I’m not talking about harebrained conspiracy theories where Bush is milking the Al Qaeda thing in order to secure the '04 elections, nor anything more sinister, but a legitamate reason for allowing Binny to remain on the run.
One of the things that the talking heads keep bringing up in their commentaries is that given the structure of Al Qaeda, if you cut off the head, the body won’t die, but will merely sprout one or more heads to replace the one you’ve killed. So, suppose we’re trying the reverse? Cutting off the body to kill the head.
We’re harrassing Bin Laden enough that he thinks there’s still a serious threat to his survival, but not enough to kill him, or force him to go completely underground. The reason for this being that if we continue to do so, Bin Laden will make periodic announcements, which contain coded orders to his followers, thus allowing us to track their movements and actions and flushing out their identities to us before they can put their plans into action.
Given that we’ve got hundreds, if not thousands, of Al Qaeda prisoners in Cuba, its highly likely that at least one or two of them have turned Quisling and are decoding any messages from Binny’s latest announcement. Additionally, there might be clues amongst the documents that we found in Afghanistan which provide hints to, if not enable us to decrypt, any hidden messages in the tape.
Nor would this be unprecidented action, as the Allies withheld information which could have saved the lives of civilians during WW II, for fear that alerting the civilians would have tipped the Germans off to the fact that we’d broken the Enigma machine.
Or it’s possible that we can name whoever serves our interest as the new eastasia so long as we can make a sketchy connection to Bin Laden. He’s out there, he’s Scary and Bad - why reinvent the wheel?
That sounded more conspiratorial than I meant it… I don’t mean to suggest that the US government “invented” bin laden, or anything - but as long as we’ve got the public outcry for him, the sense of urgency around him, the proper demonification (everyone is absolutely beyond a doubt convinced that he’s the absolute master of all that is evil without seeing a shred of evidence it was him), we might as well keep his life/death status ambiguous to bend it to whatever purposes we need it to fulfill, rather than start over with someone else.
Doubtful. The organization seems to be based on religious war, not any underlying organic economic or political grievances. Without an inspirational leader, there’s no organization.
“The organization seems to be based on religious war, not any underlying organic economic or political grievances”
Do you mind describing how you came to that conclusion? It seems pretty polar opposite to my impression. I get the feeling that Al Queda is a loose organization of cells. Before 9/11 bin Laden was more of a money man rather than a spiritual/inspirational leader, in fact I think that U.S spin has actually moved him into that role.
Also, I think you are dreaming if you believe there are no underlying economic or political grievances.
I could see the U.S keeping him alive/not trying to hard to kill him for propaganda or “keep the enemy you know” purposes.
I’m referring to their motivations more than their structure, and they do seem to be more based on the presence of infidels on the holy land around Mecca than on political/economic disadvantage, although those can’t be dismissed entirely. There’s room for much disagreement on that, of course.
But the issue is what would happen to the organization if bin Laden were to be killed or captured right now, with sufficient proof of such to convince his followers. Perhaps another inspirational leader would take over, or perhaps not. I’d bet that the capture/death would cast enough doubt that he was the agent of Allah’s will that the organization would collapse and the cells would dissolve.
Agreed, look hard enough and behind the religious rhetoric the motivations are always political and/or economic. It is tempting to dismiss all of this as religious fanaticism but I doubt these people would be that dangerous if that were all that was at stake.
—It’s possible that the U.S. has satellites sophisticated enough to listen into any room on the planet (perhaps only line of site, via laser).—
Unlikely, considering that geostationary orbits (the sort needed to watch a place 24 hours a day) are only possible over certain portions of the earth: only those not too far away from the equator. Worse, such orbits require very high altitudes, making things like laser snooping much more difficult. Molniya orbits (very eliptical, which toggle between very low and fast and very high and slow) could be a little bit better, but still have a lot of problems. For other sorts of satelite orbits, you just have to know the period, and you can simply wait till they pass over (which Al Queda did quite commonly, apparently).
—I get the feeling that Al Queda is a loose organization of cells. Before 9/11 bin Laden was more of a money man rather than a spiritual/inspirational leader, in fact I think that U.S spin has actually moved him into that role.—
Osama was supposedly always more sort of a folk hero and spokesman than an actual leader. He’s more of the Gilderoy Lockhart of Hogwarts than the Dumbledore (TERRIBLE analougy: but it was better than using a real world example that might be offended by the comparison, however non-insulting it might be). Al Queda IS designed to operate as cells each with their own mandate and planning possibilities.
“and they do seem to be more based on the presence of infidels on the holy land around Mecca than on political/economic disadvantage”
Some would say that US Military bases(aka “infidels”) in Saudi Arabia is very much a political issue. Take a look at this CNN map of bases available for a coalition attack. You don’t have to be a religous nut for that to make you nervous.