[monocasa]

Are you really questioning the idea that the Secretary of State had a hand in approving a CIA-led assassination mission when there's literally pictures of her watching it go down?

[hnmonkey]

I never said that I questioned that in the slightest. Not sure where you get that at all.

I did however basically say that she did not send the team to get him. That's what a President signs off on and military leaders plan.

[monocasa]

>> Very interesting. Because she was in the room that meant she sent the team to kill Bin Laden?

> I never said that I questioned that in the slightest. Not sure where you get that at all.

You literally just questioned that.

And it was a CIA-led, ie. civilian led, operation, not a military-led one.

[hnmonkey]

The military explicitly played a critical role in planning, leading, and executing this.

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Osama_bin_Laden#Opera...

U.S. Naval Special Warfare Development Group (DEVGRU) and at least 6 members from JSOC planned it in coordination with the CIA.

[monocasa]

Literally the second sentence of that article says:

> The operation, code-named Operation Neptune Spear, was carried out in a CIA-led operation

[hnmonkey]

You seem to be arguing incredibly uncharitably. I simply said the military planned it and based on the article I posted, I am 100% accurate. It doesn't take away from the military planning that the CIA also had a hand in planning it. I also never said the military led it, the thing you are arguing I did.

[jack9]

> You seem to be arguing incredibly uncharitably.

Ironic. You've claimed multiple things. For each case, in the face of conflicting evidence, deflected to argue about another detail.

[hnmonkey]

You edited your comment to change what you said. You originally did not say that she had a 'hand in approving'. Why would you change it to make it seem like you were talking about something else that you didn't originally say?