Home  >  Terrorism/Iraq

Osama Bin Laden Thread

Just a few observations:

1. It’s particularly satisfying in some evil way to think of Osama bin Laden not as “elusive” or “shadowy,” but as “shark food.”

2. I don’t think the location where bin Laden was hiding leaves any question that Pakistan was sheltering him. This wasn’t some mountain cave in the tribal territories that the Pakistani government doesn’t control. It was a house near a military academy in a town right near Islamabad. I was on the fence for years about whether Pakistan was a friend or an enemy. My own best guess was that the government was mostly cooperative but unable to control all of its rogue elements. I’ve moved far in the direction of Pakistan being an outright, passive-aggressive enemy, an enemy with nuclear weapons.

3. No, this doesn’t mean we can let our guard down or that we can declare victory, but it’s a tremendous psychological victory in an overwhelmingly psychological war. And now, all of the intelligence resources that had been hunting for bin Laden can shift their gaze to Zawahiri and Mullah Omar.

4. Spontaneous jubilation has erupted in front of the White House. Really? In America?

5. If you know a soldier or (for those living in D.C.) a CIA officer, the beers are on you.

6. Before today, I’d have guessed that President Obama would probably win reelection by sheer lack of an electable opponent. Today, I think his odds of reelection are even greater.

16 Responses

  1. With this news, I have to trash the guess I had about bin Laden’s likely ability to influence the terroist networks the last several years. I pictured him on the run and too deep under cover to be effective as much of a leader.

    Now, I have images of Goodfellas with Henry Hill dodging rain drops under Tuttie’s umbrella as he ferries phone messages for the local godfather.

    Pakistan is a tough foreign policy nut due to the nukes, but they’ve got to pay a price. They should have paid a price for the terrorist attack in India.

    This is outrageous.

  3. Dan OC, he didn’t kill bin Laden. He gave the order to kill him. In order to try to avoid partisan politics on this, I’d say bin Laden killed himself:

    If he had not gone too big – if he had stayed with smaller large-scale attacks, instead of something so stunning as 9/11, he would have never spurred the power and wealth and influence of the United States into implementing the seachanges in many areas across the board that eventually led to this attack within Pakistan by US special forces.

    The US and the world was not ready to deal with global terrorism throughout the 1990s despite the periodic brazen attacks. Long before Obama, I said I could not fault Clinton too much for 9/11, because the American people were not ready to combat it. I couldn’t imagine a president having the political capital and goodwill of the American people pre-9/11 to do what it took post-9/11 to fight global terrorism.

    So, in this, I don’t give Bush ultimate credit for bringing about bin Laden’s death. I give him as much credit as Obama, because Bush was president when the new post-9/11 architecture was put into place and maintained, but many a president would have likely gone down a similar path in building that architecture after 9/11.

    In short, often enough in history, the times make the man, and I think this is one case on point.

    Without the post-9/11 architecture, Obama never gets the chance to give the order, and without bin Laden doing 9/11 itself, that architecture never gets established.

  4. I didn’t mean for too much to be read into it; I just thought it was a funny picture. : )

    I don’t have much time for either President, although I will admit that it would give me some satisfaction to see the looks on the faces of some of the ultra-right nutjobs who were convinced that the guy was the anti-Christ, or some kind of “Muslim Communist” or whatever. Perhaps that’s why I liked the picture…

  5. I give him credit for making the decision. Like GI Korea pointed out on his blog, if the mission had failed in a major way – like with Carter in Iran – he would have paid a political price. (I also think any conservative/republican who says Obama did this to boost his sagging rating should be verbally slapped.)

  6. About point 6, Obama’s reelection prospects: I predict that Joshua Stanton will consider the candidates carefully and then cast his vote for Obama.

  7. I’m not worried about the GOP field today. It is early, and given the onslaught of the press once a solid number one candidate is found, it is better to wait for a later moment to try to build momentum. If the GOP had a prime front runner right now, it is very unlikely he’d be able to build momentum going into the heart of the race next year. The media would never let that happen.

  8. @usinkorea: 1. I agree with you that excessive partisanship is not needed right now. We should briefly, quickly review the last 10 years as a country, re-evaluate, and move on. 2. What do you think of Jon Huntsman?

  9. Until the US stops supporting Israel, you can expect Arab “allies” like Pakistan to keep betraying the US.

  11. Whatever public perception boost Obama gets isn’t going to last through the 2012 election. Bush the first was pulling 90% approval ratings after the Iraq War and we all know how his second term turned out.

  12. I don’t see Palin, Trump, Huckabee, or Gingrich beating Obama. I could see maybe Romney, but that’s because he is a RINO who votes with the Democrats half the time. Obama will be the clear favorite since there aren’t any electable GOP candidates.

  13. It’s funny how in four years Romney has gone from the most unelectable to most electable among Republican presidential aspirants. Still, I don’t see him winning the GOP nomination because of that government health care thing he has on his record. They’ll end up nominating somebody like Huckabee: he looks electable from your side, but he really isn’t. (SEE ALSO: Kerry, John.)

  14. sam wrote:

    I don’t see Palin, Trump, Huckabee, or Gingrich beating Obama. I could see maybe Romney, but that’s because he is a RINO who votes with the Democrats half the time. Obama will be the clear favorite since there aren’t any electable GOP candidates.

    Palin and Trump, not likely. Gingrich could beat Obama if he keeps his temper in check and the positive trends in the economy turn sour again.

    Huckabee definitely could. Romney can, but only if he doesn’t run away from his own universal health care plan.

    Remember, right now none of them is the Republican nominee. Once they are, their stature grows, and they start to be seen as being on something of an equal plane with Obama. At that point it’s their ideas, delivery, and background that are scrutinized to see if there’s anything too unlikeable about them, which is why Palin and Trump likely cannot win. Huckabee is eminently likable, and so is Romney. Gingrich not so much, but he has enough experience behind him and enough good ideas in his head to come across as statesman like.

    Who I vote for would depend on how the KORUS FTA turns out, what the real plans are for health care (“Repeal Obamacare!” is not an actual plan), and for balancing the budget. I would vote for Obama over Palin or Trump in a heartbeat, but I would have to think long and hard between Obama and some of the others, though I would probably end up going with Obama going on what we know about everyone now.