yo even that is a dumb thing, i think.

what, we're a bunch of communists who have faith in the existing institutions? really now?
cop pulls you over and pulls a bag off weed out his own pocket and says it's yours.

Would you want a trial?

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

1. Even if he did have a trial, he would have just been made to wait and be interrogated at Guantanamo, which would have been more painful, and he still would have still been killed, except that in this scenario, he would have been executed instead of being killed in a way that allowed him to enjoy his dignity down to the last second.

2. Nobody is answering the other part of my question!

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

How can any leftist support a bloody imperialist state killing anyone? OBL was an amateur at death and destruction compared to the American state in particular and global capitalism in general.

[#FF0000]

cop pulls you over and pulls a bag off weed out his own pocket and says it's yours.

Would you want a trial?

Sure would but that doesn't mean I'm about to sing the praises of, or even have any sort of faith in, the American criminal justice system.


Did I say I supported the Army, NATO, or ISAF? Please, don't put words in my mouth. So who do you think should've killed him then? Y'all are acting like all of this exists in a vacuum or some shit.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

2. If your nation becomes a dictatorship of the proletariat after a socialist revolution, but the rest of the world has not yet joined you in socialist revolution (let's all pretend that we believe in socialism in one country, just for this one exercise) and your major cities begin being endlessly attacked by foreign terrorists, what would you do?

I sort of want to know what you would do, especially if you find the action that was taken wrong.

[Manic Impressive]

I don't think that either Yazman or I were doing that. We were just saying that execution without trial is even worse than execution with a trial, which is still pretty heinous.

[Lee Van Cleef]

I voted no just to counter the kind of shocking "yes" responses in this thread, but really this is a loaded question.

I don't think anyone thinks Osama bin Laden was worse than the US Army, or that American imperialism isn't responsible for more deaths than Al-Qaeda could ever dream of. That said, it's wrong to be cheerleaders for the assassination just because he was a bad person.We have to look at the bigger picture.

Did killing this one man do anything to stop Al-Qaeda? Of course not, as it is by its very nature a splintered organization. Did the operation result in the gathering of valuable intelligence which consequently saved lives? No, the US didn't learn anything from him, because they shot him and dumped his body in the ocean in a sick display of jingoism.

The only concrete result of the assignation was an approval boost for Obama, and something he could use to kick his campaign into gear a year later. It got Americans to rally behind the war in Afghanistan, and to make it seem like we were finally "winning." Hardly worth the risk to the lives of the troops involved, or the civilians inside and outside of the compound.

[#FF0000]

2. If your nation becomes a dictatorship of the proletariat after a socialist revolution, but the rest of the world has not yet joined you in socialist revolution (let's all pretend that we believe in socialism in one country, just for this one exercise) and your major cities begin being endlessly attacked by foreign terrorists, what would you do?

I sort of want to know what you would do, especially if you find the action that was taken wrong.

Uh obviously i think that a socialist society ought to be able to defend itself. that isn't what this is, though. what is going on between the US and these terrorists is basically a lover's spat between different sections of the ruling class or wannabe ruling class. there is literally no one to support -- neither group is on my side.

[Anarcho-Brocialist]

Sure would but that doesn't mean I'm about to sing the praises of, or even have any sort of faith in, the American criminal justice system.

So who do you think should've killed him then? Y'all are acting like all of this exists in a vacuum or some shit.
I honestly don't care who did; he could have been flying in a hot air balloon and a Boeing 747 could have crashed into him. I am glad he's gone, because he was going to die either way. And I don't want people like that going after my mom, family, or even you for that matter, because you / they disagree with him. You can say what you want about justice, but the point is, many defenseless people in Afghanistan didn't get a chance to argue their innocence before his bandits put a bullet in their head.

If a man were to kill a few people, I don't mind providing him with rehabilitation, but when someone kills thousands of people and has the means to kill more, they're mentally unfit to coexist with the human species.

That goes with bourgeoisie too who commands soldiers to fight their imperial wars and the soldiers who kill just for the thrills.

[#FF0000]

I honestly don't care who did

So you support the Army doing it then? You don't care who did it, right? Context isn't important?



he could have been flying in a hot air balloon and a Boeing 747 could have crashed into him. I am glad he's gone, because he was going to die either way. And I don't want people like that going after my mom, family, or even you for that matter, because you / they disagree with him. You can say what you want about justice, but the point is, many defenseless people in Afghanistan didn't get a chance to argue their innocence before his bandits put a bullet in their head.

So what you've said basically is "OBL is bad" which isn't something anyone's going to dispute, but we don't exist in a vacuum like I said. The US going after him would mean (and uh, did mean) a lot more people dying. So many in fact that people fucking miss the Taliban.

[Anarcho-Brocialist]

So you support the Army doing it then? You don't care who did it, right? Context isn't important?



So what you've said basically is "OBL is bad" which isn't something anyone's going to dispute, but we don't exist in a vacuum like I said. The US going after him would mean (and uh, did mean) a lot more people dying. So many in fact that people fucking miss the Taliban.
Again, where did I say I support who killed the guy? I don't care who did it. Scum killing scum is how I look at it.

I never said we needed a war to take him out, once again, you're putting words in my mouth :laugh:. Please, comrade, don't insinuate what my opinion is, because you're not doing a good job doing it.

I never said we needed a war. Never said I supported the Navy killing him. I only said I'm glad he's gone.

[Manic Impressive]

Again, where did I say I support who killed the guy?
Here

Me and Work-Control-Over-Prod had a conversation about this yesterday, ironically.

1) Yes, I support the killing of UBL. He's responsible for the deaths of many innocent civilians. He's also a religious fanatic, and anti-Semite. He oppressed women, and anyone who disagreed with him.

2) I would indeed sanction the assassination against anyone who wanted to harm the people of our society. I can't let people murder my fellow comrades without avenging them. Additionally, a socialist society, not state, wouldn't have a reason to be attacked by any terrorists.

That's my opinion.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5102/5678309793_2148a857df.jpg

[Anarcho-Brocialist]

Here
Look at the question : Originally Posted by ProvenSocialist
Again, where did I say I support who killed the guy?

Nice try. You too failed.

[Manic Impressive]

The title of the thread is do you support the killing of Osama Bin Laden.

You said "Yes, I support the killing of UBL"

Then posted a picture of Barrack Obama

[Anarcho-Brocialist]

The title of the thread is do you support the killing of Osama Bin Laden.

You said "Yes, I support the killing of UBL"

Then posted a picture of Barrack Obama

Indeed, I support his killing; him being dead.

Never said I supported who killed him though. You're trying to build a house with no foundation here. We can debate between it all night. But you can't say I supported the navy killing him. Obama made a good decision in issuing the order. I support the decision for him to go.

Anyways, show me where I supported the war, and the people who killed him. Or, you could actually go with what I said instead of trying to build a house with no foundation.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Obama made a good decision in issuing the order.
So, yes, you support an order given by a bourgeois politician for an imperialist military force to kill someone.

[Blake's Baby]

2. If your nation becomes a dictatorship of the proletariat after a socialist revolution, but the rest of the world has not yet joined you in socialist revolution (let's all pretend that we believe in socialism in one country, just for this one exercise) and your major cities begin being endlessly attacked by foreign terrorists, what would you do?

I sort of want to know what you would do, especially if you find the action that was taken wrong.

Why should we pretend we believe in Socialism in One Country? Why don't you pretend you believe in fairies, and answer your question that way? Or perpetual motion machines, the Boogeyman, Gandalf, God, Alien Invasion, or a flat earth, and tell us how that alters things? If we're off into the realms of fantasy, why stop with Socialism in One Country?

I would attack neighbouring countries with my mind-controlled dragons who would teleport all the baddies into a floating prison-asteroid held up by magic repulsion rays directed from Atlantis.

However, if what you mean is 'during the world revolution, how would a revolutionary territory deal with the inevitable intervention from neighbouring territories that have not yet had a revolution?' then that doesn't require the belief in Socialism in One Country, even as a hypothetical excercise.

Can I ask what the relevance is of question 1 to question 2, given that neither Afghanistan nor the US were revolutionary territories, and Al Q'aeda didn't 'endlessly attack' American cities, though it could be argued that America did 'endlessly attack' Afghan cities. Is your question really then 'do you agree Al Q'aeda should have attempted to kill President Obama?'

[Krano]

I actually went back to my home city of New York City with an American flag (I am not ashamed; it was a very emotional moment for me and my family) to pay my respects at Ground Zero.

Im blinded by rage after reading that, shove your patriotism where the sun don't shine. Any sympathy anyone might have had for America should be long gone now, after starting two wars where millions have died already.
And not to forget that little concentration camp you freedom lovers have in Cuba.

[Bronco]

Wow at this poll being 50/50 until I just voted no, like others have said it was a state sanctioned assassination by the US, and it completely violated international law which they always claim to uphold and which they always preach to other nations. I know that we as leftists might not care for such laws but the point is that they supposedly do, as do a great deal of the international community who were applauding Obama and the Seals for saving us all from this terrible man.

Well hooray, the US got their revenge, but at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives and by means which the West would normally be the first to condemn as "illegal" and "against human rights", had they been committed by anyone else.

Edit - and now yes has overtaken no, Jesus

[Bostana]

The man was a murderer and killer of innocent people no one can deny that. But however I do not believe in capital punishment in any way shape or form.

[honest john's firing squad]

I don't support terrorism.
which is incidentally part of why i dont support any "counter-terrorist" actions lolol

[honest john's firing squad]

Indeed, I support his killing; him being dead.
His killing and his death in the abstract are completely different things, and you'd do well to remember that next time you say some dumb shit like this.

[Yazman]

I don't think that either Yazman or I were doing that. We were just saying that execution without trial is even worse than execution with a trial, which is still pretty heinous.

Yeah. I just said that execution without trial, especially when it's done by an imperialist state, is not something we should be supporting or advocating.

[Misanthrope]

I don't support terrorism.

You're implying that terrorism and state sanctioned murder are mutually exclusive.

[honest john's firing squad]

2. If your nation becomes a dictatorship of the proletariat after a socialist revolution, but the rest of the world has not yet joined you in socialist revolution (let's all pretend that we believe in socialism in one country, just for this one exercise) and your major cities begin being endlessly attacked by foreign terrorists, what would you do?
Sorry bro but SIOC is a complete fallacy (because the protracted existence of a purported "proletarian" dictatorship (edit: decades in the case of the fSU) implies the isolation and degeneracy of the revolution - and an isolated "revolution", especially today in the age of a more interconnected/interdependent world market, which somehow doesn't take hold in other countries within a matter of months or years is pretty suspect in terms of its proletarian character) so this question can't be approached seriously from a communist perspective.

edit: Besides, SIOC was never actually synonymous with a "revolutionary territory" anyway, it only referred to a distinct brand of the capitalist mode of production existing in the fSU during/after the tragedy of stalinism.


I actually did lose some family members on September 11th (I don't really remember them that well, except for my aunt), so last September, I actually went back to my home city of New York City with an American flag (I am not ashamed; it was a very emotional moment for me and my family) to pay my respects at Ground Zero.
Sorry about your loss, but I'm still puzzled as to why you couldn't have simply remembered those who died for who they were: people, not mere "citizens" of the nation-state. Or were you really young at the time?

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

Sorry about your loss, but I'm still puzzled as to why you couldn't have simply remembered those who died for who they were: people, not mere "citizens" of the nation-state. Or were you really young at the time?

We bought the flag when we we're there and it was really my parents' idea, but I had no problem with it. I guess I forgot to add that we didn't bring it from our house. The reason I had no problem with it was because it was September 11th and I wasn't going to be the whining communist making his family suffer more just because he can't acknowledge American patriotism.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

Im blinded by rage after reading that, shove your patriotism where the sun don't shine. Any sympathy anyone might have had for America should be long gone now, after starting two wars where millions have died already.
And not to forget that little concentration camp you freedom lovers have in Cuba.

My brief patriotism, even though the flag wasn't my idea, was a response to emotional turmoil and the need to feel like I am part of a community during a difficult time.

[Drosophila]

Doesn't really bother me in any way. I don't care about violating "international law" or any of that shit.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

Why should we pretend we believe in Socialism in One Country? Why don't you pretend you believe in fairies, and answer your question that way? Or perpetual motion machines, the Boogeyman, Gandalf, God, Alien Invasion, or a flat earth, and tell us how that alters things? If we're off into the realms of fantasy, why stop with Socialism in One Country?

I would attack neighbouring countries with my mind-controlled dragons who would teleport all the baddies into a floating prison-asteroid held up by magic repulsion rays directed from Atlantis.

However, if what you mean is 'during the world revolution, how would a revolutionary territory deal with the inevitable intervention from neighbouring territories that have not yet had a revolution?' then that doesn't require the belief in Socialism in One Country, even as a hypothetical excercise.

Can I ask what the relevance is of question 1 to question 2, given that neither Afghanistan nor the US were revolutionary territories, and Al Q'aeda didn't 'endlessly attack' American cities, though it could be argued that America did 'endlessly attack' Afghan cities. Is your question really then 'do you agree Al Q'aeda should have attempted to kill President Obama?'

Question 2 is completely hypothetical and has nothing to do with anything that happened, anything that is happening, or whether you support something or not.

And sorry that socialism in one country hurt your feelings so much that you had to waste almost an entire post attacking it, even though it is not the topic at hand.

[Ocean Seal]

First I really don't care very much.


It blows my mind people would vote yes. Regardless of what he may or may not have been responsible for, there should always be a trial. Always. Justice was not done when Osama bin Laden was killed.
A trial is pretty ridiculous honestly, but this is irrelevant.


2. If your nation becomes a dictatorship of the proletariat after a socialist revolution, but the rest of the world has not yet joined you in socialist revolution (let's all pretend that we believe in socialism in one country, just for this one exercise) and your major cities begin being endlessly attacked by foreign terrorists, what would you do?

I sort of want to know what you would do, especially if you find the action that was taken wrong.
The action that was taken, was wrong because it was the United States extending its foreign policy through an assassination.


Doesn't really bother me in any way. I don't care about violating "international law" or any of that shit.
Don't care much for international law either.


Tl;dr
Fuck Osama Bin Laden, but the United States shouldn't be getting commendations on a leftist forum when they go out into a sovereign country and assassinate one of their political enemies.

[Caj]

1. Do you support the killing of Osama bin Laden? Explain your position, please. Talk about all the related topics (i.e. torture of terrorists) you feel need to be addressed in the discussion. Don't hold back, because I am very curious about what you guys all think.

No, I do not support the killing of Osama bin Laden. At the same time, I'm not shedding any tears over it.

The nationalist clusterfucks that followed the event were quite sickening though, especially when one considers how many innocent people were slaughtered in Afghanistan and Pakistan over the last decade in the pursuit of bin Laden.


2. If your nation becomes a dictatorship of the proletariat after a socialist revolution, but the rest of the world has not yet joined you in socialist revolution (let's all pretend that we believe in socialism in one country, just for this one exercise) and your major cities begin being endlessly attacked by foreign terrorists, what would you do?

The terrorists would be repelled through state power.

What do you mean "let's all pretend that we believe in socialism in one country"? Those who don't accept SiOC still recognize that the proletarian dictatorship will exist initially on a small-scale (possibly on the scale of a nation). Once again, the M-Ls fail to recognize that left communists don't think proletarian revolutions will occur in all countries simultaneously.

[LeftAtheist]

I voted no; we should not be supporting the imperialist murders of any government. Regardless, his death hasn't really hindered the cause of Islamic extremism and is essentially just a huge propaganda piece for the Obama administration and, to a lesser extent, the American government in general.

Speaking of propaganda pieces, what are some of your opinions on the documents that have been in the news recently which purport to show a plot by Bin Laden to assassinate Obama? I'm rather suspicious that they're fabrications, especially to have them conveniently released not long before the US elections.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

Speaking of propaganda pieces, what are some of your opinions on the documents that have been in the news recently which purport to show a plot by Bin Laden to assassinate Obama? I'm rather suspicious that they're fabrications, especially to have them conveniently released not long before the US elections.

I don't care. All I care about is that those documents said that Joe Biden was stupid, that ABC is the terrorists' favorite news network, that CNN is too close to the government, and that Fox News will "die in her anger." :laugh:

[LeftAtheist]

Fox News will "die in her anger." :laugh:

Yeah, apparently Fox News "falls into the abyss" and "lacks neutrality". Lacks neutality? Surely not.

[Zulu]

Comrade Commistar, as a Marxist-Leninist, do you really believe everything you're being told by the CNN about the so called "war on terror"? Dumping Bin Laden's corpse into the ocean just hours after the op? Rrrreally??? Come on, I'm completely with Alex Jones on this one.

[Loony]

Sometimes I have to wonder whether Osama bin Laden actually existed in the first place...

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

Comrade Commistar, as a Marxist-Leninist, do you really believe everything you're being told by the CNN about the so called "war on terror"? Dumping Bin Laden's corpse into the ocean just hours after the op? Rrrreally??? Come on, I'm completely with Alex Jones on this one.

Yeah, I'm a Marxist-Leninist, not a conspiracy theorist. I know they have probably lied millions of times about this issue, but there has to be some truth in all this. Actually, I think most of it is true.

[Zulu]

Yeah, I'm a Marxist-Leninist, not a conspiracy theorist. I know they have probably lied millions of times about this issue, but there has to be some truth in all this. Actually, I think most of it is true.

Does Marxism-Leninism say there are no conspiracies ever at all?

Well, anyway, either the terrorists conspire to carry out genuine terror attacks, or the capitalists conspire to carry out false flag terror attacks. Either way it's a conspiracy.

[Blake's Baby]

Question 2 is completely hypothetical and has nothing to do with anything that happened, anything that is happening, or whether you support something or not.

And sorry that socialism in one country hurt your feelings so much that you had to waste almost an entire post attacking it, even though it is not the topic at hand.

Why did you mention it then?

If you want to know what the working class in a revolutionary territory should do when capitalist territories bordering it are sending/supporting terrorists to destabilise the revolutionary territory, why not say that? Why bring Socialism in One Country into it? Or is this a set of questions entirely directed at Stalinists?

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

Why did you mention it then?

If you want to know what the working class in a revolutionary territory should do when capitalist territories bordering it are sending/supporting terrorists to destabilise the revolutionary territory, why not say that? Why bring Socialism in One Country into it? Or is this a set of questions entirely directed at Stalinists?

No, I just thought the first thing some ultra-left and anarchist types would say would be, "Impossible! Socialism cannot exist in one nation!!!!!!!!!" So I just said pretend that you believe that it can. But then you came and got all offended because even pretending you believe in it makes you cry.

[Zulu]

in a revolutionary territory

Congratulations on coming up with an euphemism for Socialism in One Country!

[W1N5T0N]

I agree with killing him...


The way they went about it was just really, really, fucking inefficient. :thumbdown:

[RedHal]

I don't support terrorism.

yet you are unashamed to fucken wave the American flag, the state that has terrorized and killed way more innocents than Bin Laden has.

And some idiot posted a pic of Obama looking cool, unbelievable. This guy has killed more innocents in Pakistan with his cowardly drone strikes than all of 911.

[Blake's Baby]

No, I just thought the first thing some ultra-left and anarchist types would say would be, "Impossible! Socialism cannot exist in one nation!!!!!!!!!" So I just said pretend that you believe that it can. But then you came and got all offended because even pretending you believe in it makes you cry.

You're a Stalinist, why don't you pretend it makes sense? It'll save me the mental effort of stretching my head round the fantasies of a lunatic.



Congratulations on coming up with an euphemism for Socialism in One Country!

Not really.

There's no tendency on this board - Anarchist or Marxist, syndicalist or Anarchist-Communist, Marxian or 3rd Internationalist, Stalinist, Trotskyist, Left Communist or Council Communist - that doesn't think that the working class can take power in one place but not somewhere else.

However, only Stalinists believe that that can be socialism. It's not 'Socialism in One Country' because it's not socialism. So a 'revolutionary territory' is not a euphemism for Socialism in One Country unless what you mean is 'Socialism in One Country is an incorrect term for a revolutionary territory because the economic system is not socialism'.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

yet you are unashamed to fucken wave the American flag, the state that has terrorized and killed way more innocents than Bin Laden has.

You weren't there and you don't know what I did. I never said that I did that, I said that my family brought a flag. Oh Jesus Christ, the world is going to end!!!

I would suggest that some people grow up and get over the socialism in one country thing and the flag thing. I know what my country has done and I know what it is doing now. You don't need to let me know like if I'm some fucking dumbass. I never said I supported anything except the killing of bin Laden. I know that the US has killed many more people with its war against terror than Osama and al-Qaeda. Gee, thanks for pointing out the fucking obvious.

[Drosophila]

Baby of Blake, you have reaffirmed my stance on RevLeft.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

You're a Stalinist, why don't you pretend it makes sense? It'll save me the mental effort of stretching my head round the fantasies of a lunatic.




Not really.

There's no tendency on this board - Anarchist or Marxist, syndicalist or Anarchist-Communist, Marxian or 3rd Internationalist, Stalinist, Trotskyist, Left Communist or Council Communist - that doesn't think that the working class can take power in one place but not somewhere else.

However, only Stalinists believe that that can be socialism. It's not 'Socialism in One Country' because it's not socialism. So a 'revolutionary territory' is not a euphemism for Socialism in One Country unless what you mean is 'Socialism in One Country is an incorrect term for a revolutionary territory because the economic system is not socialism'.

Thanks for trying to derail the thread, you ultra-left piece of shit.

I want a discussion about Osama bin Laden and how you would have dealt with the fucking problem if you were leader, not some smartass coming here to start a Marxist-Leninist bashing party.

[Blake's Baby]

...
I would suggest that some people grow up and get over the socialism in one country thing ...

Get over the fact that it was stupid of you to mention of it, or get over the fact that Stalin was a traitor to the working class and the world socialist movement?

One is a fact of utter unimportance, the other is a major deal in the history of the 20th century. Which is it we're supposed to be unconcerned about?


Thanks for trying to derail the thread, you ultra-left piece of shit...

From the fan-boy of a mass-murderer, I'll take that 'ultra-Left (capitals please) piece of shit' as a massive fucking compliment.


I want a discussion about Osama bin Laden and how you would have dealt with the fucking problem if you were leader, not some smartass coming here to start a Marxist-Leninist bashing party.

Oh really? Because earlier you said:


Question 2 is completely hypothetical and has nothing to do with anything that happened, anything that is happening, or whether you support something or not...

So either you were lying then or lying now, or you don't know what you're talking about. Which is it?

[Anarcho-Brocialist]

yet you are unashamed to fucken wave the American flag, the state that has terrorized and killed way more innocents than Bin Laden has.

And some idiot posted a pic of Obama looking cool, unbelievable. This guy has killed more innocents in Pakistan with his cowardly drone strikes than all of 911.
Yup, I'm that idiot :laugh:. Obama could die too, wouldn't be any sweat off my back. I'm not going to lie and cry for Osama, not one single tear.

No where have I stated I liked the foreign policy of the US. If you've read the posts on this thread it could have been a passenger jet flying into a hot air balloon he was riding in.

As for the political side of this ordeal, both (US and al-Qaeda) have crossed international lines to spread terror and chaos.

This is the final post I'll make on this thread. I won't show sympathy because a terrorist was murdered.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

Get over the fact that it was stupid of you to mention of it, or get over the fact that Stalin was a traitor to the working class and the world socialist movement?

One is a fact of utter unimportance, the other is a major deal in the history of the 20th century. Which is it we're supposed to be unconcerned about?



From the fan-boy of a mass-murderer, I'll take that 'ultra-Left (capitals please) piece of shit' as a massive fucking compliment.

You know what I meant. I don't fucking care if you call it a socialist state or a revolutionary territory, as long as you pretend you're leader and there are terrorists in a foreign nation you have to deal with. Stop derailing, you fucking idiot.

[gorillafuck]

I am apathetic about the death of Osama Bin Laden. I don't think it was some great justice that the US did that should be celebrated at all, but I don't care that he wasn't brought to American trial therefore it's a crime of imperialism.:rolleyes:

I really couldn't give two shits at all.

[Blake's Baby]

You know what I meant. I don't fucking care if you call it a socialist state or a revolutionary territory...

No, I didn't know what you meant, but now you've explained it it seems perfectly clear that you're hypothesisng a revolutionary territory surrounded by capitalist powers. And therefore, the notion iof 'Socialism in One Country' is irrelevant to the scenario. I wonder why you brought it up then.


...as long as you pretend you're leader ...

Oh, right. This territory has a 'leader' now does it? How sad. I think if I were 'leader' of a revolutionary territory, rather than worrying about 'foreign terrorists' I'd be busy organising to overthrow myself.


...and there are terrorists in a foreign nation you have to deal with...

Can't the working class in the 'foreign nation' deal with them?


...Stop derailing, you fucking idiot.

You think this is derailing? And here's me thinking it was trying to get you to think and express yourself clearly.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

And the funny thing is that brooster comes here just to thank anything that goes against Stalin and Marxism-Leninism, even though the topic is completely unrelated to that. What a fucking troll dumbass. I swear, I no one can ask a question on this site without it turning into an argument (more like flame war caused by some idiots) about Stalin.

[Rooster]

And the funny thing is that brooster comes here just to thank anything that goes against Stalin and Marxism-Leninism, even though the topic is completely unrelated to that. What a fucking troll dumbass. I swear, I no one can ask a question on this site without it turning into an argument (more like flame war caused by some idiots) about Stalin.

You're the one that brought it up.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

You're the one that brought it up.

Oops, I said the curse word, SiOC!!!! I didn't know what else to say, but some dumbass came and derailed the whole fucking thing just because of a misunderstanding. Start talking about Osama or just get the fuck out.

[Tifosi]

And the funny thing is that brooster comes here just to thank anything that goes against Stalin and Marxism-Leninism, even though the topic is completely unrelated to that.

But you did funnel this thread in this direction. You are the one making the big fuse about being a ML at every turn.


2. If your nation becomes a dictatorship of the proletariat after a socialist revolution, but the rest of the world has not yet joined you in socialist revolution (let's all pretend that we believe in socialism in one country, just for this one exercise) and your major cities begin being endlessly attacked by foreign terrorists, what would you do?

"Let's all pretend that we believe in socialism in one country". Good work derailing your own thread.

---

Anyway, I don't support state sanctioned murder.

[Blake's Baby]

From post #32:


... if what you mean is 'during the world revolution, how would a revolutionary territory deal with the inevitable intervention from neighbouring territories that have not yet had a revolution?' then that doesn't require the belief in Socialism in One Country, even as a hypothetical excercise...

from post #40:


Sorry bro but SIOC is a complete fallacy (because the protracted existence of a purported proletarian dictatorship implies the isolation and degeneracy of the revolution - and an isolated "revolution" today, in the age of the world market, which somehow doesn't take hold in other countries is pretty suspect in terms of its proletarian character) so this question can't be approached seriously from a communist perspective.
...

honest john's firing squad and I both gave you a way out here; you could have said 'actually you're right, you don't have to believe in Socialism in One Country to answer this'. But instead, you said:



From post #44:


Question 2 is completely hypothetical and has nothing to do with anything that happened, anything that is happening, or whether you support something or not.

And sorry that socialism in one country hurt your feelings so much that you had to waste almost an entire post attacking it, even though it is not the topic at hand.

From post #55:


No, I just thought the first thing some ultra-left and anarchist types would say would be, "Impossible! Socialism cannot exist in one nation!!!!!!!!!" So I just said pretend that you believe that it can. But then you came and got all offended because even pretending you believe in it makes you cry.

from post #60:


...
I would suggest that some people grow up and get over the socialism in one country thing ...

So; is it necessary to believe in Socialism in One Country or not to answer the question? Because later you imply that it really isn't. So why bring it up, why keep going on about it as if it's important?

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

It's not necessary to believe in socialism in one country. You happy? Now, just answer the fucking question or leave.

[Blake's Baby]

It's not necessary to believe in socialism in one country...

OK; how should the working class in a revolutionary territory deal with the terrorist actions of surrounding hostile states?

Agitate for world revolution and give material support to revolutionary movements in those hostile states (and everywhere else it can).

[Martin Blank]

There has been too much trolling and other bullshit going on in this thread. You all had better unfuck yourselves and get back on track or else I'm closing it down.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

Well, since I believe in SiOC, I think I would just spy on the nation that the terrorists are based in. I wouldn't attack or invade, but spies.....I will allow them to kill if commanded to do so. I don't really know the Marxist-Leninist position, so I am just guessing. All I know is that invasion is obviously off the table.

[gorillafuck]

Well, since I believe in SiOC, I think I would just spy on the nation that the terrorists are based in. I wouldn't attack or invade, but spies.....I will allow them to kill if commanded to do so. I don't really know the Marxist-Leninist position, so I am just guessing. All I know is that invasion is obviously off the table.nation that terrorists are based in? do you mean government sponsored terrorists or non-government sponsored terrorists?:confused:

is this meant to be a parallel of the US governments supposed situation with terrorists?

[Jimmie Higgins]

No I don't support this. In GW Bush's words, "Osama is irrelevant". The assassination of Bin Laden has less to do with Bin Laden than it has to do with the US setting a precedent for assassinations whenever and where-ever it wants.

Supporting this killing isn't so much supporting attacking someone who was marginal to world events (even according to the people who used the 9/11 attack as an excuse to wage wars all over the world) as much as it's supporting the legitimization of a warfare tactic for US imperialism.

[Gatto Nero]

even though i loathe the racists and chauvinists values, and the violent actions of al-qaeda and osama bin laden towards innocent people (as i loathe the same actions as they being carried out by the so-called "democratic nations armies") , i'm against the death penalty with or without a trial and i think that the reason to the 9/11 attacks was the neo-colonialist foreign policies of the united states towards the so-called "third world countries" , and that there will be more actions of that sort from different groups who lives in those countries against the usa as long as the united states and the western world will not change it's policies and actions toward those "third world countries".

meaning that the killing of one person or the destruction of one organization will not stop those actions from happening, because there is a big motive to those actions, they derive from the loathing towards the policies and actions of the imperialist powers on that side of the world - which attempts to influence on those countries by military and economic force, in order to exploit them and empower themselves.
afghanistan for that matter has suffered invasions and exploitation from both the usa and the ussr which have made the country into a battlefield of the cold war, so the people became more radical and skeptical towards the "western world" (that includes the ussr and their so-called "communist values") and searched for a "better way" to prevent such acts of invasion and exploitation from occuring again (in my opinion the way they chose is obviously a destructive way to the afghan society and an ineffective way).

these kind of actions (like the execution of osama) - are the kind that turned the usa into a despicable nation around the world in the first place (by their arrogant disregard to the sovereignty that other communities has within their own territories , by murdering people without any pretension to maintain the right to due process, etc)
You make these organizations ineffective and powerless by changing the exploitative and unequal reality, which directly affect the people's desire to join in order to fulfill these separatist, violent and racist values - and not by adding more fear, insecurity and death.

[Jeraldi]

remember that the CIA trained Osama and armed the Taliban when Russia invaded Afghanistan during the cold war. This more or less makes the CIA responsible in a broad sense for 9-11. Therefore the US sanctioned killing a "former" CIA agent. I put former in quotes because I am not one to simply assume that Osama simply stopped working for the CIA since things rarely work that way, yet I don't want to fan any conspiracy theories since I think that the base facts are enough on their own.

No I don't support the killing however I question if the person killed was Osama (he was most likely already dead), the entire story is a little to convenient for the US agenda.

[Gatto Nero]

double post.

[TrotskistMarx]

Of course I don't agree with the murder of any human being, even if that human being has murdered 1 billion people. And besides 9-11 was not done by Bin Laden, but by Bush and his neoconservatives hawks, as a pretext so that the zionist imperialist capitalist axis of evil of this world (USA, Europe, Israel, Oil Corporations and NATO) can literally steal all the oil fields of the middle east nations by privatizing the oil fields of state-capitalist nations. That's why the axis of evil of this world hates state-capitalist nations. They are in favor of neoliberal-capitalist nations. Nations with a form of government-capitalism are a threat and an impediment to the world control of the right-wing capitalist zionist axis of evil. I think Vladimir Lenin predicted this conquest for world-control of resources in the book "Imperialism: Highest Stage of capitalism". I think he predicted like a sort of Nostradamus that some day 100 years or more from his lifetime (meaning today), the Imperialist-powers of this world (The three headed axis of evil monster: USA, Israel Europe), were going to try to expropiate and takeover and steal all the resources of this world: agriculture, lands, water, oil, diamonds, gold etc. And 9-11 and inside jobs are the older trick the oldest trick in the book, dating back to Roman times; creating the enemies you need. Go to this link to read about fake-terror: the older trick in the book of empires: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/ARTICLE5/index.php

.


Seeing that it was recently the first-year anniversary of the raid in Pakistan that successfully killed Osama bin Laden, I have been wanting to create a thread about the issue. Well, here it is.

I have two central questions:

1. Do you support the killing of Osama bin Laden? Explain your position, please. Talk about all the related topics (i.e. torture of terrorists) you feel need to be addressed in the discussion. Don't hold back, because I am very curious about what you guys all think.

2. If your nation becomes a dictatorship of the proletariat after a socialist revolution, but the rest of the world has not yet joined you in socialist revolution (let's all pretend that we believe in socialism in one country, just for this one exercise) and your major cities begin being endlessly attacked by foreign terrorists, what would you do?

Well, that's about it. If you feel like you want to add anything else related to the topic into the discussion, knock yourself out.

I have yet to formulate my own opinion on the second issue, but I do agree with the killing of Osama bin Laden. I actually did lose some family members on September 11th (I don't really remember them that well, except for my aunt), so last September, I actually went back to my home city of New York City with an American flag (I am not ashamed; it was a very emotional moment for me and my family) to pay my respects at Ground Zero.

So, yay, you heard my little sob story, now please discuss. :)

[Caj]

Of course I don't agree with the murder of any human being, even if that human being has murdered 1 billion people. And besides 9-11 was not done by Bin Laden, but by Bush and his neoconservatives hawks, as a pretext so that the zionist imperialist capitalist axis of evil of this world (USA, Europe, Israel, Oil Corporations and NATO) can literally steal all the oil fields of the middle east nations by privatizing the oil fields of state-capitalist nations. That's why the axis of evil of this world hates state-capitalist nations. They are in favor of neoliberal-capitalist nations. Nations with a form of government-capitalism are a threat and an impediment to the world control of the right-wing capitalist zionist axis of evil. I think Vladimir Lenin predicted this conquest for world-control of resources in the book "Imperialism: Highest Stage of capitalism". I think he predicted like a sort of Nostradamus that some day 100 years or more from his lifetime (meaning today), the Imperialist-powers of this world (The three headed axis of evil monster: USA, Israel Europe), were going to try to expropiate and takeover and steal all the resources of this world: agriculture, lands, water, oil, diamonds, gold etc. And 9-11 and inside jobs are the older trick the oldest trick in the book, dating back to Roman times; creating the enemies you need. Go to this link to read about fake-terror: the older trick in the book of empires: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/ARTICLE5/index.php

.

Is this post for real?

[El Oso Rojo]

It just a murder of a disobident CIA agent.

[corolla]

This entire thread makes me cry on the inside.

[bcbm]

Seeing that it was recently the first-year anniversary of the raid in Pakistan that successfully killed Osama bin Laden, I have been wanting to create a thread about the issue. Well, here it is.

I have two central questions:

1. Do you support the killing of Osama bin Laden? Explain your position, please. Talk about all the related topics (i.e. torture of terrorists) you feel need to be addressed in the discussion. Don't hold back, because I am very curious about what you guys all think.

no the us govt shouldnt be able to do whatever the fuck ui t= wants whenever it wants


2. If your nation becomes a dictatorship of the proletariat after a socialist revolution, but the rest of the world has not yet joined you in socialist revolution (let's all pretend that we believe in socialism in one country, just for this one exercise) and your major cities begin being endlessly attacked by foreign terrorists, what would you do?

murder all terrorists with drone strikes or else the people's navy seals


I have yet to formulate my own opinion on the second issue, but I do agree with the killing of Osama bin Laden. I actually did lose some family members on September 11th (I don't really remember them that well, except for my aunt), so last September, I actually went back to my home city of New York City with an American flag (I am not ashamed; it was a very emotional moment for me and my family) to pay my respects at Ground Zero.

So, yay, you heard my little sob story, now please discuss. :)

wow

[OHumanista]

Voted no.
Not because I particularly miss that "lovely" person but because the whole "War on Terror" has created far more destruction and death than anything terrorists could ever hope to achive. Plus it's a capitalist imperialist war.

[Deicide]

Is ''9/11 was an inside job!'' and ''Osama was a CIA/MOSSAD agent'' a banable thing here?

[Blake's Baby]

No, it isn't.

It would be hard to ban people for saying Bin Laden was a CIA agent, because it's close enough to being true to be, well, truish. He wasn't an agent but he was a 'resource'. The American government funnelled millions of dollars through the Pakistani secret service and Bin Laden's network when the Mujihadeen were fighting the Russians. To a large extent the American 'intelligence community' created Al Q'aeda.

That doesn't mean I think the Gub'mint (or is that, 'Zionist Occupational Gub'mint') done the twin Towers only they never flew planes into them 'cause it was a controlled demolition and anyway there was no Jews in the Twin Towers 'cause the Rothschilds control the banking network and they did it to take away our rifles... or whatever else.

But, all that aside, Bin Laden was a useful tool of US imperialism while he was fighting the Russians. Not so much afterwards.

(Compare, Saddam Hussein, useful tool of American inperialism while fighting the Iranians, etc).

[gorillafuck]

No I don't support this. In GW Bush's words, "Osama is irrelevant". The assassination of Bin Laden has less to do with Bin Laden than it has to do with the US setting a precedent for assassinations whenever and where-ever it wants.

Supporting this killing isn't so much supporting attacking someone who was marginal to world events (even according to the people who used the 9/11 attack as an excuse to wage wars all over the world) as much as it's supporting the legitimization of a warfare tactic for US imperialism.do you actually think that this made it so the US feels more free to do what it wants abroad?

if this incident in 2011 set a precedent, then what was American foreign policy been based off of before?


It just a murder of a disobident CIA agent.fighting on the same side as the CIA during a war in the 1980's does not make someone a CIA agent.