« Palin and Pit Bulls and Putzes and Pigs | Main | American Servicemen Dying From Shoddy Reconstruction Work In Iraq »

Six Seven Years Later Osama bin-Laden is Still Free

[Originally published September 11, 2007]

Why doesn't this administration want to bring bin-Laden to justice?

main.bin.jpg

Are the horrific images of the destruction of life and property at WTC on 9/11 more powerful and useful to the Republicans with bin-Laden still free, instead of being captured and executed as he should have been many years ago?

Is it because he's more valuable to the Republican party as a threat? A boogey-man to shake at the American public when the Bush White House wants to affect public opinion?

Why is this man still free? Why?

UPDATE: Jim Henley musing on what it might take for the Republican administration to finally capture bin-Laden (h/t Kos).

...it's probably fun to be Osama Bin Laden during this season. How galling is that? Six years after that dead or alive business, six years after perpetrating unforgivable atrocity, he's still free and in operation. He has gotten away with it. At the rate the Bush Administration is going, we'll have to hope Bin Laden gets so cocky he signs up for the White House tour just to do it and knocks over a stanchion while waiting for a view of the East Room. Maybe, maybe we might nab the bastard then.

Note: Wizbang Blue is now closed and our authors have moved on. Paul Hooson can now be found at Wizbang Pop!. Please come see him there!

  • Currently 1.9/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 1.9/5 (17 votes cast)


Comments (10)

DaveD:

I will preface my next remark by writing that I believe we should continue our best efforts at seeing the job through in Iraq. However I must agree with a radio host/commenter I heard earlier this week that the early capture/ killing of bin Laden would have put serious constraints on the administration's justification to expand hostilities into Iraq in the eyes of the public. This is a radio commentator (Michael Smerconish out of Philly if it matters) who I feel does a very, very good job of dispassionately looking at both so called liberal and conservative viewpoints. In that regard his program is terrific. However, the administration's inability to either capture or kill bin Laden has also been a sticking point with Mr. Smerconish and I believe his arguments were quite valid. He is far from being an extremish on either side of the political spectrum. So, I guess the one thing I disagree with you on Lee is that to me, bin Laden is no longer a powerful bogey man. But early on when the war on terror was being expanded to Iraq, I think not having him finished off at that point was of some benefit.

Lee Ward[TypeKey Profile Page]:

"So, I guess the one thing I disagree with you on Lee is that to me, bin Laden is no longer a powerful bogey man. But early on when the war on terror was being expanded to Iraq, I think not having him finished off at that point was of some benefit."

I disagree that he's no longer a powerful boogey man, and I strongly suspect the McCain/Palin campaign will invoke imagery of bin-Laden in upcoming TV ads for that specific reason.

But I'm not clear on why you (and Smerconish) think leaving bin-Laden untouched was a good thing. Aren't you - in effect - suggesting that bin-Laden was used as a boogeyman to expand the war in Iraq?

Tim:

You're right, Lee. We should follow the Obama plan and invade a nation of 145 million people who we know for sure have nukes. Real good idea.

Rich:

How many years ago was it that Clinton let Osama go? Would 9/11 have happened? Iraq? If only he had done his job back then.

LCVRWC:

Waiting for Rich's comment to get deleted, like my earlier one was.

Fred:

I think the idea that Bush has let Bin Laden go deliberately is paranoid madness.

Bush would love nothing more than a nice political victory. You can hear how they brag every time they get another 'Number 3' in al-Queda.

Bush wants his legacy and he wants to nail some hides to the wall. Bin Laden's hide will do nicely.

Lee Ward[TypeKey Profile Page]:

No comments have been deleted, LCVRWC - feel free to try again and email me at 'leewardblue at gmail dot com' if it doesn't go through.

Lee Ward[TypeKey Profile Page]:

"Bush wants his legacy and he wants to nail some hides to the wall. Bin Laden's hide will do nicely.

If Bush wanted bin-Laden's hide he would have had it long ago.

dooz:

#8: Lee, if it's so easy to capture and execute bin Laden (and it must be, if that idiot Bush could do it whenever he wants), why don't you go do it. That will take away Bush's boogeyman AND rob him and his party of the "hide on the wall".

Lee Ward[TypeKey Profile Page]:

I'm not suggesting that the decision to not make the capture of bin-Laden a high priority is one made by our military, Chad - this is purely a political decision from the Bush administration.


Advertisments

Categories

Archives

Technorati



Add to Technorati Favorites

Credits

Publisher: Kevin Aylward

Editors: Lee Ward, Larkin, Paul S Hooson, and Steve Crickmore

All original content copyright © 2007 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark. Wizbang Blue™ is a trademark of Wizbang®, LLC.

Powered by Movable Type 3.35

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.