Bin Laden Dead?

[dgridley]

Some news services are reporting the possibility that Bin Laden died (unconfirmed) of typhoid August 23rd in Pakistan..

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/23/terror/main2035766.shtml

 

[Colleen]

I'd like to see them confirm it. I've been reading so far that it's unconfirmed.

 

[dgridley]

We hear so much about Iraq these days and virtually nothing about the supposed "hunt" for Bin Laden.

Not long ago, I read something along the lines that a tradeoff was made in exchange for easing up on the search for Bin Laden.. this would be a convenient way of sweeping the whole thing under the rug.

I guess I'm a skeptic but my thoughts are that if we were actually actively looking, we'd have found him by now.

Funny, I was just thinking last night that I bet they find him soon and read this news this morning...

 

[HHDomains]

Could be just a smoke screen.
Bin Laden loves to make video tapes to disprove rumors of his death. They could just be trying to flush him out.

 

[dgridley]

That's an idea I hadn't considered..

Could be just a smoke screen.
Bin Laden loves to make video tapes to disprove rumors of his death. They could just be trying to flush him out.

 

[.X.]

until they show the people who need to see bin laden is dead...he isn't dead in my book....But he is definatly going to captured by the US...dead or a live.

 

[dhscott]

It wouldn't matter if he was dead or alive though, this "War on Terror" is not a war on a sole body of people, cultures or (unbelieveably) religions, it's just a way for America to get rid of it's enemies, pure and simple. They'll continue fighting anti-western idology until it goes away. Sad thing is it won't. America just makes it worse!

Belief that killing Bin laden will suddenly end anti-western feeling and / or action is naive. Osama is not the King of anyone, his subjects won't suddenly lay down their arms and go back to their ordinary lives. This isn't the middle ages anymore, this is guerilla warfare on an unbelieveable scale. You won't get rid of it until you get rid of the reason behind it, or the thing they are fighting for.

 

[dgridley]

I agree completely.. as you say, many of the US's actions are merely exacerbating the problem.

I know this will be an unpopular answer, but in many ways, Chavez and Ahmadinejad have been correct in their assessments. America is an Imperialist nation and is NOT the center of the Universe. Times have changed and we, as a Nation, need to realize this and stop being so ethnocentric and xenophobic.

(Oops! There goes my chance at Sept. MOTM! :D )

Oh, and by the way, it's because I love my country that I'm saying this.. not to spite it.

Belief that killing Bin laden will suddenly end anti-western feeling and / or action is naive.

 

[sdtrader]

Even if you get backlash at home Dave you are percieved as a patriotic and wise person from abroad.

 

[01wojtowicz]

none of this would of happened if the US hadnt been so stupid in the cold war, fighting proxy wars, so they train bin laden, supply him with weapons and then annoy him alot, thats not very clever is it!]

I couldnt care less if hes dead, he dies then even more attacks will happen, hell be seen as a martyr, even if the US dont kill him. But if he stays alive theyll still be attacks, hes offered a truce, why don't we just withdraw from the middle east and itll be much easier for us.

 

[mis_chiff]

Could be just a smoke screen.
Bin Laden loves to make video tapes to disprove rumors of his death. They could just be trying to flush him out.

Unfortunately, this may cause problems, he may do something
to prove he's not dead, and not in the form of a video....

 

[dgridley]

Sad part is, now that we've stuck our foot in the mud, when we pull it out, all we'll hear is the sucking sound of the vacuum we've created and more mud filling it's place. My prediction is if we leave before the Middle East has stabilized, it'll be 10x worse once we've left. It wasn't stable to begin with and I fear we've only served to destabilize it more. We need to let the mud dry before we pull our foot out.

why don't we jsut withdraw from the middle east and itll be much easier for us.

 

[01wojtowicz]

Dave , why should we care about the middle east! they wouldnt help us if we were in their situation! it would end id say 50% of the worlds troubles if the middle east just dissapeared!

 

[dgridley]

It's a double edged sword, isn't it?

Dave , why should we care about the middle east! they wouldnt help us if we were in their situation! it would end id say 50% of the worlds troubles if the middle east just dissapeared!

 

[01wojtowicz]

yep, we cant do anything right, if we pull out though i recon iw would be the best thing to do, but gradualy!

 

[HHDomains]

I find this whole "War on Terror" idea to be a bit of a joke.
The bush administration claims that their agenda is to spread "democracy" around the world and to fight terror world wide, and yet they seem to be targetting Muslims.

When was the last time the US took a stand against the Tamils in Sri Lanka?
Or what about the dozens of terrorist groups that operate out of Africa and the Philippines?
What about the Basque seperatists?
What about the National Democratic Alliance?
Hell, what has Bush done to help his British buddies with the IRA?

There are hundreds of non-Muslim terrorist groups out there and yet I've never seen them targetted by the Bush administration.

Why is this. Whis is it called the "War on Terror"?

 

[NwS]

I find this whole "War on Terror" idea to be a bit of a joke.
The bush administration claims that their agenda is to spread "democracy" around the world and to fight terror world wide, and yet they seem to be targetting Muslims.

When was the last time the US took a stand against the Tamils in Sri Lanka?
Or what about the dozens of terrorist groups that operate out of Africa and the Philippines?
What about the Basque seperatists?
What about the National Democratic Alliance?
Hell, what has Bush done to help his British buddies with the IRA?

There are hundreds of non-Muslim terrorist groups out there and yet I've never seen them targetted by the Bush administration.

Why is this. Whis is it called the "War on Terror"?

+++

Is Just "America Creating History" IMO..

none of this would of happened if the US hadnt been so stupid in the cold war, fighting proxy wars, so they train bin laden, supply him with weapons and then annoy him alot, thats not very clever is it!]

I couldnt care less if hes dead, he dies then even more attacks will happen, hell be seen as a martyr, even if the US dont kill him. But if he stays alive theyll still be attacks, hes offered a truce, why don't we just withdraw from the middle east and itll be much easier for us.

And leave the oils?? lol

 

[Jeff]

Personally, I've believed that he's been dead for quite some time ... :blink:

... You won't get rid of it until you get rid of the reason behind it, or the thing they are fighting for.

Agreed. :imho:

 

[dhscott]

In response to HHDomains post,

The IRA, Basque Seperatists & Tamil Tigers are all internal problems, they only affect the specific countries they are fighting in. America SHOULDN'T intervene if anything as it is none of their business.

This whole "war on terror" thing started in Africa with the bombings of the American embassy's in Kenya and Tanzania. These were performed by al-qaeda. The US however did not act and let al-qaeda grow in strength in terms of arms, members and politically also.

The largest Islamic population in the world is found in Indonesia, yet you do not see as much US activity there, where al-qaeda is a lot more potent, compared to the middle-east. The US is starting to look at the horn of africa, in particular Somalia, with a bit of pessimism as the country (which has been lawless and run by warlords practically for the last 10-odd years) is now being overrun by the Union of Islamic Courts, read more here. It is the largest fighting force in the country, and the government, which holds no REAL power looks like it's next target. Ethiopia has "unofficially" sent troops into the borders of Somalia as a deterant, they'd rather have the bad government and warlords than a country run with a powerfully, actively violent Union. The US's stance sees this as a potential training ground for al-qaeda since there have been claims of links between some of the leaders in the Union and al-qaeda. Has there been any action though, diplomatic or otherwise?

Footnote: The IRA is disarming the last I heard.

 

[HHDomains]

In response to HHDomains post,

The IRA, Basque Seperatists & Tamil Tigers are all internal problems, they only affect the specific countries they are fighting in. America SHOULDN'T intervene if anything as it is none of their business.

This whole "war on terror" thing started in Africa with the bombings of the American embassy's in Kenya and Tanzania. These were performed by al-qaeda. The US however did not act and let al-qaeda grow in strength in terms of arms, members and politically also.

The largest Islamic population in the world is found in Indonesia, yet you do not see as much US activity there, where al-qaeda is a lot more potent, compared to the middle-east. The US is starting to look at the horn of africa, in particular Somalia, with a bit of pessimism as the country (which has been lawless and run by warlords practically for the last 10-odd years) is now being overrun by the Union of Islamic Courts, read more here. It is the largest fighting force in the country, and the government, which holds no REAL power looks like it's next target. Ethiopia has "unofficially" sent troops into the borders of Somalia as a deterant, they'd rather have the bad government and warlords than a country run with a powerfully, actively violent Union. The US's stance sees this as a potential training ground for al-qaeda since there have been claims of links between some of the leaders in the Union and al-qaeda. Has there been any action though, diplomatic or otherwise?

Footnote: The IRA is disarming the last I heard.

So what is it then? A war on Al Queada?
Al Queada didn't exist in Iraq until the US invaded. Why did the US choose to invade Iraq and call it a war on terror?
Why does Bush insist on calling it a war on terror when terrorist numbers have tripled every year of his presidency since he invaded Iraq?