I don’t quite understand what you are getting at with the first sentence. Please be clearer about the lying and tapdancing you speak of.
As to the second point, it’s kind of silly to ask for a cite isn’t it? Have I been crawling through Afghanistan with SEAL’s and therefore able to present first hand authentication? No. Does that mean that I can’t use my own knowledge and common sense to extrapolate how the search for OBL would be conducted? Again, no. And please don’t pretend that you don’t understand that the moveon.org comment was based on the idea that the left is not going to be alerted to everything that happens on the ground during a search for OBL.
And advocating torturing OBL? You bet. Pacifism is an intellectual luxury. It’s very easy to look down your nose at the idea of torture while surrounded by an idealogical haze. But if the information saves lives, it’s worth it. OBL and his goons are not debating philosophy, they are trying to figure out how to kill as many of your friends and family members as possible. So the idea of pumping him full of chemicals or keeping him awake for days to loosen his tongue does not bother me in the least.
As much as it pains me to say it, we’re probably in the best possible strategic position re: bin Laden right now. He’s under enough pressure and being forced to move around enough that he’s functionally crippled. Anything we do to him at this point besides keeping him on the run would be a rallying cry for more extremists and thus be bad for us.
If we kill him, he becomes a martyr.
If we imprison him, we’ll see hostage crises and more terror attacks trying to get us to let him go.
Keeping ObL on the run and effectively worthless is probably one of the smartest things our government has done since losing world favor after 9/11.
Do we actually know anything about ObL, at this point, except that circa the last video tape, he was still alive? Do we, in fact, have him on the run? Is he, in fact, functionally impotent and reduced to the status of symbolic figurehead? For all any of us know, he’s vacationing in Malaysia. And what of Mullah Omar? We got any intel on him? Probably not. Let’s face it, they’re long gone. Probably they’re in Pakistan somewhere, but we really don’t know. And, at this point, I don’t think we have any evidence indicating ObL is under any more threat today than he was when he lived under the protection of the Taliban. He was always prone to moving around, so if anything, it’s could be for him that it’s just same shit, different location.
Still the point I think some were making is that “Osama bin Laden” vs “other Arab wacko” makes for more impact in headlines since he has “market recognition”.
The spectre of Bin Laden as the ultimate bogeyman will be exhumed once more, of this you can be sure. Just as soon as it’s politically expedient. Bush is smart enough (hah!) to know that you can’t remain freedom’s enemy#1 in the public’s fickle mind for more than six months at a time. Nor is there room for more than one “enemy of freedom” at a time, indeed the list stops at #1, ever heard of #2?. So giving him a rest every so often prolongs his usefulness.
Well to be honest I don’t think Bush & Co. are avoiding capturing Osama in order to keep the bogey man alive. Its convenient of course…
Still overall the difficulties of capturing Osama are real and complicated… and no one likes to admit they aren’t being sucessful. Even if the US is spending and allocating considerable resources to capture him… they wouldn’t admit so. That would be “losing”.
So Osama is a target… less so than in the past… and less so as far as attention is given to the subject.
In my mind this is just so much misinformation. Prove me wrong and give a cite supporting this claim.
For my money Rashak Mani has given the most reasonable answers. Could this be because he doesn’t have an agenda?
Why hasn’t anyone mentioned the fact that the reward for OBL has just been raised from $25 million to $50 million? Could it be because it doesn’t fit into most theories being given?
You want a cite that a majority of American’s believe Saddam was behind 9/11? I think that it was fairly well established in a number of opinion polls that this was true, but in case you missed that year…
I am not. Show me a cite where it says Osama Bin Laden is no longer a target.
That he is free to go where he chooses without worrying the US will take him out because he is a target. Actually I am dumbfounded you even made such a claim, and would be shocked to see you pull up a credible cite supporting it.
How many democrats do you think were part of the 7 out of 10. Bush never stated Saddam was involved in 9/11, and I remeber very vividly people having to prove that point to many lefties here on these boards at the time. And saying you believe Bush implied it and believeing it yourself is two different things.
And as for the second part, The Bush Administration was very adamant, and still is to this day, that Saddam’s regime had connections to AlQaida.
YOu are also linking a article that is avoer a year and a half old. PLenty of things have come to light since then, and saying that it proves most AMericans believe Saddam was behind 9/11 because of this cite is rediculous.
