Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government The Media The Military United States

Leaked Doc May Have Forced US To Speed Up Bin Laden Raid 632

Posted by timothy
from the friday's-out-how-about-tuesday? dept.
cf18 writes "Wikileaks released a set of leaked Guantanamo prisoner files to the public last week. Among them is a document dated from 2008, which mentioned both Osama's trusted courier's name and Abbottabad, the city in which Osama had been hiding. There are speculations that, fearing al-Qaida realized their courier may have been tracked and move Osama, the US administration accelerated their plan and attacked the target site over the weekend. This link highlights the relevant section of the document."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Leaked Doc May Have Forced US To Speed Up Bin Laden Raid

Comments Filter:
  • Sept 2008 document (Score:4, Informative)

    by Beerdood (1451859) on Tuesday May 03, 2011 @06:43PM (#36017540)
    So uh, why did it take so long to plan an attack if they had a lead for more than 2 years? That's only the age of the document as well, the guy in question here (Libi) was captured way back in 2005.
    • by geekoid (135745) <dadinportland@ya ... m minus math_god> on Tuesday May 03, 2011 @06:58PM (#36017690) Homepage Journal

      You know its not a game, right? They just don't find a document from one guy and then go kill people.

      • by LWATCDR (28044)

        It is on Slashdot. After all they believe in Kill them all and let God sort them all then blame it on Bush! As I have gotten older I have discovered that you can never go wrong second guessing. That way you can never be proven wrong.

      • by guspasho (941623) on Tuesday May 03, 2011 @08:40PM (#36018812)

        I have a hard time believing the US government, the same one that drops countless bombs on innocents in order to take out low level "militants", would put off an operation for years in order to be 100% sure before it acted. Really, when has it ever dallied on a target for that length of time out of an excess of caution, much less a very slippery and high-value target? The idea is completely absurd.

    • by Brucelet (1857158) on Tuesday May 03, 2011 @07:01PM (#36017728)
      "A courier moved to Abbottabad" is a far cry from "Osama is at 101 Terrorist Way, Abbottabad, and we're confident enough that he'll be there and that we can take him down that we're willing to risk going through with the operation even though he might escape and Pakistan might get annoyed that we violated their sovereignty". Getting from point A to point B takes a little while.
    • by Darinbob (1142669)

      They had a lead only. A lead is not an address or confirmation. They have to find the courier, watch the courier over time, see where he goes, try to find out where he came from, verify that he really is a courier, verify that he's really the right courier, figure out which of the many locations he goes to is the one with Osama, verify that Osama is really there, watch the place to figure out the comings and goings, etc. This was in Pakistan which is an ally and not a country we're at war with, you can't

  • sensitive--as opposed to embarrassing-- information? How could they not figure out the name of OBL's courier and his location shouldn't be public knowledge?
  • Im curious to know whether he is/was still relevant. In the NBC broadcast the anchor said something like many al-queda soldiers dont even know who Bin Laden is. I understand that they fight for a cause, rather than fighting for a commander. So.....was the raid on Bin Laden really that important? Revenge and icing on the cake for Obama?

    Im all for being Patriotic, but if he's not calling any shots how is he a threat? Even if he was still relevant, shouldnt we be looking for his replacement now?
  • by thestudio_bob (894258) on Tuesday May 03, 2011 @06:57PM (#36017680)

    I hope it isn't true, but I really hope that our elected government weren't waiting to do this at a more convenient time... like election time.

    If that's the case, I really am glad that WikiLeaks may have fast-tracked this operation.

  • So if the first kill from Wikileaks is OBL, shouldn't we be giving them a medal, rather than complaining about them?

    Apparently, the US knew where he was for the past 3 years and did nothing until Wikileaks pointed out we knew something about someone who may know something. Where's the line between cautious and negligent? Or have we been tracking him accurately for that long without his knowledge and using that knowledge to dismantle the organization? Though if we were doing that with any efficiency, we
    • by blueg3 (192743)

      The people who originally had the document and the people who made the kill are both the US Military, right? Wikileaks didn't help at all, then.

      If I'm wrong and a leak from Wikileaks actually led to finding bin Laden, I'm willing to change my position and say they should be hailed.

  • nope (Score:5, Insightful)

    by obarthelemy (160321) on Wednesday May 04, 2011 @01:43AM (#36020794)

    the doc only states that the detainee moved there in 2003. A couple a lines down it also states he moved away from there a year later.

    Basically, it's that randomest and least remarkable mention of the place.

  • by geekmux (1040042) on Wednesday May 04, 2011 @08:16AM (#36022672)

    "...fearing al-Qaida realized their courier may have been tracked and move Osama, the US administration accelerated their plan and attacked the target site over the weekend."

    Awww, so sorry Obama. You couldn't perfectly time the killing of OBL to match your re-election and get that popularity vote behind you. (Sorry, but the more I read about how we've known about/tracked his courier for literally years now, the more I question why the hell we waited this damn long to take action if NOT for some other benefit such as re-election timing.)

Nothing succeeds like success. -- Alexandre Dumas

Working...