Since the US is pretty much the last remaining superpower, what if the US President decides to heck with the Bin Ladens? Could we seize all their assets? Would it be enough to pay for the Iraq war? Who would be able to stop us?
It would not be enough. And it would probably mean going to war with Saudi Arabia and that would probably be more expensive than what we would get from the bin Ladens, but there are other assets there, too.
And a lot of Muslims would be pissed.
Heh. Wouldn’t it be more fair to bill the Bushes?
I have no idea how the Binladin companies have their finances set up, but I imagine seizing their assets - at least, any assets that aren’t inside the U.S. or its banking system - would require a lot of international cooperation that would never happen.
In theory, I guess, we could sieze all the assets of the Binladen Group in US banks (ignoring the illegalities of the action). The last I could find, the company had assets of around 5 billion, so even assuming those assets were all in US banks (which I’m sure they’re not), it wouldn’t come close to paying for the Iraq war, which has, so far, cost up to about 480 billion dollars.
Can’t go into Saudi Arabia,we have armed them with the best available. Besides they are funding the Iraq insurgents and makeup 40 % of the foreign insurgents.
Nice trick. We buy the oil that helps fund a war against us.
I don’t quite see your logic. 
Osama Bin Laden perpetrated 9/11, so the US invaded Afghanistan.
Later Bush decided to invade iraq because he claimed there were WMD’s there. There weren’t.
Why do you think seizing assets of people related by birth to a terrorist over a war that had nothing to do with terrorism makes sense?
Also (and I live in the country that has been your closest ally), saying you are a superpower, so you can kill and rob with impunity is pretty frightening.
(One consequence is to note that the US doesn’t invade nuclear powers, so every country should immediately get nuclear weapons. Quite fitting for the Bush Presidency, really.)
What if we tossed Bill Gates and Warren Buffett into the mix?
Probably still not enough, but imagine the fun! 
Do you really think that Saudi Arabia could successfully defend against a US invasion?
Good point, glee. How about we bill them for the cost of rebuilding the twin towers and the pentagon, the cost of the planes that went down, the payments to the victims, and the cost of the Afghanistan operations then?
Why they had nothing to do with it? This whole thing seems anti-bin Ladenist. The bin Ladens are a great family with a few bad apples.
As most business people would be able to tell you, billing people isn’t that hard.
It’s collecting that’s the trick.
It would probably take new legislation, seeing as the bin Laden family hasn’t been found guilty of anything, as far as I know. If the necessary laws were passed, whatever funds are in US banks could be frozen. Not the rest, obviously.
Hell, no.
The countries whose banks you’re preparing to rob would tell you to go away. No sovereign nation could accept a demand like that.
Then you’ll have to decide whether you really want to start a war with Saudi Arabia, Switzerland etc. etc. (Switzerland:“You don’t get to decide who has accounts in our banks, we do. Incidentally, we just froze a few hundred US-owned accounts while we make sure the funds aren’t tainted according to Swiss laws. We’re sure you wouldn’t demand that we concede to your laws unless you’re prepared to follow ours.”)
Silly idea.
Military, I’m sure it couldn’t. Unfortunately I recall hearing somewhere that Saudi Arabia controls a large amount of a certain vital resource. I can’t remember what the stuff is right now, but it might be an issue.
We could just as logically bill the Swedes for Pearl Harbor.
What is the Bin Laden family guilty of, again? I’ve seemed to have missed that part of the argument.
They produced Osama Bin Laden, who was involved in a bit of terrorism. And Saddam Hussein apparently supported terrorism, too. So they are on the wrong side in the War on Terrorism. (Ignoring small details, like OBL and SH not getting on, and OBL not getting on with the rest of his family – well, they are all from the Middle East, so they must be connected somehow.)
Among the several levels of illogic piled upon one another here, I’m still stuck on why we might possibly find a family financially responsible for the actions taken by an adult member of that family without any family support.
I expect that the OP is operating under the misconception that Osama Bin Laden is acting in some fashion as an agent of the Bin Laden family and its its companies. In fact, long before the 2001 terrorist attacks the family broke with him and his militant Islamic fundamentalism.
A Chinese man and a Jew are sitting at a bar, drinking. The Jew stands up and cold-cocks the Chinese – knocks him right to the floor. The Chinese picks himself up and asks, “what was that for?” The Jew says, “Pearl Harbor.” The Chinese, “But I’m Chinese, not Japanese.” The Jew, “China, Japan, it’s the same thing.”
They go back to drinking, and suddenly the Chinese stands up and cold-cocks the Jew. The Jew picks himself up and asks, “what was that for?” The Chinese says, “the Titanic.” The Jew, “the Titanic?” The Chinese, “iceberg, Goldberg, it’s the same thing.”
I think there still was some minimal support. A brother (and maybe a cousin) were still in contact and giving UBL funds just before 9/11.
Well, if the President filed suit against the Bin Ladins, they’d probably hire Baker Botts. The big Houston law firm has represented Saudi Arabia’s Salman bin Abdulaziz.
The illustrious James Baker is a senior partner. And the link above says Our Shrub worked in the B&B mail room.
Getting a bit incestuous…
We froze Bin Laden’s assets a few days after 9/11, you can bet he’s not going to see that money again.
Aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the Play?
I think it’s Astrolube. Without that W might get chafed by the Saudis.