Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: HighWheeler
It's a reasonable argument, and you may be correct. I think some of the points are weak, however. I agree that Bush was confident that the Taliban would not hand over Bin Laden, but that could have been based on what was clear to everyone at the time--that the Taliban were not about to give up on that point. It wouldn't have been in character with what we had already seen of them. They had plenty of chances earlier, and they refused to do it.

Moreover, although some of the tribal leaders have been willing to switch allegiance at the drop of a hat, that isn't true of the real fanatics. They are still showing that they are willing to die for the cause.

I am more inclined to agree with your general evaluation. We have been assuming that Bush would want to produce Bin Laden's body, but as you say there may be advantages in having him simply disappear. If he is already dead, there are also advantages in not saying so until after the whole country has been mopped up. He is a useful bogie to placate weenie-whiny liberal newspersons with. In fact, although he did nothing about the problem, it was clinton who first made bin Laden infamous, demonizing him in the clintonoid media, as had earlier been done with Saddam. So Bush already had a liberal-certified liberal demon to deal with, and that made it awkward for the press to complain.

3 posted on 11/28/2001 4:30:06 PM PST by Cicero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Cicero
I disagree with your opinion in #3 above.

If his body is never produced, anybody could committ a terrorist act and "blame it on Osama".

94 posted on 12/11/2001 12:33:02 PM PST by DCPatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson