Osama throws down; Maybe we should fold...

Great Debates
1

A new recording attributed to Osama bin Laden is offering rewards in gold for killing top American and United Nations officials or citizens of any country which has troops in Iraq. …

."…whoever helps the infidels against Muslims, or helps the occupying forces and whatever is affiliated to them - such as the transitional or permanent government - is committing a violation to Islam," he said, warning of consequences including “spilling blood, taking his money, separating him from his wife.”

The threats spurred Interpol to call on security forces around the world to take extraordinary measures to help ensure the safety of UN staff.

“The world’s governments and Interpol must make protecting the UN and its officials one of our highest priorities,” Interpol’s secretary general, Ronald Noble, said

The last time that 'sama threw down

(‘96-get your big tittied t-shirt wearin’ ho’s the fuck out of the Hejaz or I will fuck you up…)

we didn’t pay much attention, so probably this response by interpol is prudent.

That said, folks who have scoffed at “bargaining” with the terrorist, what do we do now?

Can we really go forward with no help from the UN?

If not, (and I would say we cannot) can 'sama veto that help at the cost of ;ten or twenty suicide bombers?

If he can, wtf do we do about it?

Maybe its a Kenny Rogers moment for us…

2

We have the ability to do lots; the will is another matter.

We should be dividing Iraq - it’s an artificial construction anyway. It’s a shame we haven’t learned the lesson of Yugoslavia - keep different populations seperate. So what if Iraq is divided into 3 or 4 parts?

We should have been much more forceful in our response to the mutilations; we should never have allowed the torture by our soldiers to take place.

3

Sure, we could learn lessons from Yugoslavia, OR we could learn from the past mistake of EVERY TIME THE BRITISH SUBDIVIDED A REGION ! ! ! Iraq is/was a mess because the British randomly drew lines to create nations, again in Palestine and India. There is no possible way to divide a country without creating 100 Kashmir regions that would be disputed for the rest of our lives. The biggest roadblock to your idea is the oil. The idea of creating a Kirdish area requires aknowledging that they are sitting on HUGE wealth that the non-Kirds are going to want. But please, start a new debate, and don’t fill this thread with Iraq sepeartion ideas.

But to alaricthegoth my apologies, I don’t this doesn’t take your thread on an alternate course.

I’ve been reading about the rewards offered by Ossama, and as a poor grad student my first thought was, “how do I cash in.” Seriously, how does someone get that money? It said he was offering gold.

Personally, I see this as the beginning on the end for Ossama. Moving that much gold is waaaaay too easy to track. If I was Interpol I’d be staging Annan’s death and asking for the payout.

In reality though, this is nothing new. He’s been offering rewards of ome form or another since he started. In his arrogance he’s tried to grow. And as he grows it will only make it easier to find and destroy his organization.

4

I am open to any direction that can get us out of this mess.

If the un doesn’t bail us out, (and kofee makess lots of noises that add up to that possibility), who does?

We are the local tarbaby. Whether or not there is some agency or divine intervention that can keep things from going even more thoroughly to hell in Iraq (read no Iraqui oil for five years, or something…) it seems pretty sure it’s not us…

we are lower than dogshit there, and so is any iraqi who lets our shadow fall on him.

think “leper”.

5

This only proves to me that the man needs to be killed rather than appeased.

6

certainly a feel good answer, but how does it play out strategically?

It seems that he can set the whole western world off and ground flights at will just by staging some “chatter”, then blow up the madrid commutters without a hint that it’s coming.

Don’t you think he says,

“Oh, habib. It’s been so dull here, get on the cell phone, you know, the one George Bush listens to , and make some noise about airlplanes. I hear it costs them two billion dollars a month to bump to code orange…plus, we’ll wear them out so by time we hit they will be numb to any warnings…Oh Habib, I just love this job…”

7

I don’t know what you’re saying. You can’t bargain with this man for probably half a dozen very good reasons. He’s doing the same thing he always does. I don’t see how this would stop the UN from helping if they want to do so. It’s not like Kofi Annan will be going to Iraq personally, and prominent figures were at risk before. That’s why Bush, Blair et al visit Iraq unannounced. I just can’t see how this changes anything that’s happening right now. They should be extra careful because you don’t ignore a Bin Laden threat, but you can’t appease him. And I mean that literally as well as practically- he wants everything.

8

Doesnt that just prove that it’s worth spending $2 billion in a one-shot deal to make this guy (and as many of his cohorts as possible) dead? You seem to be operating under the assumption that bin Laden is some fixed quantity to which the western world must adapt.

Personally, I think if you’re going to spend huge amounts of dough, the best bet would be an extremely aggressive campaign to distribute gameboys and nintendo systems to every Arab household, then dole out the best games very gradually. Thus, Arab youth becomes hopelessly addicted to American technology and is too busy to go out and blow things up. More seriously, establishing schools for girls throughout the Arab world and teaching them how to read (including teaching them to read the complete Koran in their native languages) as well as useful trades would be even better. I favour killing Osama and reducing the social conditions under which other Osamas can rise, rather than paying attention to anything Osama has to say.

9

Here’s an idea. Maybe the US should have put some effort into finding the guy, instead of dicking around in Iraq.

10

Y’know, I’m inclined to agree. I was fully in favour of the Iraq invasion if it was assured or at least highly confident that a nuclear program was in progress but now it’s pretty clear that Bush was being told what he wanted to hear, or just ignored anyhting he didn’t want to hear. I stand by the idea that Saddam should’ve been overthrown back in 1992, when a large coalition force was poised on the Kuwait/Iraq border, ready to head north, but going after him in 2003 with questionable motives was just plain stupid.

Clobbering the Taliban, though, is something I fully support since I despise fascism in any form, including fundamentalism. I’d like to see Afghanistan pacified by the relentless building of stripmalls and tract housing and anything else to gentrify the heck out of them. And along the way, this Osama guy really needs to be found and killed. I wouldn’t even mind if a woman walked him around on a leash for a while, first.

11

I’m just wondering what exactly can the UN do? They can talk and that’s about it.

Useless.

12

Not necessarily.

If al-Ibrahimi (who know THAT was his name) give THESE guys the nod, maybe we can get our skinny white asses the hell out of there.

(Or, we could end up vetoing the Security Council Resolution censuring us that passes by 13-2…)
nti-occupation Iraqi group forms

Sunday 09 May 2004, 12:52 Makka Time, 9:52 GMT
Al-Dhari has rejected the IGC calling it a US-imposed group
Related:

A pan-Iraqi group has been formed to oppose the occupation of Iraq and has immediately called for a meeting with UN envoy al-Akhdar al-Ibrahimi in a direct challenge to the country’s US-appointed leadership.

About 500 Iraqis met in Baghdad on Saturday to set up a national political force free of US influence to push for a handover of sovereignty under the auspices of the United Nations.

The United Iraqi Scholars Group - which appointed a 16-strong leadership panel - has vowed to boycott any political group set up by the US and called for a stronger army than the small force envisioned by the US-led coalition. …

13

I think I was muddling my “negotiating with terrorist” and “taking him seriouisly”

I don’t really think we can “negotiate” here.

It’s more like, when the other guy says “mate in two” and you knock over your king,

It’s like this.
We desperately need the UN (see w’s press conferfence, when he appointed Lakhdar Brahimi the man of the hour)

  1. Kofee Annan won’t send people back in if they are subject to getting killed
  2. As long as 'sama is alive (and perhaps after as well) they are subject to being killed
    3.We have shown ourselves singularly inept in the “bring me the head of bin laden derby”
  3. Tho 'sama had nothing to do with iraq, he can still put a giant spoke in any wheel we care to roll there.
  4. The only possibility of a regime in that area in 2010 that is not bone deep america hating is to leave now and drop cash on the way out.
    The idea that we have any kind of legitimate continuing role to play in determining the policy of the iraqi people is a mirage that will leave us dying in the middle of the desert (to scramble a metaphor beyond repair…)
14

Capitulation is grossy premature. In fact, it’s hard for me to imagine the situtation getting so bad that any concessions can (or should) be made to Al-Qaida. If anything, ongoing terrorist threats just prove the need for more search-and-destroy, as well as hearts-and-minds of the people who nominally support or shield terrorists.

15

OBL has declared war, not just against the US, but of all Western Civilization. He has rejected all aspects of cultures that are not purely Islamic in nature. He is literally breeding terrorists with Madras schools and Al Qaeda camps all over the world which makes it tough to deal with. He and his supporters are taking 5 year old children, teaching them NOTHING but the Quran until they are 11 and then giving them special ops military training. Hitler would be impressed with such an organized indoctrination into an army that WANTS to die for their cause. They are the perfect killing machines. Nothing will change if the US capitulates to this system. There isn’t any discussion that changes this fact.

Time is his friend and the world’s enemy. It took 10 years to plan and implement 9/11 after the first attempt failed. He will eventually achieve a level of war capacity that cannot be easily defeated. Our losses to date aren’t even a fraction of a fraction of what lies ahead if he is not stopped.

15 years ago it was predicted that the region would have nuclear weapons in 10 years. It happened. The man responsible for this achievement spread this knowledge far and wide. Saddam was caught in the late 90’s with mobile calutrons 10 years after he said he stopped using them to refine uranium. Where are they and the uranium they refined? The clock is ticking.

OBL needs to die. His followers need to die. More importantly, the system that created them needs to be dismantled.

16

Yes, there’s no telling how much damage Pakistan’s Abdul Qadeer Khan has caused with his free-lance “business” deals, with or without the participation of the democratic and military presidents he’s served under. India’s program is still secure, though - as far as we know.

Saddam? WTF? How’d he enter this discussion? We already know about this purported uranium. It’s still in Niger, and still unrefined. Some of the little he did get hold of got looted in the war. Perhaps you’re thinking about the already-ready stuff under inadeuqate control in the former Soviet republics, ready for the taking? Saddam isn’t known to have had any of that, either.

Yes, but not for the reasons you’ve stated. Saddam didn’t have anything to do with 9/11 either, as you may have heard.

17

** Yes and no. He didn’t launch the attack but our presence in the region was the catalyst OBL used to start the war. The US was in a stalemate situation with no exit other than UN intervention or armed conflict. The UN chose not to intervene beyond inspections which had no end date, showed no promise of an end date, and required the continued support of US troops in the region.

I think it is legitimate to argue the timing of the war but it is a different discussion entirely to argue for a permanent presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia. One of the results of the 2nd Gulf war was the relocation of US troops from Saudi Arabia to Qatar. I’ve never been able to determine if we were kicked out or withdrew on our own. Most articles just say it was a mutual parting of the ways because the intent of the relationship was to maintain the no-fly zone. **see US troop move **

Could we have waited for the base in Qatar to be built and then move? Would that be considered satisfactory to the religious warriors in the region? Would that be seen as bowing to terrorists? If left unchecked would Saddam perfect a nuclear weapon before he was taken down internally in a civil war? And if so, would the religious state that formed after his defeat then have instant access to nuclear weapons? I can’t answer my own questions to my satisfaction because I don’t have the intel needed. It’s why I try to keep my discussions on a conceptual “IMO” level.

The Mid East region needs to be addressed on a broad scale. You cannot fight an army of soldiers that have been trained since age 5 to seek their own death in a war to defeat you. There is a distinct philosophy of this region that says the enemy of my enemy is my friend. To the extent Saddam actively conspired with OBL (or vice versa) is subordinate to the ability of both followers to work in tandem to attain their goals. To the extent that Saddam was likely to attain nuclear weapons is (to me) a function of time. He wanted them and would have achieved his goals. The time to stop him is hopefully before it happens.

My apologies for the Saddam hijack but to me it is related to the capitulation of OBL. Leaving the region after 9/11 would not only give in to terrorists it would do nothing to stop the machinery that creates it (which should be the ultimate goal).