I notice that Bush’s standard stump speech includes the anecdote of some WTC cleanup guy telling GWB “whatever it takes”. I assumed that meant “get the bastards who did this”. Can those who think Bush is doing a good job tell me why bin Laden’s name is never mentioned, and why “whatever it takes” is not being done, since bin Laden has not been found?
bin who? Oh, bin Laden? Please…that’s SO 2001…
bin Forgotten
.
…tell me why bin Laden’s name is never mentioned, and why “whatever it takes” is not being done, since bin Laden has not been found?
Because they have no clue where he is and even less how to find him. The war in Irak is a nice diversion, isn’t it.
“why bin Laden’s name is never mentioned” How or why would you like him to be mentioned? GW can talk about him all he wants but unless and until he is handcuffed or his body drug out and on film it isn’t going to matter. ( I would prefer option 1) The bottom line is no one really wants to hear Bush talk about how we are going to get OBL people just want it done so there is no need to bring him up.
“and why “whatever it takes” is not being done, since bin Laden has not been found?” I am sure they are just waiting for November 
Seriously, how do you know what is and isn’t being done? I am not sure how you define “whatever it takes” but they are offering $50 million and have people looking for him all over the globe. We are dealing with someone who has enormous resources and entire countries willing to give him relief and safe passage.
The better question is why didn’t we kill him when he had the chance?
My concern is that the administration is claiming to be so strong on the “war on terrorism”, yet vast resources are being used in Iraq while supposed Public Enemy #1 (bin Laden) has not been found. That’s my take on what is and is not being done.
I agree, but we should be able to do both. Can we, I don’t know but we should be able to. Also, it is possible that all the military hardware in Iraq may not really be of value. It may be that the only way to catch OBL is by using human intel and undercover work to get someone to turn on him. It is also possible that with this type of prey that 50,000 troops is not the best approach but small, quiet and stealth of special or black ops is the solution.
My point is that the tactics and strategy may not require all the fire power in Iraq.
The real question is why people think that catching bin Laden is so vitally important. Does anyone really believe that if we get bin Laden, the entire global network of terrorism is going to collapse? Americans like to have a face or a target, and that’s understandable, but not very realistic.
Most people in the government and who understand this I would say don’t think there is any real value to catching him other than making us feel better. I guess I see it like I see capital punishment in the sense that it will not bring back the victim but we want to punish the criminal. This is why I want to capture OBL not kill him, killing him is too much in line with what he wants and will make him bigger than he is.
I agree, there is no impact to Al Queda, but there is a need to get him and punish him, whatever that is.
I agree we should try to catch him. He would be an invaluable source of intelligence, and is undoubtably guilty of crimes that need punishing. However, if we do get him, someone else will step right in. Casey said we have been told our intell is so good, and it’s embarrsassing that we haven’t gotten bin Laden yet, but I don’t think that’s true. Since before 9/11, we have known that our intell capability with terrorist groups is weak, and that it is difficult to build this capability. We knew that finding bin Laden would be exponentially more difficult than getting Saddam, for instance, and it doesn’t surprise me, or embarrass me at all that we are still looking for bin Laden.
-
OBL may very well not be found because the pieces of OBL are too small to find.
-
If not, OBL is doing his best to hide in the deepest possible cave to avoid the fate of more than 75% of his closest friends. It is a lot harder to plan massive terrorist attacks if you are hiding that hard.
-
If OBL is alive and if we elect a President serious about fighting terrorism, he will someday be found, but is far more likely to be killed than captured.
-
If OBL is alive and if we elect a President that has not yet figured out his nuanced position on the First Persian Gulf War, then OBL will have a lot less reason to hide.
“4. If OBL is alive and if we elect a President that has not yet figured out his nuanced position on the First Persian Gulf War, then OBL will have a lot less reason to hide.”
Nicely nuanced!
“But the war on terror is a tremendous failure, that much cannot be disputed.”
Of course it can be disputed. A viscious dictator has been dethroned, bin Laden and al Qaeda have been neutralized, and there have been no new terrorist attacks on American soil.
I’d be hard pressed to see how that’s failure.
Let’s see…maybe because they’re searching for him and one or two others in an area that’s larger than the state of Texas, that he’s being aided and abetted by countries and organizations friendly to his organization, that we’re simultaneously trying to reorder the mindset and outlook of a formerly-unfriendly region, and that we’re trying to do that all while trying to nation build in another part of the region in a country that was just as inimical to us as the former Taliban regime in Afghanistan. All with the barest numbers of American fighting men and women.
How funny that we haven’t had one single terrorist act committed against us in the United States since we began military operations over in Iraq and Afghanistan.
A little perspective, please.
K.
I do not understand the relationship between OBL and Iraq. There are proofs, and it is quit logic that there was no relation between OBL and Saddam Hussein.
The fact that OBl is not found is based on the fact that Afghanistan is a very special country, that can not be ruled by anyone else than Afghans. Remeber the 80s, even russian Army, that is really not suspicious to be squeamish, was not able to rule this territory - neither do the US Army and their allies.
From everything I have read, there is no relationship between OBL and Iraq. Saddam had some ties to terrorists. Abu Abas was living openly in Iraq. Saddam did apparently pay off the families of Palestinian suicide bombers.
I can’t see OBL wanting a relationship with Hussein. His fundamentalist beliefs are at odds with a corrupt dictator like Hussein, who only gave lip service to Islam until somewhat later in life.
There are some lawless areas of northern Iraq where some terrorists with ties to OBL might have trained. There are also some areas in Florida and Arizona where terrorists with ties to OBL trained. Shrug.
Bin Laden and al Qaeda have been neutralized
.
Ken,
Tha main problem here is that we have a guy who doesn’t deserve to keep his job and another guy who can’t convince enough people of this.
– Tha main problem here is that we have a guy who doesn’t deserve to keep his job and another guy who can’t convince enough people of this.
What is scary is that people should already be convinced unless they live in a hole in the ground. It is sad that anyone would be swayed by anything that either candidate has said. If people are listening to the candidates to decide who to for, this country is in BIG F’ing trouble!!!