home

The Path Not Taken

By Jeralyn, Section War on Terror
Posted on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 04:42:00 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Does anyone besides me wonder what would have happened between March, 2003 and now, had Bush not made the decision to take out Saddam and instead focused solely on finding and taking out Osama?

Only the most incompetent of the incompetent could fail to find Osama in five years time. September 11, 2006, which is coming right up upon us, has our leaders in a tizzy. Doesn't it ever occur to them that they wasted three years playing neo-con games in Iraq when they could have invested the manpower and less money in finding Osama and breaking up al Qaeda?

Instead we have a neutered Saddam languishing in a courtroom, while violence in Baghdad has escalated past anyone's expectations.The U.S. repsonse: re-employ 3,700 more of our youth to Baghdad, not to fight our war, but to fight the crazy insurgents.

Bush has been an utter incompetent at dealing with terror threats. Condi Rice has been totally ineffectual at negotiations for a middle east peace plan.

Is there anything this adminstration can do competently and correctly? It sure doesn't seem that way.

Congress ought to give Bush a spending ultimatum: A huge cut for Iraq expenses and an increase for finding Osama. If he can't find Osama after 6 to 8 years in office, his legacy should be burnt toast.

I'd bet Dog the Bounty Hunter could find him, and I'd know he'd welcome the opportunity. He told me so a few years ago. I'd even go along as a reporter if he got the chance. He can't do worse than Bush and Rumsfeld.

No one talks anymore about how with all our superior technology like that used to intercept our communications, the technology isn't aimed at Osama. Are they just clueless as to how to interpret the internet chatter? Why would one expect that a 60 year old government career military man or FBI or CIA agent would have that particular set of skills? It''s time to get our priorities back in order. Iraq needs to go to the back burner. We need to find Osama and for my money, Dog is the man.

< Lieberman Tries to Exploit British Terror Threat | Friday Open Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • The Path Not Taken | 61 comments (61 topical)
    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#1)
    by bad Jim on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 01:28:57 AM EST
    [I don't think the junior senator from Illinois ought to be the target of our anti-terrorism efforts. Obama != Osama. Please delete this comment.]

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#2)
    by rdandrea on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 05:15:12 AM EST
    Big Jim beat me to it. That notwithstanding, I am sure Bushco would love to take out Obama.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#3)
    by joejoejoe on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 05:22:20 AM EST
    It goes back earlier than the Iraq War. If the US had accepted the NATO Article 5 declaration after 9/11/01 ("an attack on any one member is considered an attack on all members") we would have never got into the weeds of secret prisons, torture and Iraq. Telegraph UK, 9/27/01:
    The Bush administration also chose not to invoke Nato's mutual defence clause, Article 5, which deems that an attack on one member is an attack on all 19, triggering a collective response. Mr Wolfowitz said the decision of the alliance two weeks ago to extend the definition of Article 5 beyond conventional military attacks to include terrorist atrocities already gave the United States a "a very powerful basis for a variety of individual requests to individual countries". The crucial meetings yesterday occurred outside the main hall in a series of "bilaterals" between Mr Wolfowitz and important allies in the anti-terrorist coalition, including Britain's Defence Secretary, Geoffrey Hoon, and his counterparts from France, Germany, Turkey, and Russia. Nato diplomats said the Americans were reluctant to divulge sensitive information about future attacks to a wide circle of countries. Instead, Washington has adopted an "a la carte" approach that involves sounding out allies for future contributions, without tipping its own hand. Mr Wolfowitz also warned the allies privately of a serious risk that terrorist networks already had access to weapons of mass destruction.
    Fighting Al-Qaeda would have never morphed into what is perceived as a clash of civilizations. EU applicant Turkey would have likely been involved from the outset, and communication with Iran and Syria could have been maintained by the NATO coalition, if not the US.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#4)
    by chemoelectric on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 05:24:09 AM EST
    Crazy people do crazy things. Doesn't matter that the craziness of the things is obvious. Heck, people with obsessive-compulsive disorder even themselves know what they are doing is nuts, but they do it anyway because if they don't it hurts. But we are not so lucky with Bush and crew; Bush thinks the sun shines from his Sitz bones.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#5)
    by Strick on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 05:28:52 AM EST
    With respect, while little would delight me more to have Bin Laden dead or behind bars, I doubt accomplishing that would have had any impact on plots like this. In a way we're better of marginalizing the man than making him a martyr or a rallying point the way the Ayatollah Khomeini-in-exile was. Heck the worst thing would be for him to be in jail. The obscene efforts to convince the West to free him would make the recent antics of Hamas/Hezbollah. Still, it's a lovely idea. The thing is, I can't see how Bin Laden is really a factor today. If, as so many have pointed out, mounting pressure has made Al Qaeda become something of a franchise, to become more fragmented, smaller, more local, in an attempt to be more difficult to find, he capture or death wouldn't have changed anything, would it? The remnants of Al Qaeda would still be trying to pull this sort of thing off, either in his memory or to force us to release him. Saddly, this is something like a twisted game of "bop the mole" where when you hit one, more pop up, smaller, generally less dangerous, but still capable doing what terrorists do. That thought can make you dispair and go out to buy a pray rug (what in the end they're fighting for), or more determined to keep on bopping until they're too small and weak to be a threat. Isn't that the lesson we learned the last time terrorism was in fashion?

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#6)
    by kdog on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 06:01:46 AM EST
    The administration needs Osama as much as Osama needs the administration...keeps the checks comin' in and the power intact. One without the other might lead to...gasp...peace. Peace is not profitable or useful in accumulating power.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#7)
    by Che's Lounge on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 06:31:28 AM EST
    You guys (TL and Dog) wouldn't last a week in the Pashtun mountains without some serious funding. It's not Honolulu. Besides, that's not what the neocons want, so it ain't gonna happen.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 06:39:18 AM EST
    BB, the sky is falling.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#10)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 06:40:03 AM EST
    et al - The decision has been made to not take OBL down, that is if he is actually still alive, at this time. The reaons are numerous. We don't want to make a martyr out of him, and we have him marginalized. Communications from/to him yield a great deal of intelligence. And the most important, they don't want to cause problems for Pakistan as he is undoubtedly in that country. So rest easy folks, 9/08 seems to a good date. ;-)

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 06:51:44 AM EST
    Remind me again how killing Yamamoto - the architect of the Pearl Harbor attack - in April, 1943, ended the war in the Pacific? Do you really think that a ground effort into the wilds of Pakistan (which is almost certainly where bin Laden is) would have ended terrorism?

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#12)
    by oldtree on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 07:07:14 AM EST
    your assumption is that this is all a mistake, I don't think so If you look at this from a historical perspective, they have been actively doing what they have done since january 01, to make profits. look at the trillions of profits. do you think the oil companies aren't our government?

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#13)
    by Sailor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 07:11:47 AM EST
    Why is the left so obsessed with Osama?
    uhh, falling twin towers, 3000 dead Americans, airliners ... you know, just the usual. the real question is why isn't the right obsessed with finding the man who is still planning terror attacks on us. wrongwingers, soft on terror, completely clueless parrots only able to squawk '9/11' at every opportunity but don't want to find the man responsible.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 07:35:37 AM EST
    Many of these posts don't seem to grasp the fact that Osamsa's meme, war against the Great Satan, is now far more prevasive and far more powerful because of the way the BushIdiot & his AssClowns have conducted our 'foreign policy'. The repeated efforts of new groups, inept or not, to attack the west demonstrates this to any but the terminally stupid. That said, there is no interest on the part of BushCo to catch Osama. None at all. Osama and his freedom are the main mechanism by which Bush and his cabal are trying to convert our nation into a theocratic dictatorship. The man should be in jail not the White House. Let's work to put the Dems in control of Congress and send Bush and Cheney to the chokey.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 07:37:55 AM EST
    BB, re: talking out of both sides of your mouth.... Touting the superiority of how the US govt interfaces with their constituents, "treating all the same", "innocent until proven guilty", etc. and then violating those same principles at the drop of a hat relegates your "vision" to nothing more than that of a dictatorship.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#16)
    by Repack Rider on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 07:38:45 AM EST
    PPJ: The decision has been made to not take OBL down, that is if he is actually still alive, at this time. The reaons are numerous. So this would be a 180-degree "flip-flop" from the stirring "dead or alive" speech, right? "I was FOR catching Osama before I was against it." Are you saying that flip-flopping on issues of such importance is okay? Hey, who cares about catching criminals AFTER the crime? It doesn't make the crime go away to catch them later, so what's the point? We could save a lot of money on police with your ultra-liberal policy of forgiveness toward murderers. I have to say, you're far to the left of ME on that issue, because I still believe in law enforcement. As we both know, Osama and Bush need each other more than they need anyone else on earth. Each one uses the other as a demon to inspire his minions and each would be lost without the other. Before 9/11, Bush was a national joke just a few months into his term, and it is not a stretch to say that the attack was the biggest favor OBL could ever have done for him. Now George is returning the favor by looking for him everywhere but where he is and recruiting thousands of new terrorists in Iraq.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#17)
    by soccerdad on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 07:41:57 AM EST
    Terrorism will persist against the US with or without OBL simply because the US not only doesn't address the root causes of ther terrorism but actually throws gas on the terrorism fire. So the US has 2 choices - modify its ME policies or kill all 1 Billion Muslims. Bush has opted to start the latter.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#18)
    by Repack Rider on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 07:46:40 AM EST
    Remind me again how killing Yamamoto - the architect of the Pearl Harbor attack - in April, 1943, ended the war in the Pacific? Remind me again as to who made that claim, and then take it up with him or her, because I haven't seen anyone here say that. If you do not think it was militarily effective to kill a high-ranking officer, then it would have been even less effective to kill ordinary grunts with no authority whatsoever, but we spent a lot of time and money doing that too.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#19)
    by desertswine on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 07:58:27 AM EST
    Only the most incompetent of the incompetent could fail to find Obama in five years time.
    You said "Obama" but I'm sure you meant "the insidious Dr. Fu-Manchu."

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#20)
    by squeaky on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 08:03:36 AM EST
    Osama is just a bad apple amongst a bunch of Saudi princes. His family will talk to him just as they have talked to Bush. Everything is already straightened out. It would be in bad taste for Bush to step in. Saddam was our man so that was OK, but OBL, he is not just a royal, but an oil royal. Another kettle of fish entirely. I mean you don't hear of anyone trying to catch god or the devil, do you? That would shut the religion thing down in a second and that is a very big industry. Last time a big wig like god or OBL was " caught, albeit inadvertently, it was in the wizard of oz. And look at the damage it did to poor dorothy' illusion. I can see why Jeralyn thinks dog can find him Toto could find the wizard, I.m sure dog could find OBL. I just don't think it would be good for the rest of the movie. Too much dramatic irony would be wasted, cut short, with little or no return.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#21)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 08:10:55 AM EST
    Osama lives in the Pakistan-Afghan mountains. Good morning. Deja vu all over again, as they say. 19, hmmmm, that's an interesting number. 19 Saudis 5 years ago? "Drug and Terrorism". duh, if drugs were legal, the terrorists could not profit from the illegal trade of drugs! DUH! Seems pretty simple, doesn't it? Now, the new London terrorists wanna bes recently visited Pakistan and some of them were of Pakistan descent. Guess they needed a visit with the Boss up there in the mountains thumbing his finger at Shrub! Marching orders. Anyway, the Monday, August 07, 2006 report from the Daily Times of Pakistan caught my eye. It says, "US accuses Pakistan of chopper misuse" "ISLAMABAD: The US government has accused the Ministry of Interior of using its "expensive helicopters" for works other than the purpose they were given, to counter terrorism and drugs smuggling along the Pak-Afghan border." Seems the US Government is too stupid, or just does not want to see, that the opium crop in Afgahnaistan is funding Osama throughout his neighborhood. Maybe Osama was just using the "expensive helicopters" to fly the London boys up to his cave! Anybody in out "Intelligence" Department" of the US Government ever thought of that? And they probably saved gas money by flying back to London on the same helicopter....

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#22)
    by squeaky on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 08:33:29 AM EST
    americandrugstorm.com-
    duh, if drugs were legal, the terrorists could not profit from the illegal trade of drugs! DUH!
    I am all for making drugs legal as the WOD is a big misuse of resourses, but even if drugs were legal, why would that stop OBL from getting the profits off Afghanistan's opium industry? Legal or illegal someone is going to provide the goods.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 08:36:10 AM EST
    Soccerdad, Phillipines, East Timor, India, Kurdistan, Chechnya, Nigeria, SUDAN, Indonesia (Bali), China, are some of the regions around the world that are having troubles concerning Muslim terrorism and/or strife which have absolutely nothing to do with Israel's existence (the 1948 war had nothing to do with occupied land since it hadn't yet been seized. Nor was their too much ado concerning Jordan and Egypt's occupation of the rightful Palestian land.) To simplify the problems with certain factions of Muslims as to having everything to do with Israel is naive at best. I mean, certain radicalized Muslims still want to avenge the Crusades as well as a return of Andulacia from Spain. The civil war in Iraq is between Muslim sects (as was the Iran/Iraq war) and Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. Not to mention the murder of Anwar Saddat because he dared to make peace with Israel.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#24)
    by Al on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 08:42:12 AM EST
    We could consider the Bush regime incompetent if their intention had been to capture bin Laden and failed. But it is clear now, five years after the World Trade Center dissolved into a pile of rubble and buried over 3,000 people under it, that their intention was not to go after the people reponsible for the attack. They used the emotions triggered by the attack to gain popular support for the invasion of Iraq, and who knows what other adventures they have planned. And it worked; long after even the government's own people, like David Kay, confirmed the falsehood of the "weapons of mass destruction", a majority of Americans continued to support the invasion of Iraq, for whatever reason, it didn't really matter. Osama has already done his part, and it wouldn't benefit the regime at all to find him and put him out of commission. In fact, "success" would be bad for the regime; how could it continue to justify its imperial push into the Middle East? The beauty of the war on terror is that it never ends. So no, they haven't been incompetent at all. On the contrary, they have manipulated people's emotions masterfully to pursue their real goals. Check it out: This morning The Globe and Mail asks in its internet poll "Has your attitude toward the Muslim world changed as a result of the alleged terror plot unveiled on Thursday?" As of now, the results are: 62% yes, for the worse; 9% yes, for the better (these are the people who think it's a good idea for Muslims to blow up planes); and only 29% no, it hasn't changed. How can someone's attitude toward the entire Muslim world be affected one way or another by an alleged plot to blow up planes? Can it be that most people are racist? The answer is yes, they can be, if they are manipulated effectively. No, the regime has done its job very competently indeed.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 08:59:28 AM EST
    Sqeaky, you say I am all for making drugs legal as the WOD is a big misuse of resourses, but even if drugs were legal, why would that stop OBL from getting the profits off Afghanistan's opium industry? Legal or illegal someone is going to provide the goods. Squeaky, I know, Osama might control the opium if drugs were legal, but really, our only hope is that governments are truly "of the people" (i know, problems there) but i sill goes back to the Al Capone theory; prohibition did not work; illegal drugs is by definiton drugs controlled by crooks. Legal or illegal someone is going to provide the goods. of course!

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#26)
    by squeaky on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 09:02:53 AM EST
    But it is clear now, five years after the World Trade Center dissolved into a pile of rubble and buried over 3,000 people under it, that their intention was not to go after the people reponsible for the attack.
    Actually there is no proof that OBL had anything to do with the attacks. For Bush and OBL it was a win win situation. For the rest of the world we are losing. Even the FBI has found no evidence linking him to 9/11. He is on the top 10 most wanted list for bombing US embassies in 1998 not 9/11. The CIA also dropped its unit, "Alec Station," dedicated to finding OBL. I wonder who could possibly have engineered 9/11. You are correct that the WH is not interested in finding out. Maybe they already know and are not telling.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#27)
    by Punchy on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 09:04:12 AM EST
    I found Obama. He's in Washington, DC.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#28)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 09:09:17 AM EST
    Boca - Who murdered Yitzak Rabin? There are enough warmongers on all sides to go around. Besides, aside from killing a billion plus people, what's your soloution?

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#29)
    by squeaky on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 09:13:56 AM EST
    but i sill goes back to the Al Capone theory; prohibition did not work; illegal drugs is by definiton drugs controlled by crooks.
    That is the problem. Terrorists can be Freedom Fghters depending on what goverment lens you are looking through. Capone was a criminal, period. Even if some would romantisize his legacy, he was still a criminal. Legalizing drugs would eliminate organized crime's take, or a big chunk of it, but hurting the funding of 'terrorists', I am not so sure. One thing is for sure though, if drugs were legal during Iran Contra, Ollie North and his pals would not have been able to do what they did the way they did it. And if any similar type of US govermnemt program is going on now, it would cease, if drugs were legal.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#30)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 09:22:37 AM EST
    Sqeaky, precisely! One thing is for sure though, if drugs were legal during Iran Contra, Ollie North and his pals would not have been able to do what they did the way they did it. And if any similar type of US govermnemt program is going on now, it would cease, if drugs were legal.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#31)
    by Aaron on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 09:22:45 AM EST
    Nice post. Forget dog the bounty hunter, if you're going to get serious about Osama bin Laden, just get the Russian mob to help you out. I don't think there's anywhere in the world these guys can't find you, these days they've got all the old GRU and KGB agents and psycho Stasi cleaners working for them. Expert killers many of whom have 20 or 30 years of experience under their belts, guys who cut their teeth in the Russian military hiking through the Afghan mountains fighting the Mujahideen, our guys. The Russians wound up losing, so they might look at a bin Laden hunt as a second chance. They'll probably even give you a special rate for their services. Unfortunately the death of bin Laden will have little effect on what's happening in the world today, in this respect perhaps George Bush is correct. Osama is no longer necessary, things have moved beyond him at this point. But it would be a fantastic PR move. The head of bin Laden might even win your presidential election.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 09:29:18 AM EST
    The Osama bin Laden Round (to: Frere Jacques) Where's bin Laden? Where's bin Laden? I don't know! I don't know! We gave up looking for him; politically adore him, We let him go! Let him go! ©2006 Bob Clayton & Ed Drone

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#33)
    by Steven Sanderson on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 09:31:09 AM EST
    Instead of hunting him down, "G.I. George" became OBL's top recruiter. 2,597 dead real G.I.'s as of this morning and "G.I. George" is still smirking and lying and indifferent to their deaths.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#34)
    by squeaky on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 09:32:25 AM EST
    just get the Russian mob to help you out.
    Aaron, why would the Russian mob risk their life and suffer through the difficult terrain of Afghanistan, when they are comfortably making money hand over fist in the cities. These guys may have cut their teeth in the Russian Military, but that was a long time ago. Now they are powerful, rich, fat and living a life of luxury. Nice idea but not applicable.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 09:35:19 AM EST
    Jondee, A Radical, fundamentalist Jew killed Rabin. Now, if Jews were really killing people all over the world in order to establish a caliphate and killing non-believers etc... then your attempt at moral relevancy would be apt. that's the problem: removing context and trying to be politically correct. Are there problem with every government and nation? Of course. As for a solution, I don't know. I build low income housing for seniors and the poor. In my spare time I take care of my two kids, and am a parent advisor for children with cranial-facial problems. I also bike and play a little golf. Solving geo-political problems is not something I'm completely adept at. But the first thing I would do is identify all the problems with people who wish to do us harm (whether justifiable or not) and show where the same people are stirring up problems all over the planet. Once done, then we can move forward.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#36)
    by Edger on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 09:42:09 AM EST
    Does anyone besides me wonder what would have happened between March, 2003 and now, had Bush not made the decision to take out Saddam and instead focued solely on finding and taking out Obama?
    I've come to the conclusion, and I think many others have as well, that bush was never interested in finding Bin Laden. Kdog is right IMO: The administration needs Osama as much as Osama needs the administration...keeps the checks comin' in and the power intact. The current overkill of continuous propagandizing by Fox, CNN, and other media about the "terror plot" in Britain, whether or not the plot really existed or exists, is a glaring example of what Kdog said. Two night ago I watched Daryn Kagen reporting on CNN about the British investigation, and for 10 minutes while she talked, CNN kept a ban2er across the bottom of the screen with the words "Osama Bin Laden" in letters about 3 inches high, while the words "terror plot" were displayed up in the top corner over Kagen's shoulder. The conditioning message being broadcast to the nation by the combination of images was a blatantly obvious and manipulative propagandizing to anyone glancing at the screen. Mcluhan was right too: "The Medium is the Message"

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#37)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 09:57:47 AM EST
    Osama/Obama...same thing don't you know since voting Democrat means you are a terrorist. But yeah, it looks like Osama bin Forgotten too long to even remember the spelling of his name. Too bad for Bush that his plot got broken up. He got some mileage out of it, but he pissed off a lot more air travelers. If only his plan had gone forward he could have gotten a much bigger helpful wave of national indignation from the list of dead published in the newspapers and read at annual commemorations.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#38)
    by Aaron on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 11:18:19 AM EST
    Squeaky Try reading my comments a bit more carefully. The people I speak of are not in the Russian mob, they just work for them, grudgingly work for them. The Russian crime syndicate people hates these guys and vice versa. They only do business with each other for one reason, money. Never use the people in your own organization to do dirty work when you can pay your former enemies to do it for you. The Russian criminal underground spent many years surviving under a police state which was extremely harsh on criminals, far harsher than anything in Western Europe and the United States. Once the Soviet Union fell, the land of capitalism was like the promised land to these people, flowing with milk and honey, ripe for the picking. That's why the Russians have done so well. Now the former cops and secret police who once hunted these criminals, have now been reduced to working for them. Interesting irony actually. Pay these guys enough money, and they'll round up the whole bin Laden clan for you. Much of my family came from Russia by the way, and I'm quite grateful that they chose to leave the USSR for the land of decadent capitalist exploiters. Much better to be an exploiter then one of the exploited. Bad karma perhaps but far better food. Though I admit I still eat borscht, stuffed cabbage and Blintzes.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#39)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 11:19:45 AM EST
    A Citizen... war against the Great Satan, is now far more prevasive and far more powerful because... Because people like you believe the main stream press when they post touched up pictures as fact... ridicule Isreal and give Hezzbollah a pass,.... don't call out the "religion of Peace" to stop their violence against the rest of the civilized world... ..etc...etc. The repeated efforts of new groups, inept or not, to attack the west demonstrates this to any but the terminally stupid. Well...anybody that thinks all this just started with 9/11 (or GW) is the "stupid" one. These people have been attacking the "west" for decades... we are now (finally) starting to fight back! Sky ho.... relegates your "vision" to nothing more than that of a dictatorship. I hate to be the one to break this to you, but in a time of war, some of your percieved freedoms are suspended for awhile. Now if you feel you "rights" have been trampled on (which I highly doubt) you can always go to a "nicer" country. As I have stated many times before... all the rights in the world don't mean much to you if you are dead! Al... How can someone's attitude toward the entire Muslim world be affected one way or another by an alleged plot to blow up planes? Come back to Earth... Just in case you were on your other planet. Here are some facts: Radical Muslims have attacked every major country on Earth (you know ..this planet) and have been doing so since the 70's. Our "attitude" towards Muslims will improve when they stop blowing everything up and trying to kill everyone who isn't Muslim. Got it now? Squeaky... Actually there is no proof that OBL had anything to do with the attacks. Hello? ...Squeaky? Anybody home? No proof...except that he actually admitted it!!!! Ed_Drone.... We let him go! Let him go! Aren't you quoting Clinton there?

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#40)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 11:23:27 AM EST
    Sorry for the typing errors in the original post, they are now fixed. Ed Drone, loved your little ditty. Actually, good comments by everyone on this thread.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#41)
    by squeaky on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 11:27:27 AM EST
    BB-
    Hello? ...Squeaky? Anybody home? No proof...except that he actually admitted it!!!!
    Well you better get on the horn and call the FBI, CIA and Interpol. They need to update their info cause the last time I checked he is not the guy on the list for 9/11. There is no one on the list, yet. BTW-you have said a lot of stuff too, does any one believe you? So why should anyone believe a known liar and criminal like OBL?

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#42)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 11:32:46 AM EST
    I'd bet Dog the Bounty Hunter could find him, and I'd know he'd welcome the opportunity. He told me so a few years ago. I'd even go along as a reporter if he got the chance.
    This was a joke, right TL?

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#43)
    by Al on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 12:09:49 PM EST
    Pay attention, BB. I'll repeat the Globe and Mail question because you obviously didn't understand it the first time. I'll even emphasize some stuff for you so it will be clear. Here it is:
    Has your attitude toward the Muslim world changed as a result of the alleged terror plot unveiled on Thursday?
    I'm guessing you would have picked "Yes, for the worse", although evidently you didn't understand the question. This is precisely my point. All this stuff about not packing toothpaste stirs up some racist crap from the dregs of some -- many -- people's brains and makes them think, if that's the word, "I - hate - Muslims - must - destroy - Muslims - Muslims - bomb - major - countries - ..." (What do you mean by "major countries" by the way?) Of course, you have nothing to say about the main point that the Bush regime is not pursuing terrorist bombers at all. Instead it has invaded Iraq. Perhaps you could explain to those of us that, you know, are not from this planet, how the invasion of Iraq furthers the defense against terrorist attacks.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#44)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 12:57:46 PM EST
    Al... My point was... most of us see (have seen) these Muslims for what they are for some time now. This latest incident only re-affirms our convictions. What that question was really aimed at, (pay attention now) is people that may be on the fence, (like you?) and still might think this is the religion of peace and it's all our imagination. So... the question really is...did it change your mind? Major Countries = Italy, France, Germany, Spain, Russia, USA, Brittan, ...etc..etc. Of course, you have nothing to say about the main point that the Bush regime is not pursuing terrorist bombers at all I have plenty to say.... all you need to do is ask. But the first thing I'd say is...That's not true. The terrorists bombers we are not pursuing are where? how the invasion of Iraq furthers the defense against terrorist attacks It's been explained again over & over and you just don't agree, so why bother? I'll give it another try...although I'm surly wasting my time.... Iraq was invaded because : 1- it ignored the many UN santions against it 2- it had developed WMD's (even tho you all like to shout that Bush lied) and Saddam used them on his own people...and every major intel agency as well as most of the Democratic party agreed! 3- due to Saddams hate for the US, it was widely thought that if he did develope nukes, he would give them to the various other Islamic crazies that have said over & over again that they want the US (infidels) destroyed. And after 9/11... not many of us wanted to chance that, because I think we can all agree that if they had nukes, they would have used them? 4- it rewarded, trained and gave safe haven to various terrorist groups. 5- it killed / raped /tortured thousands of it's civilians. (which I don't recall any of those on the left yelling about then) So...in conclusion.. the invasion of Iraq not only tried to address all these problems, but also gave the people there that wanted to be free a chance to be. It would also provide a friend in that region (which we don't have many of and not because of what GW has done in the last few years) Now, a side benefit to all this (and one that was probably not considered to well) is that it has indeed attracted many radical Muslims that think they can get a piece of the USA.... So the main mistake was to leave the borders open for that. (Of course we can't (won't?) secure our own so why would we there?) Anyway... while we keep them busy over there, we don't have to deal with them over here.... hence we are safer in several areas, .... but the bottom line is, as long as we are alive, we will continue to be targets. They want us dead and have long before GW showed up. So, we can try to appease them as the left wants to do (at our own peril), or we can take them out! As short and as sweet as I can make it! Now, let me ask you... DO you think if Saddam was still there we would be safer.... none of this would be happening now?

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#45)
    by squeaky on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 01:04:04 PM EST
    DO you think if Saddam was still there we would be safer.... none of this would be happening now?
    No question about it. And at this point most Americans and the International community would agree.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#46)
    by Bill Arnett on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 01:11:54 PM EST
    I don't see any mention here of the fact that British POLICE engineered the arrest of these latest terrorists. Clinton's DOJ caught, jailed, prosecuted, and sent people to jail the bombers of the WTC using good old police tactics. No martyrs were created and the perpetrators were relegated to insignificance. Spain, Germany, France, and many other countries have used their police to successfully bust many terrorists cells, although in Germany's case they had to drop charges against some of them because the U.S. would not release the sources of some of the info used at trial. One of them is suspected of being the twentieth member of the 9/11 plot; he walks free as a result. By choosing as our response to 9/11 the use of preemptive amoral wars of aggression, secret prisons, rendition, torture, denial of habeas corpus, and abandonment of many treaties long ago signed into law, Bush and his Republican Guard chose a completely amoral and immoral path that reduces America to a status no higher than that of the terrorists. We cannot claim moral superiority by inflicting the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people and destroying whole countries that never posed a threat to us. Osama himself said (paraphrasing here), "I will defeat America by bankrupting it. Already I can send a single man to the mountaintop to wave the flag of al-Qaeda and the West will spend billions and billions of dollars fighting against a non-existent threat." Bush and his Republican Guard play right into this scenario. They are making America both financially and morally bankrupt, and have destroyed our once famous democracy and its credibility. This is what the neocons cannot, and never will, understand - the incalculable damage done to America by their betrayal of everything in which this country used to take rightful pride.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#47)
    by squeaky on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 01:15:50 PM EST
    Aaron-I did read your post carefully. The Russian mob has too many profitable ventures going that are fast and easy money. To waste the manpower tracking down OBL is not in picture for them. That is not the kind of work they do. My grandparents all came from Russia too, and I grew up eating blintzes, borscht, gribnis, chickenfat,etc. The fact that you also ate/eat those things doesn't make your argument any stronger. It does suggest that your heart may be about to give out though, that is if you are still eating all that stuff.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#48)
    by John Mann on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 02:07:45 PM EST
    I bet Dog the Bounty Hunter could find him, and I'd know he'd welcome the opportunity. He told me so a few years ago. I'd even go along as a reporter if he got the chance.
    I'd love to see Dog the Bounty Hunter go after him. When he was rendered hors de combat after ten minutes or so in Pakistan, A&E might finally replace his piece of crap program

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#49)
    by wumhenry on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 02:18:06 PM EST
    To turn the question around, where would we be if the U.S. gummint had quit doing everything that TalkLeft disapproves of? http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110008785

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#50)
    by John Mann on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 02:20:35 PM EST
    Bocajeff wrote:
    Phillipines, East Timor, India, Kurdistan, Chechnya, Nigeria, SUDAN, Indonesia (Bali), China, are some of the regions around the world that are having troubles concerning Muslim terrorism and/or strife which have absolutely nothing to do with Israel's existence
    The problem with this thought is that you forgot the other half of the reason that Islamic fundies hate the U.S., and that is the fact that they don't like the American military presence in Muslim countries. They believe that the U.S. and Israel plan to dominate the entire Middle East, and there's not much happening these days to disabuse them of that notion.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#51)
    by Al on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 02:43:50 PM EST
    BB, thank you for presenting your beliefs so clearly and so thoroughly. Really.
    My point was... most of us see (have seen) these Muslims for what they are for some time now. This latest incident only re-affirms our convictions.
    What that question was really aimed at, (pay attention now) is people that may be on the fence, (like you?) and still might think this is the religion of peace and it's all our imagination.
    If you have followed my postings, dear BB, you would know that I'm not on the fence about anything. It's the generalization that reduces your thinking to mere racism. If there's any religion of peace it's Christianity, and yet many evil things have been done by people who profess to be Christians. If anyone concluded from this that "most of us see (have seen) these Christians for what they are for some time now", you would be appalled.
    Iraq was invaded because : 1- it ignored the many UN santions against it
    You can't ignore sanctions, they just happen. What do you mean? What did Iraq ignore? And how is this related to terrorist attacks on the US?
    it had developed WMD's (even tho you all like to shout that Bush lied) and Saddam used them on his own people
    Even David Kay admitted that Saddam had no chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons of any sort long before the invasion of Iraq was decided. And if you are talking about earlier times, remember who his allies were.
    due to Saddams hate for the US, it was widely thought that if he did develope nukes, he would give them to the various other Islamic crazies that have said over & over again that they want the US (infidels) destroyed.
    Other Islamic crazies? You can accuse Saddam of a lot of things but not of being religious. Besides, Saddam was nowhere near having nuclear weapons, or the missiles to deliver them. The IAEA said so; the Administration's own experts said so. How could Saddam deliver anything to anybody if he didn't have it? And why would any competent military force not know that? Heck, Putin hates the US. Think about that. Do you think maybe it's time to invade Russia? Oh, that's right. Putin is not Muslim.
    it rewarded, trained and gave safe haven to various terrorist groups.
    Name one.
    it killed / raped /tortured thousands of it's civilians.
    Perhaps. So does China. When does China get invaded? And what does this have to do with defending the United States?
    So...in conclusion.. the invasion of Iraq not only tried to address all these problems, but also gave the people there that wanted to be free a chance to be. It would also provide a friend in that region.
    Oh, yeah, that worked really well.
    Now, a side benefit to all this (and one that was probably not considered to well) is that it has indeed attracted many radical Muslims that think they can get a piece of the USA.... So the main mistake was to leave the borders open for that. (Of course we can't (won't?) secure our own so why would we there?)
    Are you talking about the countries bordering Iraq? Do you even know what they are? And how do you propose to "close the borders"? And what does this have to do with defending the US ... oh wait, here it comes:
    Anyway... while we keep them busy over there, we don't have to deal with them over here.... hence we are safer in several areas, ....
    Ah, the flypaper theory. Then WHY THE FUDDLEDUDDLE AREN'T WE PURSUING OSAMA BIN LADEN IN AFGHANISTAN SO WE DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH HIM OVER HERE? What is wrong with you? If the Administration keeps telling us over and over and over again that all major terrorist attacks are due to Al Qaeda, WHY DON'T WE GO GET BLOODY AL QAEDA? Saddam is in shackles, and flying anywhere in the world is more dangerous than ever.
    Now, let me ask you... DO you think if Saddam was still there we would be safer.... none of this would be happening now?
    Certainly the invasion of Iraq created far more enemies than friends, so yes, we would probably be a lot safer.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#52)
    by wumhenry on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 03:38:16 PM EST
    The problem with this thought is that you forgot the other half of the reason that Islamic fundies hate the U.S., and that is the fact that they don't like the American military presence in Muslim countries.
    If we take them at their word -- and why shouldn't we? -- the main reason why Islamic fundies hate the U.S. is that it's the most powerful state not governed by Islamic fundies. Or, to put it another way, because it's the most powerful state not governed by Islamic law. If we started stoning adulteresses and following every other rule laid down in the Koran a thousand years ago, they'd love us to pieces. Jettison democracy, republican government, sexual equality, due process of law, and other such cultural baggage and peace with Islamic fundies will be at hand!

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#53)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 03:39:22 PM EST
    BB, "I hate to be the one to break this to you, but in a time of war, some of your percieved freedoms are suspended for awhile. Now if you feel you "rights" have been trampled on (which I highly doubt) you can always go to a "nicer" country. As I have stated many times before... all the rights in the world don't mean much to you if you are dead!" That is one of the most un-American comments I have ever seen.. Listen, numbskull. What makes our country great is that, in the face of much greater threats, we never had to give any rights up to maintain our security. To imply otherwise demonstrates ignorance beyond all imagining. Do you really think that lowering ourselves to the cultural level of those we do battle with allows us, in any way, to even justify a fight. We just became just like them. You advocate us drawing ourselves down to "their" level. I say you are traitorous to try.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#54)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 04:46:56 PM EST
    Sky-Ho writes:
    What makes our country great is that, in the face of much greater threats, we never had to give any rights up to maintain our security.
    Before you go much further along the ignorance path you might want to check out the things done by Lincoln during the Civil War.
    With Congress not in session until July, Lincoln assumed all powers not delegated in the Constitution, including the power to suspend habeas corpus. In 1861, Lincoln had already suspended civil law in territories where resistance to the North's military power would be dangerous. In 1862, when copperhead democrats began criticizing Lincoln's violation of the Constitution, Lincoln suspended habeas corpus throughout the nation and had many copperhead democrats arrested under military authority because he felt that the State Courts in the north west would not convict war protesters such as the copperheads. He proclaimed that all persons who discouraged enlistments or engaged in disloyal practices would come under Martial Law.
    Link Now. You were saying what about who??

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#55)
    by John Mann on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 05:54:26 PM EST
    wumhenry wrote:
    If we take them at their word -- and why shouldn't we? -- the main reason why Islamic fundies hate the U.S. is that it's the most powerful state not governed by Islamic fundies. Or, to put it another way, because it's the most powerful state not governed by Islamic law.
    With respect, these people from Osama bin Ladin down have stated time and again that they will wage war on the U.S. until it gets out of the Persian Gulf. If the reasons were as you've stated, why is it that prior to the attack on the Marine base in Lebanon there were no attempts by Islamic fundies to attack the U.S.?

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#56)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 07:29:16 PM EST
    John Mann - Now you know that isn't what he said. In fact, in OBL's 3/87 interview with then CNN's Peter Arnett, he said the exact opposite. Why do you spread such inacccurate things? Here, in OBL's own words:
    REPORTER: Mr. Bin Ladin, will the end of the United States' presence in Saudi Arabia, their withdrawal, will that end your call for jihad against the United States and against the US ? BIN LADIN:... So, the driving-away jihad against the US does not stop with its withdrawal from the Arabian peninsula, but rather it must desist from aggressive intervention against Muslims in the whole world.
    Are you incapable of understanding the clear and simple meaning of those words?

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#57)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 08:01:01 PM EST
    Jim - Apparently you're incapable of understanding clear and simple words: I dont know where he is; I just dont think about it. Obviously whatever the madman says or whatever influence he has is quite negligable. Otherwise there's little doubt that our full might and resourcefulness would have already been utilized to it's fullest extent to track down OBL and his inner circle. Or are you choosing now to question the judgement of your commander-in-chief?

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#58)
    by soccerdad on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 08:03:07 PM EST
    still peddling that crap I see you may be dishonest but you're persistent. I keep telling you to get out to your local CC and take a remedal reading comprehension course, but i suppose that would take time away from your duties as the king of propaganda and snark. We didn't buy it the first 100 times you posted that snippet

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#59)
    by Aaron on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 09:11:06 PM EST
    JimakaPPJ Why are your arguments always based on such ridiculous premises? Why is it that conservatives continually use historic examples of injustices to bolster their arguments? Your historical point, while made, ultimately dismantles your larger argument. Unless you proceed from the position that the ends always justify the means. Which I will say, given your general distaste for democracy, and your adherence to what you and others describe as Republican ideals, ideals which I would submit are really nothing more than monarchy disguised, I guess that's a real possibility. Kings, popes and potentates, emperors making decisions for us and having no qualms about deceiving us in the process. That does seem to be your ultimate position and the position of many in this administration, especially the ultimate elitists, the neoconservatives. But perhaps you would only continue along this line as long as those in power continue promoting your personal agenda, somehow I suspect that is the case. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Instead of learning lessons from history, many conservatives feel the need to re-create those mistakes by endlessly dragging us back to a past which so many generations struggled for so long to put behind us. Lincoln made decisions that he agonized over, while dealing with a country that was literally breaking up. George W. Bush seems to agonize over nothing while at the same time promoting the kind of divisions which Lincoln struggled so ferociously to end in our land. I've known a few Americans who believe that a second Civil War is a good idea, Southerners all, I am not foolish enough to consider such a thing for one moment. But if our leaders would undermine the Republic, using deceptive means to garner and maintain their support in their crusade to maintain control, perhaps soon such an option will begin to become less and less unthinkable. But hey, it's not like I don't realize who I'm talking to, you're a guy who thinks Joseph McCarthy was a great hero, just some horribly misunderstood and maligned American. Frightening. Thankfully Lincoln is not alive to see the crap that George Bush is pulling, no doubt he would run for the Republican nomination and embarrass the opposition. since there are no Republicans today in Lincoln's league. Not one. With Lincoln in the White House today the Republican Party would be transformed overnight into the new progressive movement. Suddenly the Democrats would be the one's looking ridiculously conservative, and struggling to catch up. There is a theory in quantum mechanics which basicly states if you were to continually run towards a solid wall, enough times, hundreds of trillions of times, there is some probability that your molecules will pass through that solid object. Conservatives would spend the next hundred billion years trying to do something that is a practical impossibility in their hopes of adhering to some misbegotten ideology, while progressives are at least wise enough to walk around the wall. We may both get to the same place in the end, but some of us will undoubtedly wind up horribly bruised and battered in the process. I support your right to bang your head against that wall endlessly, just don't force all of us to run forever at that wall with you. Please!

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#60)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Aug 12, 2006 at 12:00:33 AM EST
    Jettison democracy, republican government, sexual equality, due process of law, and other such cultural baggage and peace with Islamic fundies will be at hand!
    Looks like Bush is following your suggestion to the letter. He's even selling off our natural resouces and bankrupting the treasury to sweeten the deal for the Islamic fundies. We'll be a 3rd world theocracy by 2008, then we can declare victory in the War on Terror.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#61)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Aug 12, 2006 at 05:42:29 AM EST
    You on the right, let me remind you that bin laden is the reason we got into this mess in the first place.That's the reason we want him. If Saddam was a dictator here would it be right for another country to come in and take him? No amount of confusing the issue will change the fact that we are in Iran to secure our oil concerns.

    Re: The Path Not Taken (none / 0) (#62)
    by John Mann on Sat Aug 12, 2006 at 07:22:01 AM EST
    Jim quoted OBL for the umpteenth time:
    BIN LADIN:... So, the driving-away jihad against the US does not stop with its withdrawal from the Arabian peninsula, but rather it must desist from aggressive intervention against Muslims in the whole world.
    Thanks for proving the point I was making in my comment on wumhenry's remarks. I couldn't find that quotation, but I knew you'd have it sitting on your desktop. Then asked:
    Are you incapable of understanding the cear and simple meaning of those words?
    No, but you have proven time and again that you are.

    The Path Not Taken | 61 comments (61 topical)