It matters not. The Taleban government of Afghanistan is an accomplice to this atrocity and war against their nation should be declared formally. Getting Osama bin Laden is a sidebar to the retaliation merited against Afghanistan. The Taleban Government (and preferably all Taleban governments) should be deposed immediately by whatever means necessary.
There is a difference between harboring terrorists and simply being a place that has terrorists. The Republic of Ireland, as far as I know, does not shelter IRA terrorists from justice. Certainly Britain does not offer its protection to IRA terrorists in Belfast, nor to their counterparts on the other side.
The USA does not help terrorist cells in Boston or Florida stay out of the US’s reach. Germany has never, to the best of my knowledge, provided aid and comfort to any terrorists using Hamburg to plan aircraft bombings out of. Japan does not allow the Aum Shinrikyo to use terrorism in support of Japan’s foreign policy.
The Taliban, as well as others, have done things of the sort. The war that is to come will not be on those who are in the vicinity of terrorists, but on those who harbor terrorists.
As for bin Laden, his presence outside of the US’s reach is an encouraging precedent for those who would commit acts of terrorism. If he cannot be brought to justice for what he has done, others will be inspired. If Afghanistan is allowed to harbor known terrorists, other countries will conclude that they too can harbor terrorists.
This is why there will be war.
While it will be a called war on terrorism, it will be a war on fundamentalist Islamic terrorism. Or at least 90% so. For one thing, most other terrorism is internal to a country, or at least to a region. For another, no other terrorist organizations are supported by governments as a form of international policy, to the best of my knowledge.
Some say that terrorism is like a Hydra, and that if we wipe out bin Laden, two more will take his place. I disagree. Potential terrorists are drawn to commit evil by the successes of others. 5,000 lives taken and billions of dollars of economic damage in return for their lives is an inspiring tale to them. Being hunted down like rats and brought to justice without helping the cause is not.
Bin Laden, aside from deserving death for the acts he has previously committed, is a symbol to potential terrorists of the impunity with which they can act. Afghanistan is a symbol to other nations of how a pissant little third-world nation can project fear on the US. We cannot allow this.
Of course, if it was anyone other than Osama bin Laden, that person must be brought to justice as well. The investigation seems to be progressing rapidly and thoroughly, so I’m confident that the correct targets for our vengeance will be identified.
Of course it matters. If he’s not the guy and they go after him, the people who really did it will still be at large!
Imagine if after Pearl Harbor the U.S. had gone to war against Spain instead of Japan, and someone had said “Well, it matters not. Franco is guilty of terrible crimes against humanity.” Meanwhile, here comes the Imperial Japanese Navy…
It seems very obvious to me that amidst all this war talk, if this is a war, then the objective of the United States and NATO should be defending the United States and NATO. That means they have to kill the people who did this… not some guy who did something else.
Sorry.
I thought the question was;
What if Osama bin Laden is not a ** guy.**
Excuses. 
Interesting article by former CIA director R. James Woolsey in
The New Republic about the Iraqi connection to the 1993 WTC bombing (and the US reluctance to acknowledge this possibility).
I was wondering something like the OP myself. What if fault really lies with the northern Taliban faction rather than the ruling Taliban, and we (Americans) are being played so we’ll bomb the hell out of bin Laden for them? Just a thought.
Patty
Everyone here has a valid opinion that is pretty much right. That is the problem the objective isn’t clear.
We know what we need to do but how to do it? There is prostitution because there are Johns. There are drugs because people want them. Take away the Johns no prostitutes. Take away the demand. No drugs. How is best to fight it.
In many areas of Pakistan the Islamic extreamists are the ONLY education the kids get. Of course they grow up to be extremists. They don’t know any difference.
But where is it best to attack terrorism?
We have the EU trying to deal with Iran. Israel consideres Iran a terrorist sponsor. How can we fight terrorist by dealing with them? Or can we?
For example if Bush were to say “objective one is to get OBL. He is the worst terrorist.” Fine but then someone is sure to say “if he is so bad why didn’t we go after him all out before? We have the warrants, the means. Why did we just issue a warrant and forget about it?”
It is interesting to read foreign sites and the BBC. Outside people are saying “we sympathise with the Americans but where were there cries when an Israel bus got gunned down. What about the Palastinians killed by Israel?” It seems America cares only about what effects them."
So the debate goes on…
CIA Trained Binny to go after Ivan the Terrible (aka Red Threat). The US Gov. pumped truckloads of cash into Afghanistan to support their war effort from '79 -‘89. As soon as the Soviet Union was bankrupt (subsequently causing the end of the invasion of Afghanistan) the US lost all interest in the region… Until these same people started harboring ANTI US terrorists. 1990: Saudi Arabia allows the US to use its land and air space to launch attacks on Iraq; Binny didn’t like it. US was supposed to un-ass the AO as soon as Quwait was liberated; Military occupation in Saudi Arabia became permanent(Funny, the US didn’t even have to have a beef with SA to become an occupying force!) Bin Laden gripes and raises big stink about continued US involvement; Binny gets tossed out on his ear, causes many hard feelings against US. US Support of Israeli Fascism against Palistinians adds rocket fuel to Binny’s religious fervor against US. Seems to me that an oversite or two by the ol’ Big Brother in America has occurred. I think earlier interest in Afghanistan to the tune of “Just exactly What is the Taliban’s stance on Human rights anyway?(what? humans have rights?!)” Could have had tremendous impact on the blind support of militant regimes. They’d had a King who had been exiled,destabilizing the country and paving the way for invasion by Mother Russia. Now: to the question at hand. Bin Laden probably is just the cash cow and motivational guy. These cells operate around the globe and each cell has a mostly autonomous leader. Leader and party come up with a plan, give Binny the secret sign, or maybe even tell him the details (either way he can claim he didn’t do it and probably pass a polygraph!) he issues a credit card drawing on funds provided by one of his banks or just a dummy account that he pipelines funds to. The cell carries out said mission and due to the fact that they are mostly suicide missions dead men tell no tales. Only the support chain is left to answer any questions. If you’ve ever been in the military try asking the support teams what the mission is. The biggest problem the US will run into(aside from toe tromping as usual) is that the Taliban and other radical groups are preying on the ignorant populace of these 3rd world mostly Muslem countries by convincing them that the TRUE US aim is a war on Islam. The Q’ran does OK fighting and War for attacks against Islam. Twisted? Sure, but these people aren’t allowed TV’s and can only listen to Taliban Radio, how are they supposed to know any different?