Osama Bin Laden - Do you really think you can't catch him?

[Ehsan]

I was just wondering about this. Does anyone here genuinely believe that the US has been unable to capture him or kill him till now?

Think about it. Personally, I think he's either dead or no one's really trying to catch him.

Your thoughts?

(Btw, I was trying to figure out if this has been specifically discussed, but my search function isn't working and I can't remember it being discussed.)

[peleincubus]

Originally Posted by Ehsan I was just wondering about this. Does anyone here genuinely believe that the US has been unable to capture him or kill him till now? Think about it. Personally, I think he's either dead or no one's really trying to catch him. Your thoughts? (Btw, I was trying to figure out if this has been specifically discussed, but my search function isn't working and I can't remember it being discussed.)

im pretty much positive there have been 2-3 videos in the last few years that have proven he is alive.

as far as the other question. who the hell knows about this goverment.

[rhester]

The US govt. will only catch him if they want to.

[Rocket River]

OCTOBER SURPRISE, baby!

Rocket River

[MadMax]

Originally Posted by Rocket River OCTOBER SURPRISE, baby! Rocket River

how long have we been hearing that??

i've heard people speculating as to that for roughly 6 years now.

[danny317]

i think catching him would be a symbolic victory but wouldnt do much in the way to stopping terrorism. i think more people would step up and then we'd have like 10 osamas to chase after.

[Rocket River]

Originally Posted by MadMax how long have we been hearing that?? i've heard people speculating as to that for roughly 6 years now.

I say it only in semi jest
but
IMO
He is dead or captured already

Rocket River

[Surfguy]

Militants are pretty much free to roam in Pakistan...especially in the tribal lawless areas. There is pretty much no chance he will ever get caught and face the justice he deserves. All he has to do is avoid our drones...which are the best chance of firing a missile at him and taking him out. I seriously doubt he is out walking around during broad daylight for any extended periods of time. He is just lying low and only his most loyal know where he is.

He will likely die of natural causes before he is ever caught. Same goes for his second in command.

[Air Langhi]

I don't think it is in the best interest of the bush administration to catch osama; without him they probably couldn't have done a 1/10th of the stuff they have done with him. Maybe he is even on their payroll cause he has helped bush a bunch.

[durvasa]

Originally Posted by danny317 i think catching him would be a symbolic victory but wouldnt do much in the way to stopping terrorism. i think more people would step up and then we'd have like 10 osamas to chase after.

Exactly. But this has been known for a while, and the Democrats still act like catching/killing Bin Laden should be priority #1 in the "War on Terror". They're just exploiting the public's simplistic world view. This isn't Lord of the Rings, Bin Laden isn't Sauron, and if you kill him all terrorists won't simply disappear like dust in the wind.

[Ottomaton]

Granted it was nearly 100 years ago, but there was a guy that the British named The Faqir of Ipi who roamed around the tribal areas for like 50 years leading a massive rebellion against the British. The British spent almost all of that time actively and aggressively perusing him and couldn't catch him.

As long as bin Laden avoids cell phones, satellite phones, pagers, etc. he will be fine. I imagine at some point he got some sort of technical training from someone associated with Pakistani intelligence services on how to insulate himself from these things. US Human intelligence in Pakistan is far worse than what the British used to have. If that is what must be used to catch him, he won't be caught, IMO.

If you catch him there are all sorts of things you can do. You could see what the US did with Saddam Hussein and all the photos of him looking sick and weak after they captured him. If you capture bin Laden and put him on trial and work all that stuff on him, you can damage the message by making the messenger look sad, weak, and pitiful. It would have a serious effect, especially with the weak minded children that are often recruited to do the dirty work for ‘the cause’.

[xcamm1]

I think we have already caught him and we are waiting to show the world around election time. That way Mccain wins for sure!!!

[glynch]

It is hard to imagine that they cannot catch him. Of course, they have not caught the anthrax terrorist(s) either.

Same with Al Qaeda Number Two and Mullah Omar ? the head of the Taliban.

[sook]

drop nukes in the mountains of afghanistan, the gov. doesn't want to catch him so why should they ? It gave an insentive into going in to iraq

[HAYJON02]

If it's not important, don't say it is. Either it is important that we avenge the 3,000 people who were crushed/burned on 9/11 or it isn't.

If it's not then give up talking figuratively and talk literally. Explain why you do what you do and for what aim. Are we that dumb that we can't be expected a reasonable explanation or is reason an exclusively elitist concept for nerds?

Politics = lame.

[CometsWin]

Originally Posted by durvasa Exactly. But this has been known for a while, and the Democrats still act like catching/killing Bin Laden should be priority #1 in the "War on Terror". They're just exploiting the public's simplistic world view. This isn't Lord of the Rings, Bin Laden isn't Sauron, and if you kill him all terrorists won't simply disappear like dust in the wind.

A man is responsible for the death of 3,000 Americans and that's not priority number one? What? If someone walked into a school and shot 100 people, catching him would be priority number one for the entire country. What's any different here? We're a nation of laws and justice. He needs to be caught and brought to justice. Anything less is a terrorist getting away with the biggest crime in history. We don't let murderers roam the country side just because it's difficult to catch them.

[Jugdish]

Originally Posted by sook drop nukes in the mountains of afghanistan, the gov. doesn't want to catch him so why should they ? It gave an insentive into going in to iraq

Freedom isn't free, there's a hefty ****ing fee

[durvasa]

Originally Posted by CometsWin A man is responsible for the death of 3,000 Americans and that's not priority number one? What? If someone walked into a school and shot 100 people, catching him would be priority number one for the entire country. What's any different here? We're a nation of laws and justice. He needs to be caught and brought to justice. Anything less is a terrorist getting away with the biggest crime in history. We don't let murderers roam the country side just because it's difficult to catch them.

If the goal is to protect ourselves and our allies from terrorist attacks, I don't consider capturing Bin Laden a high tactical priority. Should he be caught and brought to justice? Ideally, yes (amongst many others). But I don't think it's critical from a strategic standpoint, which is really where our focus should be.

[CometsWin]

Originally Posted by durvasa If the goal is to protect ourselves and our allies from terrorist attacks, I don't consider capturing Bin Laden a high tactical priority. Should he be caught and brought to justice? Ideally, yes (amongst many others). But I don't think it's critical from a strategic standpoint, which is really where our focus should be.

I think you've missed the larger issue which is our moral authority to defend ourselves from terrorism and to bring these people to justice no matter where they hide. That is the larger strategic importance here. Nobody questioned our authority to invade Afghanistan to hunt this killer and rightfully so. If we decide that's no longer a core element of this struggle then we're setting a bad precedent for the future.

[HombreDeHierro]

why would we want to capture or kill our own guy?