Tuesday, September 19, 2006

Should Americans Be Ashamed That Bush (Again) Is Choosing Not To Pursue Osama?

"We now know why the Bush administration hasn't made the capture of Osama Bin Laden a paramount goal of the war on terror. Emphasis on Bin Laden doesn't fit with the administration's strategy for combating terrorism. Here's how President Bush explained this Tuesday: "This thing about . . . let's put 100,000 of our special forces stomping through Pakistan in order to find Bin Laden is just simply not the strategy that will work."

-- Fred Barnes, Weekly Standard, Sept. 13, 2006


I've disagreed with President Bush on many things -- from policy to political tactic to spin control -- but I never thought I'd be ashamed of Bush.

That moment came for me when Bush said, for the umpteenth time, that the U.S. would not dedicate itself to capturing Osama Bin Laden.

It dawned on me that we are fighting a war, with 2,700 dead and 20,000 injured, on the original premise that Saddam might have had ties with Al Qaeda, might have had a relationship Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, might have wanted to pass weapons of mass destruction to terrorists, might have created a safe haven for terrorists. In 2003, Condoleeza Rice said that Saddam might be close to developing a nuclear weapon, and that "we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

The only actual thing we knew for sure on Saddam and terrorists was that he was sending money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. Everything else we knew about Saddam dealt with horrible things he had done against his own people.

But with regard to Al Qaeda, we didn't know much for sure. We just knew what he might do.

But Bin Laden, who actually led the group that actually did hit us on Sept. 11, isn't worth our trouble? Bin Laden, whose group was behind the London, Madrid, Riyadh, Istanbul and other bombings, whose group might have been tied to the plot to blow up of airplanes over the Atlantic, who continues to pose a horrible threat -- if you listen to Bush's own words -- that's the guy we can't be bothered trying to catch?

The fact that Bush is completely out of step with the vast majority of Americans is obvious. Bush's critics haven't asked for 100,000 special forces hunting down Bin Laden. They have said that Al Qaeda should be our nation's top priority in the war on terror, not an afterhought -- not something that the U.S. might deal with.

Conservative ranters say that "if we get hit again" we should blame the ACLU, "activist" judges, "liberal" politicans and the media.

That's empty conservative spin. Bush has had five years to direct our forces -- working with other nations in our U.S.-led "coalition" -- to stop the terrorist group that struck us on Sept. 11, 2001.

As Bush said on Sept. 11: "Make no mistake: The United States will hunt down and punish those responsible for these cowardly acts." That's Al Qaeda.

30 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I hope we never catch Bin Laden, because if we do we are doomed. He will get an ACLU lawyer who will have every right to look at top secret documents and pass them on to Bin Laden. The some activist judge will let him go because our military didnt read him his miranda rights over in Pakistan.

12:22 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

Ahh, the fringe conservatives are watching.

Nice defense of Bush. Way to go. You convinced me that Bush was right. Great job.

12:28 PM  
Anonymous trinity said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

12:51 PM  
Anonymous trinity said...

Anonymous said...
"I hope we never catch Bin Laden, because if we do we are doomed. He will get an ACLU lawyer who will have every right to look at top secret documents and pass them on to Bin Laden."


You are so right about that, Anonymous. If anything, I hope OBL gets caught all right. By a bullet in the head.

And it's even worse than you say, because if some in Congress have their way, the top secret information will not only be shared with his ACLU lawyer, but with the Islamo-terrorist himself. Can you believe how clueless some of these people can be? May God save us from such useful idiots.

12:56 PM  
Anonymous trinity said...

Oh, and in response to the title of this post, "Should Americans Be Ashamed That Bush (Again) Is Choosing Not To Pursue Osama?", I would just like to say that I could not be prouder of our President.

Unlike so many of his critics, he does absolutely "get it", and more and more of the American people seem to be "getting it" as well, as is evidenced by his rising poll numbers.

1:30 PM  
Anonymous trinity said...

reposted comment to fix HTML

David R. Mark said...
"As Bush said on Sept. 11: "Make no mistake: The United States will hunt down and punish those responsible for these cowardly acts." That's Al Qaeda."

Exactly. It IS al Qaeda, and I know you can't possibly be suggesting that we are not going after al Qaeda, are you, David? Everything that this administration is doing is directly connected to it's efforts to destroy al Qaeda, as well as all of it's many off-shoots and all of the al Qaeda wannabes that are out there trying to bring as much death and destruction to innocent people as they possibly can.

OBL is but one man. Would we all, including President Bush, love to see this guy caught and/or confirmed dead? What the heck do you think that answer is? But if you think that his capture or death will mark the end of al Qaeda's war on America, Israel, and all free societies of the world, you're quite delusional.

David, your efforts to further criticize and smear this President are really sad. Liberals such as yourself have never given President Bush credit for anything that he's done to protect this nation from further attacks by Islamo-facists. He has dedicated himself tirelessly to this end, and has gotten nothing but grief from his political enemies. I can't tell you how that disgusts me.

What about Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, considered to be the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks on our soil? Doesn't his capture count as a success in bringing the perpetrators of the 9/11 atrocity to justice? How can you ignore something like that? Making it all about Osama bin Laden is just very short-sighted and wrong-headed on your part, imo. It's also blatantly unfair and partisan of you. Big surprise there.

(CBS) Osama bin Laden may still be at large, but the man captured in Pakistan last Saturday was even more important than bin Laden in the planning and execution of the Sept. 11 attacks.

Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was apprehended in his pajamas just before dawn in a suburban home near the Pakistani capital of Islamabad. American authorities will have many questions for him because as, Bob Simon first reported last fall on 60 Minutes II, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was not only the mastermind of 9/11, but America’s most lethal enemy for more than a decade."

Click here for more.

1:43 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

more and more of the American people seem to be "getting it" as well, as is evidenced by his rising poll numbers.

>>

His poll numbers waver around 40%. Support on his handling of the Iraq War: About 40%. Support for his handling of the War on Terror: About 40%.

Percentage of Americans who want to see Osama captured or killed: 86%.

Your move, Trinity.

1:45 PM  
Anonymous Dave G. said...

But if you think that his capture or death will mark the end of al Qaeda's war on America, Israel, and all free societies of the world, you're quite delusional.
He doens't think that. And none of us think that, either. That's something a bunch of people have made up to try to criticize those of us on the left, to suggest we really are "tired" of fighting terrorism, when nothing is further from the truth.


Meanwhile, anonymous is doing his usual garbled frothings that suggest we'd like to take terrorists out for ice cream.

1:45 PM  
Anonymous aquart said...

You never thought you'd be ashamed of BUSH?
LOL! Now that's funny.

1:47 PM  
Anonymous sparosnare said...

I was ashamed when he took his oath of office - in fact, I was ashamed of him more times than I can count when he was governor of Texas. I've been putting up with this asshole for way too long and been ashamed way too many times. Bin Laden is valuable to the Bush Adminstration - he's a convenient boogeyman. They don't want to capture him. I'm not ashamed about it - I'm outraged.

1:47 PM  
Anonymous MrCoffee said...

What i don't get is why Americans aren't as PISSED AS HELL that we're NOT going after bin Laden. WHAT THE FUCK!!!!!!!!!

1:47 PM  
Anonymous MrCoffee said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

1:48 PM  
Anonymous Cosmocat said...

THAT'S it ...

Ashamed ... I never thought I would resort to overused/mindless cliches, but I am definitely on the verge of being ashamed to be an american, with this country letting these freaks have power in the first place, much less this long ...

But, what I just do not get ... As sheeplefied as people are, how this country is not literally up in arms that OBL has not been dealt with ... First, to state the obvious, IF this was a democratic presidency, you would have "days since 9-11 and OBL still alive" time lines PERMANANTLY placed on the bottom of every News channel on the TV, and that is ALL you hear ...

As is, we FOREVER hear how this president is "resolute" in his battle against terrorism, and the whores NEVER mention that OBL is still drawing air ... And, the general populace ... COME THE FREAK ON !!!

1:49 PM  
Anonymous LondonReign2 said...

Because it hasn't been reported

How many MSM stories have you heard about the fact Bush isn't going after OBL? How many outraged pundits talking about us backing down? How many 15 minute analyses on CNN about how Bsuh shut down the special task force looking for him?

I'll bet < 5% of Americans even KNOW it is no longer Chimpy's policy to catch Bin Laden.

1:49 PM  
Anonymous Sugar Smack said...

YES.

1:49 PM  
Anonymous sfexpat2000 said...

Imagine how Afghanistan feels

1:49 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

Al Qaeda struck us. We should dismantle Al Qaeda.

We've captured some parts of Al Qaeda, but imagine how many more parts we could capture if we were entirely focused on Al Qaeda, and not primarily focused on Iraq.

Imagine if we'd caught Osama in 2001, rather than outsource the capture.

We may not have had the London, Madrid, Riyadh and Istanbul bombings. Bush would probably have huge and resounding support, and with that support, he would have had the go-ahead from the American people to go fight state-sponsored terrorism, from Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.

Instead, Bush's words from 2001 and Bush's words today don't match. It's the ultimate flip-flop.

1:53 PM  
Anonymous trinity said...

rob of wilmington, del. said...
"His poll numbers waver around 40%. Support on his handling of the Iraq War: About 40%. Support for his handling of the War on Terror: About 40%.

Percentage of Americans who want to see Osama captured or killed: 86%.

Your move, Trinity.


Hi, there, rob. I was just in your neck of the woods on Saturday, for a BBQ with my Mark Levin Fan buddies. A good time was had by all. Were your ears ringing? ;)

The latest USA TODAY/Gallup Poll has the President's approval rating at 44%. I know it's not "off-the-charts" high, rob, but it has gotten better, wouldn't you agree?

Besides, as has been proven time and time again, a president's poll numbers are always hurt when the gas prices are high.

With regard to the 86% of Americans who want to see OBL killed or captured, didn't I just say that I'm part of that number? I just don't think that anything much will change if and when that does in fact happen.

Besides, once we got OBL, you guys would just change the mode of attack and say that his capture/death didn't mean a damn thing. You know you will. We know it too. :) Actually, I think that Pelosi has already said that. lol

1:58 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

All I know is that I believed the president when he said he'd get Osama -- dead or alive.

And I've been stupefied by Bush's comments since, about how he doesn't worry about Osama, about how he doesn't spend a lot of time thinking about Osama, etc.

I think the reality is that Bush thought we'd get Osama, and quickly. When that didn't happen -- combined with the importance he gave to Iraq -- Osama became "less important" to the war on terror.

If they could catch Osama, they would. They haven't been able to, so they'll hope Americans agree he isn't that important. It's B.S., Trinity.

..... P.S. Was the BBQ at a restaurant or a private home? I love BBQ ... LOL

2:20 PM  
Blogger thewaronterrible said...

Trinity is up to her usual Bush apologist strategy of changing the subject.
Too bad she's just spinning in the wind.
Trinity, answer the question referenced to by Rob.
Wouldn't it have made more sense to have totally dismantled Al Queda in Afghanistan, which could have indeed prevented a series of terrorists attacks including in Spain and London, before diverting efforts to Iraq, creating a whole new Al Queda breeding group while weakening our military capability from REAL threats of Iran and North Korea, as well as Al Queda, as claimed by non-partisan experts.
Never mind Tony Blair's lies. The facts show Al Queda cited Iraq for bombing the London subway.
The Iraq diversion arguably caused the Bush Administration to take an entire five years to capture Khalid Shaih Mohammad and prevented it from putting OBL and Al Queda out of business.
And never mind which Al Queda official is the more lethal threat.
What about retribution for the worst terrorist attack on American soil in history? What about holding Bush accountable for his promise to capture OBL "Dead or Alive?"

P.S. These conservative sheep bleaps above about "Liberals" concerned about Osama's miranda rights is another feeble attempt to change the subject.
This charge is baseless conservative spin, utter nonsense equivalent to saying the moon is made of green cheese and does not merit a response.
I'm sure they served plenty of baloney sandwiches at that Levin picnic.

4:50 PM  
Anonymous trinity said...

rob of wilmington, del. said...
"All I know is that I believed the president when he said he'd get Osama -- dead or alive.

And I've been stupefied by Bush's comments since, about how he doesn't worry about Osama, about how he doesn't spend a lot of time thinking about Osama, etc."


Rob, why are you stupefied, when it's really so simple? The President cannot afford to spend his time bemoaning the fact that we haven't been able to get OBL yet. He's looking at the forest, and you can only see the trees.

OBL, and even al Qaeda, are only one factor of the threat that we are facing. As we've seen, these types of terrorist organizations can and already have inflicted serious damage both here and in other countries, but their resourses are limited. Still, we are definitely going after al Qaeda cells. At the same time, however, President Bush is thinking more long-term, at the danger that exists in state-sponsored terrorism. It's all part of the same equation.

Iran and Syria sponsor Hezbollah and al-Sadr's Mahdi Army in Iraq. Russia and China, in turn, have given support to Tehran. If Iran is victorious in Iraq, it's the beginning of the end. It is Iran's design to dominate the entire region. If we cut and run in Iraq, the next move Iran makes will be to run us out of the Gulf.

Here's an excerpt from an article that quotes from a tape made by Ayman al-Zawahri:

“You should not waste your time in reinforcing your troops in Iraq and Afghanistan because they are doomed to defeat and are already all but defeated. Instead, you have to reinforce your troops in two regions. First is the Gulf, where you will be thrown out after you are defeated in Iraq, at which point your economic ruin will be achieved. The second is Israel, because the jihad reinforcements are getting closer to it.”

So you see what is at stake here. And Iran has no intentions of stopping there in the Middle East. It's on to Europe, and ultimately, to North America, and our own country. This is what they intend to do, and our President is determined not to let it happen.

P.S. The BBQ was at a private home, rob.

5:11 PM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

OBL, and even al Qaeda, are only one factor of the threat that we are facing.

>>

It's the biggest threat. It's the threat that keeps coming up again and again. If you don't believe that, then you must believe that Bush is only using OBL and Al Qaeda as props -- to scare us, to get his way with Congress, to help the GOP win this November, etc.

At the same time, however, President Bush is thinking more long-term, at the danger that exists in state-sponsored terrorism.>>

Of course, if Bush had addressed this logically, he would have gone full force after OBL and Al Qaeda, dismantled them, become a hero to the world that was still mourning 9/11, then moved on to state-sponsored terror states (Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, etc.)

A much larger chunk of the world would have been behind the U.S.' efforts if Bush had followed this path.

I agree with David, in that Iraq was not tied to Al Qaeda or 9/11, so it was at best an indirect player in the war on terror (back in 2001). Iraq was contained, and while Saddam was a horrible human being, and Iraq had a sketchy record on a number of issues, certainly the priorities should have been Al Qaeda first, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and other state sponsors of terror second. Iraq was a distant third then, and in hindsight we have further reason to believe that to be the case.

5:53 PM  
Blogger thewaronterrible said...

So Trinity does not see the value of retribution against the country's most notorious murderer?
Trinity, while Iran's actual threat to the region and the world is open to debate, you still offer no explanation as whether fully taking out OBL and Al Queda might have sent a stronger signal to these random terrorist groups than diverting attention to Iraq, which by your own description appears to be throwing more gasoline on the fire.
One big fallacy of the Bushie position is to pretend these "Islamic terrorism" groups can be dealt with at once, as one big threat when they must be dealt with and considered individually.
The U.S. can only do so much to eradicate terrorism and Bush has shown little competence in knowing where to pick and choose fights.
You cannot use the state-sponsor terrorism argument because the U.S. itself is itself a big supporter of state-sponsors of terrorists.
http://tinyurl.com/egyow

6:14 PM  
Anonymous whoop4467 said...

to all repukes on these boards -- You guys/gals are so full of crap. You tell me one war in the history of the world that has been fought that has not had some great leader of the opposing army that was the center of focus. I guess by your logic WWII was fought without Hitler in mind and that if the U. S . captured him he would have been given a trial and then set free. I guess we went into Iraq without Saddam being the top goal of being killed or captured. Hell that is all we heard was get Saddam and Iraq will be ours.

I do not fault you repukes for defending your leader, but at least have enough love of America to keep him honest about what the goals are for keeping America safe. I understand the threat from OBL and his followers. I also understand that not going after OBL and saying he is not that important in the fight against "terrorism" emboldens others that say if the going gets tuff in finding one ruthless "terrorist" leader we will just find another boogeyman( gone from Hitler to Stalin to Saddam to Al Qaeda to the catch-all "terrorist") to instill fear in the American people.

It is so obvious to me, I am sure to others, and I am sure to other nations that the fear of "Terrorism" is real. The questions is not is it real or not real, but what to do about it. Keeping the question on the burner that is turned up high for political purposes is not a solution. We had the world's 100% support to fight "terrorism" and GWB blew it by going into Iraq. He blew it by dirverting the focus from OBL and his followers to the oil fields in Iraq. If you repukes do not see the implication of all this, then I say you are not honest with yourself about the real fight against "terrorism".

12:59 PM  
Blogger thewaronterrible said...

The Bushies commenting here conveniently dance around the implications of the diversion into Iraq issue.
You can almost here them grimmacing in the background (if not baaing like sheep) while they attempt to contrive a connection between Iraq and some kind of vauge, regional Islamic terror war diminishing OBL and Al Queda into relative insignificance.
I have one statement for the Bushies. Stick to real terrorism threats, like the ones this country experienced on 9-11, not imagined ones.

2:17 PM  
Anonymous Cromwell said...

Dave G at 1.45 PM said "anonymous....suggest(ed) we'd like to take terrorists out for ice cream"

No worries mate. No need. Nothing tame like that. Pretty soon your Islamo-Nazi friends will invite themselves into your house and help themselves to the ice cream in your fridge. That's if the electricity is still on.

These guys want you to live like Mohammad did. That includes helping themselves to your wife, daughters, sons.

And you thought it was just about an ice cream cone. The only cone involved here is the dunce one you should be wearing.

5:52 PM  
Blogger thewaronterrible said...

Like I said the difference between real or imagined terrorist threats...
Maybe I am missing something here. Let's see if Cromwell or some other Republican/Bushie bloggers can intelligently define exactly whom these "Islamo-Nazis" or "these guys" truely are, the true extent of their threat, their capability to carry it out, where they would come from and in what kinds of numbers, when they would invade the U.S., and exactly how they would begin to infiltrate our families, homes and refrigerators.

7:24 PM  
Blogger Crystal said...

David G, you are a thoughtful and eloquent writer. I enjoy your posts, among some of the crap others have posted on here!
Blind obediance is a cancer that eats at democracy. It has no place in America. As a wise man once said...
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." ~Theodore Roosevelt, 1918
And of course...
"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together." ~ D. Eisenhower, Farewell Address...
Then last but certainly not least... one of the greatest heros in journalism...
"Good Night, and Good Luck!" E. R. Murrow.

9:47 PM  
Blogger Crystal said...

Good point waronterrible! What is that about?! So now peace activists are branded "Nazi-sympathizers" Rummy? Please! What a crock.

9:49 PM  
Anonymous Dave G. said...

Cromwell said...
No worries mate. No need. Nothing tame like that. Pretty soon your Islamo-Nazi friends will invite themselves into your house and help themselves to the ice cream in your fridge. That's if the electricity is still on.

Sort of like the electricity that's running full-blast in Iraq, where it's about 100 degrees every day? Like that, right?

These guys want you to live like Mohammad did. That includes helping themselves to your wife, daughters, sons.
Who are you referring to, exactly? Bin Laden? Ah, yes. I think I and most of us, really are on record saying bin Laden should be killed dead, along with his deputies, al Qaeda destroyed. But we're in Iraq instead, looking to increase our troops levels! Oh, everything is going swimmingly.

And you thought it was just about an ice cream cone. The only cone involved here is the dunce one you should be wearing.
Such wit! Such grace! I give thee a 9.8, because I can dance to the beat of puns such as these. Huzzah!



And Crystal, I thank you for your nice comments.

10:40 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Listed on BlogShares