Replies

We would've had him by now if we had pushed Mushy a little harder.

And why don't we have Zarqawi in Iraq then? - Who haven't we pushed hard enough to get him?

Nonsense. (IMO)

The Pakistan border region is basically autonomous from the rest of Pakistan (has been for over a century) - Additionally people just don't have a clue as to the terrain in this region of the World to suggest we could simply catch him (UBL) if only the Pak's put more soldiers there. The terrain just doesn't allow for Operations like that, nor would those troops lead to any guarantee of capture (at all) - Nor would the Pakistan public stand for any long term, large, occupying Pakistan military operation within this region to boot.

Again, we control 90% of Iraq, we have over 125,000 soldiers there, we have 85% support from the new Gov't and yet we still are hunting down Zarqawi. These Ops are much more involved and fluid then 90% of those discussing them understand.

Don't be silly; Zarqawi's case doesn't prove anything. We caught Hussein and his sons. Their situation was far more like bin Laden's circa January 2002 than Zarqawi's today. The difference, of course, is that bin Laden, al Qaeda and the Taliban were falling back in disarray into Western Pakistan in January 2002, and bin Laden was thus far more susceptible to capture than is Zarqawi, what with Zarqawi's carefully built-up force of foreign supported terrorists, his flow of foreign money, his terrorist ratlines, safe houses, etc.

We should all be sick by now of the constant defeatism we hear from the left and not allow ourselves to fall victim to it. "The Pakistani public would not stand for it," "it's inevitable that terrorists will hit us again harder than before," "the arab street blah, blah, blah" . . . Tired old leftist platitudes, every one of them. Aren't you sick of that lame crap by now?