On Feb 26, 11:33 pm, Jeff Dougherty
wrote:

Sigh. I know I said I'd stay out of this, but...does it occur to you
that the U.S. and NATO *might* have been just a bit more interested in
finding bin Laden than the Taliban were?

-JTD

Who knows what NATO wants anymore?

The US -- well, it's not as easy as "find the guy and kill him and
everything will go back to the wonderful Clinton years." (Even though
Bin Laden attacked more targets during those years than the Bush
years).

First, with Bin Laden in the mountains, Pakistan has an incentive to
remain in play. So far they have rounded up hundreds of his
accomplices, kept pressure on the Taliban sympathizers, and kept the
pressure on internally against fellow fanatics. None of this done
incredibly well, of course, but as expected from such a splintered
mess of a country.

Second, the US public would probably heave a collective sigh and
think, "Good, now that's over" once the images are broadcast. The
drive-bys would declare that everything bad is over, and the weasels
would start demanding all troops immediately be brought home and given
a warm blankie and some milk..

Even though "getting bin Laden" only takes out one ultra rich Muslim
jihadist. There are many, many more willing to step up and take his
place.

His continued miserable existence -- while unjust and annoying to
those of us who want him handed over to NYPD/FDNY for 24 hours --
continues to expand our knowledge of his network and his organization.
It also gives moral justification to various activities worldwide
you'd rather not know about.


Dan