[SevenMinusOne]

,i>I believe that as well - that the "assistance" is more of the passive variety. In that part of the world, where everyone knows everyone else by tribal association, intel infiltration is extremely difficult. Locals' eyes are everywhere, and any kind of outsider movement would be quickly detected.

I think it would be better for all involved (including Musharraf) if UBL's handover were done locally, as opposed to a massive American effort.

Let me try this again to make it easier to read -

Very true - Though there is no doubt that if we every get good Intel on UBL's exact location we will send in an American Team (Teams) to take him out immediately.

However locating him within the Pakistan border region is d*mn near impossible. It will take someone talking to accomplish this - Or getting extremely lucky during a snatch and grab Op and taking someone who has some timely Intel (that is how we got Saddam).

[COBOL2Java]

It's an extremely high-risk strategy for Bush. If a snatch-and-grab fails, he'll be compared to Carter's hostage rescue failure (you know the Democrats and the media will try). On the other hand, if Bush decides to wait for a warlord handover and THAT fails, he will be portrayed as a fool; the Democrats will hold a full-court press. I can imagine the likes of Clinton, Kerry, Pelosi et. al. doing a big I TOLD YOU SO.