How long to bin laden is caught/killed?

[ByteMe]

I bet before the next election. I imagine Bush will get a huge boost because of it. At least I hope they catch him soon.

 

[RussSchultz]

I bet before the next election. I imagine Bush will get a huge boost because of it. At least I hope they catch him soon.

It certainly is the conspiracy theorist prediction that Bin Laden will be "caught" right before the elections, so Bu$hit can rig (yet another) election through cheap PR stunts.

Even Diarrhea_Splatter said the same thing about Saddam (even though the elections are over a year away and the only political thing in the news right now is democratic candidate debates)

Or, alternatively, he'll never be caught so Bu$hit and A$$croft will always have their boogie man to blame taking our rights away on.

Personally, He might be paste on a cave wall, as some people have theorized, or he'll be caught as soon as he can, not a moment too soon for my taste.

But I'm a sheep. Baaaa.

edit: wrong person (Clashman) originally ascribed to the conspiracy theory, which will make his response below seem out of place.

 

[Natoma]

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3716037/

We could have had Osama had we sent in enough troops in 2001 to contain Al-Qaeda's escape routes. We only used about 15,000 troops I believe, roughly 1/10th the amount we have in Iraq now. One reason we found Saddam so fast is because he had no place to flee. The same could have been said for Osama after we bombed his facilities and forced him into the hinterlands.

Frankly I'd have rather had Osama caught than Saddam. And who cares about the damn polls ByteMe. That man orchestrated the attacks that killed 3000 people in this country. Fuck the polls.

 

[Clashman]

Even Clashman (I think) said the same thing about Saddam (even though the elections are over a year away and the only political thing in the news right now is democratic candidate debates)

Or, alternatively, he'll never be caught so Bu$hit and A$$croft will always have their boogie man to blame taking our rights away on.

Personally, He might be paste on a cave wall, as some people have theorized, or he'll be caught as soon as he can, not a moment too soon for my taste.

But I'm a sheep. Baaaa.

First off, fuck you very much Russ. It's always nice to have that little bit of condescension from you to brighten up my day. It might seem to be nice to have an occasional civilized debate, or even conversation. But I guess this forum would just be too damned boring without the constant cheap shots getting in the way of actually addressing the issues the other person has raised.

Secondly, I did not in fact say the words you ascribed to me. Next time you want to demean and belittle someone, make sure you know who you're talking about.

Asshole.

 

[Clashman]

To actually address the original question posed, as has already been mentioned the U.S. doesn't really have the manpower in Afghanistan to make catching OBL anywhere near as likely as catching SH was. If they had a hundred thousand troops there, they would probably have a decent chance of catching him, (based on how many close calls they appear to have had with Saddam), but would probably at the same time be facing another guerrilla war similar to Iraq. Not that it would really change anything anyway. Killing or capturing a single person rarely, (although not in all circumstances), does much to stop a movement. It could in fact have the opposite effect of making the person a martyr.

 

[RussSchultz]

My apologies, it was Diarrhea_splatter, and not you.

 

[Vince]

We could have had Osama had we sent in enough troops in 2001 to contain Al-Qaeda's escape routes. We only used about 15,000 troops I believe, roughly 1/10th the amount we have in Iraq now. One reason we found Saddam so fast is because he had no place to flee. The same could have been said for Osama after we bombed his facilities and forced him into the hinterlands.

Just curious, how many of those troops would it have taken to apprehend Osama if the Clinton Administration accepted his extradition from Sudan? Like 1/10,000th the amount? I love politically motivated revisionist historians - it's like you can't help yourself, can't contain the criticism...

In December 2001, 'Vanity Fair' published a devastating expose of the Clinton Administration's mishandling of repeated offers by the Sudanese government, some dating back to 1996, to provide Washington intelligence on terrorism - particularly with regard to the al-Qaeda terrorist network.

• (1) Part of what was offered to the Clinton Administration were several hundred Sudanese files on al-Qaeda and its members.
  (2) The Administration also passed up the opportunity of interrogating two al-Qaeda members who had clearly been involved in the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in east Africa. In keeping with its very questionable Sudan policy
  (3), the Clinton Administration rejected all of Sudan's repeated offers. The implications of this studied indifference are clear. As 'Vanity Fair' stated: "September 11 might have been prevented if the U.S. had accepted Sudan's offers to share its intelligence files on Osama bin Laden and the growing al-Qaeda files." It had also earlier been revealed that in addition to offering the Clinton Administration intelligence on al-Qaeda, the Sudanese government had in 1996 also offered to extradite Osama bin-Laden - just as Khartoum had extradited the international terrorism known as "Carlos the Jackal" to France.
  (4)This offer was also rejected by the Clinton Administration.

 

[K.I.L.E.R]

Another thread lost to "mature" adults.

 

[Ty]

Why are you trolling Russ? Normally you're here AGAINST trolls but now you're on a whacko leftist hunt? So what if someone else said something stupid in a totally different thread?

To answer the original question: Probably never is my guess. He'll be dead by natural causes long before we catch him is my guess.

 

[RussSchultz]

Why are you trolling Russ? Normally you're here AGAINST trolls but now you're on a whacko leftist hunt? So what if someone else said something stupid in a totally different thread?

Trolling? Sorry, I don't think it is. Had I been less lazy (and verified who I was referring to), I think my "response" would be right on topic in this thread, and wouldn't have offended anybody.

The fact of the matter is there is a contingent of people who believe all sorts of crazy things concerning Bin Laden and Saddam, particularly the items (and reasoning) I put in my overly sarcastic role-playing response.

 

[Natoma]

Just curious, how many of those troops would it have taken to apprehend Osama if the Clinton Administration accepted his extradition from Sudan? Like 1/10,000th the amount? I love politically motivated revisionist historians - it's like you can't help yourself, can't contain the criticism...

First off there is no revisionism here. I didn't know about this. Second, was Osama the monster criminal he's known to the world today? If so, then that is a rightful criticism and a huge failing on the part of the Clinton Adminstration. I can't imagine that any president would not accept the extradition of such a monster, if he were known as such at the time.

 

[Tahir2]

I would say Osama is dead... why?
Because he loves the limelight, loves seeing his face plastered on TV's and all we have had from him in the recent months is an audio tape that was not him (one of his terrorist friends apparently) and an old video.

There is the fact that he was apparently pretty ill anyway that he may have died of 'natural causes'. Either way...I am just speculating.

 

[Tim Murray]

I'd think it'll be years at least before we can confirm that he is, in fact, dead. He might be dead now from kidney failure, but we'll almost certainly never see his body.

 

[pax]

Sarcasm seems to rule the day now yeah... especially concerning fried chicken... now you can diss me all ya like. But dont diss the colonel man that guy knew his spices.

As for Bin Laden I think we had a good chance of getting him or at least some of his higher buds when Kunduz was surrounded but then orders from Rummie had the army let every fighter leave on Pakistani transports without checking for who was pakistani or al quaeda...

No conspiracy there it was done publically in broad daylight and shamelessly unanswered to this day. I dont think Bin Laden will get caught...

 

[RussSchultz]

Sarcasm seems to rule the day now yeah... especially concerning fried chicken... now you can diss me all ya like. But dont diss the colonel man that guy knew his spices.

Sarcasm + a little surrealism?

 

[pax]

Surreal?

 

[RussSchultz]

Just the strange segue from sarcasm to fried chicken.

 

[ByteMe]

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3716037/

We could have had Osama had we sent in enough troops in 2001 to contain Al-Qaeda's escape routes. We only used about 15,000 troops I believe, roughly 1/10th the amount we have in Iraq now. One reason we found Saddam so fast is because he had no place to flee. The same could have been said for Osama after we bombed his facilities and forced him into the hinterlands.

Frankly I'd have rather had Osama caught than Saddam. And who cares about the damn polls ByteMe. That man orchestrated the attacks that killed 3000 people in this country. Fuck the polls.

I agree that catching that bastard is more important than the polls. The problem is Natoma, if we had sent in 100,000 troops.. you would be screaming that we are taking over the country and should get out. People get upset anyway we do it.

 

[akira888]

First off there is no revisionism here. I didn't know about this. Second, was Osama the monster criminal he's known to the world today? If so, then that is a rightful criticism and a huge failing on the part of the Clinton Adminstration. I can't imagine that any president would not accept the extradition of such a monster, if he were known as such at the time.

Mansoor Ijaz is about as mainstream, centrist, and establishment as they come in the US foreign policy appartus. Here is Ijaz in the LAT with his take on the affair. I have no commentary to add, take this as you may.

 

[pax]

Just the strange segue from sarcasm to fried chicken.

Its originally from another thread hhe...