« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

On Bin Laden’s Death

A lot of ink will be spilled announcing and analyzing the death of al Qaeda leader Usama bin Laden. According to the Newseum, this story has graced 719 newspaper front pages as of Monday morning with more likely tomorrow. The islamofascists with whom we have been contending since the streets of Mogadishu have predictably threatening a to “unleash hell” if bin Laden is killed. Our partner in the Middle East Peace Process, Hamas, has condemned the killing as “a continuation of the American policy based on oppression and the shedding of Muslim and Arab blood.”

A lot of us are satisfied that justice has finally been brought to the man responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Presumably Code Pink will hold a ‘take back the night march’ some place to mourn his passing. And a handful of men from SEAL Team 6 will drink for free for the rest of their lives whenever special operators gather.

What does the killing of bin Laden mean? In the main, probably not very much to al Qaeda but perhaps a turning point in our war on terrorism.

As an operational commander for al Qaeda, bin Laden ceased to matter by early 2002. His cosmic misapprehension of American actions in the aftermath of 9/11 caused him to devote virtually 100% of his time to staying alive. This isn’t to say that he didn’t have value to al Qaeda, he did. By being alive he served as a potent symbol for fundraising and recruiting. While his death would have seen al Qaeda split into warring factions, by remaining alive he ensured some continuity of command through commanders he had appointed prior to being driven from Afghanistan.

To a great extent, his continued survival paradoxically enabled President Bush to wage a global war against jihadism. Had he actually been killed or captured in Afghanistan the pressure upon the Bush Administration to declare a triumphal end to a war only half begun would have been overwhelming. Though his continued presence politically damaged President Bush, arguably it damaged al Qaeda more by keeping the organization and its leader in the spotlight. The search for bin Laden has sent most of al Qaeda’s skilled troop commanders to hell, Guantanamo, or to scream out their secrets in obscure prisons in obscure countries. Strategic direction over the entire network has not been possible since the fall of Afghanistan.

His death will have little impact on an organization frozen in amber. Ayman al-Zawahiri will assume direct control without pause, having had nearly a decade to plan for this eventuality, and he will remain in hiding until more helicopters visit him in the dead of the night… or until he returns to Egypt under the protection of the Muslim Brotherhood whom feted during this bogus Arab Spring.

I’ve no wish to be churlish at this moment and I will give a hat tip to the president over having the resolve to actually take action when presented with the opportunity. We arrived at 9/11 because President Clinton refused to do as much. Even so, one can’t help but notice that Obama’s statement on the death of bin Laden completely ignores the debt owed to the Bush Administration while at the same time taking a couple of oblique swipes. However, the wildcard in this are the actions the administration will take now that bin Laden is dead.

It is pretty well established that the current president doesn’t have the stomach for the successful war he inherited in Iraq and the unsuccessful war he has managed to create in Afghanistan. The death of bin Laden is more likely to give impetus to Obama’s ambivalence about the concept of “victory” and his deep-seated hostility to the success of American military power and thereby give him the political cover he feels he needs to speed up troop withdrawals from those countries.

I don’t share the views of either Erick or Ben Domenech that Obama has actually adopted the national security policies of President Bush rather than having been forced through a lack of moral courage into an unwilling embrace. To the contrary, I fear the death of bin Laden will give Obama the impetus to do what he has long wanted but lacked the guts to do: wind down the war against al Qaeda, close Guantanamo, and release most of the prisoners we hold a Guantanamo under the guise of “releasing prisoners of war.”

If the killing of bin Laden results in the administration declaring our job is done then bin Laden will have done more for al Qaeda in death than he ever accomplished in life.

COMMENTS

  • powertothepeople

    is selective about their disdain for war and violence. On their own website, they sing the praises of the violence in Libya and Syria, yet constantly act like twits towards our own men and women fighting.

    And you are correct Streiff, they will mourn OBL’s passing. He is their hero since he is fighting the evil American army. It would be nice to see the day come where some politician or police officer has the courage to arrest each and every one of the code pink members and charge them with treason, a charge of which all of their members have earned.

    • djvu

      I agree completely with you about the arrest of members of code pink but, unfortuneately, we are dreaming; Ms. Fonda still remains at large.
      Robert Palmer Smith

  • shermr

    I will go so far as to make the following statement:
    For the first time as an American I approve of an Obama administration accomplishment and, possibly, any involement the president may had taken in the military strike that eliminated the presence of bin Laden.

  • shermr

    e (here is the missing e in involement) – I was able to retrive it from potato e

    • Brian Simpson

      but you were missing a “v”.

      • blooch

        He wants his e back.

      • edintexas

        Maybe Dear Leader has a fetish involving voles.

  • Marcus_Traianus

    Probably the best, most balanced piece I have read out of scores.

    This is also an especially salient point;

    don?t share the views of either Erick or Ben Domenech that Obama has actually adopted the national security policies of President Bush rather than having been forced through a lack of moral courage into an unwilling embrace.

    I have to profess. Given Mr. Obama’s action over the past two years I don’t understand how many people have come to this conclusion.

    • YnotNOW

      is confused and not based on any overarching policy or principle. So he gets pulled back and forth by whatever current circumstance arrives. Then he “leads from behind.”

  • blooch

    learning the wrong long-term lesson from this, but short-term I’ll bet he ends up with some leverage on Kadafi, from whom we should be getting a call shortly. Whether or noe Obama has the guts and brains to use that leverage wisely is another matter.

  • cwb33

    if you said that the GOP steadfastly condemned Clinton when he tried to take action. And then you would be more correct in saying that we arrived at this moment because Bush dismantled every operation Clinton had in place and ignored every warning given to him by CIA officials.

    • streiff

      sort of like you.

      I’m not going to take the time to address the levels of crap here 1. there was no criticism of Clinton for taking action on bin Laden, 2. there were no Clinton programs dismantled by Bush, and on and on. Read the 9/11 report if nothing else.

      And don’t come back

      • davidleigh

        When Clinton was sitting in a chair watching golf at the White House residence Sandy Berger came to him several times saying our forces had bin laden in their sights, give us the order, we’ll get him now….Clinton did nothing! The blood of 911 is on his hands and it always has been. Yes, Obama owes the killing of bin laden to George W. Bush. BETTER MEN THAN HIM layed the foundation for all of this. Sen. Obama voted against it. I have a co-worker saying it will be virtually impossible to defeat him, that his approval ratings will soar. That will be very short-lived. And, with the cost of milk going up, no jobs to be found and higher taxes coming, Obama is surely no shoo-in in 2012. In fact, he loses. We have 19 months until the USA votes. I will wager this guy does the country much worse and loses especially if Mitch Daniels throws his hat in the ring.

        • sparkyva

          The victory of Desert Storm did Bush 1 no favors in the following election. It was still on economics. Bush took actions to improve the economy, but they were long term actions that could not be seen until shortly after Clinton was sworn in. He should have made war against the mild recession we suffered thin, but he was too stodgy and we got Clinton instead. Obama is making war on the economy instead of on the recession, talk about a mixed up world. He has to go in 2012.

          • 6eorge Jetson

            was not reelected, either.

            Consider that again: The greatest wartime head of state in our era got the voters’ pink slip in an election focused on other matters.

            Given that precedent, those that say Obama is now a sure thing in ’12 are ignorant of history.

          • earlgrey

            at least his image was.

            good point, BTW.

        • momofthecastle

          DERELICTION OF DUTY by Buzz Patterson. I can’t remember, because I gave it to an Army recruiter who thought Clinton was a good President.

  • Menlo

    Both parties are going to use the “threat of terror” to carry out their own agenda, whether it’s virtual rape by airport security screeners; unwarranted aggressive police power; databases monitoring and tracking every citizen’s every move; massive expansion of bureaucracies; or whatever else has happened in the past 10 years.

    To the contrary, it’s popular and can win lots of votes; and that’s precisely why Obama won’t abandon it.

    • aesthete
  • http://www.FranBaker.com frankieb

    n/t

  • Death_of_the_Donkey

    Just think if this had turned into Desert One. He would have been finished as a president. And the gain he gets from this will likely be negligible by the time the election rolls around anyways. This was a fairly courageous and risky decision from a man not known for either of those attributes.

    • aesthete

      no one would have known about it. We’ve had plenty of botched ops in Pakistan under both Pres Bush and Obama: a failure would have made this one in a long line of such operations.

    • CJB68

         I’m certain that even someone like Obama doesn’t want to get out of the White House leaving behind a man like Osama Bin Laden, who’d direct squads of terrorists to take out targets within the United States.  With what Bill Clinton either botched up or allowed to happen, the O’s legacy would be that much more tarnished if, following his departure, a couple dozen or so Al Qaeda agents managed to pull off an attack far more devastating than that of September 11th, 2001.

         Even so, looking at all the Left cheering like it was the Phillies winning the World Series is a hoot, considering their constant harping on not celebrating a win.  It is “My Way or the Highway,” unless there’s some benefit to themselves…

  • http://whattoreadtoday.blogspot.com/ Paula

    Is anyone else wondering why Obama shuffled Panetta and Petreaus around right in the middle of this operation?

    Note that Obama gave Panetta credit for this successful operation in his remarks last night (noting that Obama ordered Panetta to make it his number one priority). Rather….he took joint credit with Panetta.

    So why the moves coinciding with this major operation?

    • streiff

      Gates announced back in Jan that he was leaving this year. Panetta won’t be confirmed until later this month.

  • Rusty_S

    Surely they’ll let the poor man catch his breath for a couple of days…

  • Rob_McEwen

    Since 9/11, there have been BIG Al Queda strikes in several nations (Indonesia, Spain, UK, Saudia Arabia). But things have been somewhat quiet since Obama took office. Why? Because the islamofacists truly believed that Obama was THEIR candidate working for THEIR interests. And Obama “delivered” by being anti-Israel, pro-Islamic-dictatorships, pro-Muslim-Brotherhood (etc). (as this Red State article explains in better detail!)

    But with bin Ladin’s death, might they be “motivated” again. Is Obama prepared for that? NOT saying that we shouldn’t have taken out bin Ladin.

    If Al Queda is SMART–they’ll realize that this is merely a symbolic victory… and they’ll continue lying low and letting Obama continue to bring economic destruction to America, while slowly continuing to support the Muslim Brotherhood (etc.) and continuing to slap Israel around. Soon, Egypt and Libya will be full-fledged Islamic dictatorships, due in part to Obama. (they weren’t much better before, but this will definately be worse in the long run for the US strategic interests!–like large chess pieces won by Al Queda!)

    But, instead, passions may get the better of the islamofacists. And we could see some terror cells go “active” and some terror plots engage. The real test of Obama is… now that they are “motivated”, as they were under Bush, can Obama prevent large terrorist attacks on US soil? (as Bush did) Is Obama the adult in the room? Or the pretender? We are about to find out!

    I don’t have a crystal ball, but I think this chances of another 9/11 strike (or worse!), in the next 12 months, just got considerably higher! EXTREMELY HIGH!

    PS – even as I say this, I’d prefer no terrorist attacks, or stopped terrorist attacks, even if Obama gets credit. I’ll never “root” for the terrorists. Never. (some on the Left weren’t so civilized under Bush–some of them were openly rooting for our defeat, just in the hopes of scoring some political points! That is shameful!)

    • ag8tor

      because “W” had the courage to take them on in their country instead of here. No one can ever convince me that there weren’t WMDs in Iraq. I’ve been talked down to by some of the “more enlightened” telling me that the UN inspector didn’t find anything. How can we be that naive? He gassed his own people! “W” also made everyone mad when he instituted security policies that while unpopular have kept us safe and thwarted attacks. I’ll give “O” credit for giving the go ahead to take this bastard out but it stops there. As has been stated his reluctance to deal with Islamic threats and his voting record don’t add up to a true man of action where national security is concerned. Is it just me or has he started to act a bit more patriotic since 2012 is getting close? I’m just sayin’!

      • edintexas

        Silly, “everyone knows” that military gas (e.g. Mustard, Sarin, Vx, etc.) was only a Weapon of Mass Destruction when the US had them in stock. It was widely reported (and documented) that Saddam used nerve gas, and choking gas, against Iraqi citizens. A simple person, such as myself, might think that proves that Saddam possessed such military gasses. And he did, but that doesn’t count because George W. Bush wasn’t a Democrat.

        See, it really is simple.

    • YnotNOW

      and risk more stings in the short run, than try to “negotiate” with the hornets for a tolerable level of stings continuing by leaving the nest intact.

      And by the way, if you think that Osama or al-Qaeda are in any way reducing their efforts to attack the USA because of some supposed sympathy in the White House, you need to put your tin foil hat on and go to another site. Islamofacists were always motivated – just their capabilities were diminished.

    • Common_Cents
  • CJB68

       Giving credit where credit is due, Obama obviously doesn’t want to leave the White House outliving someone like Osama Bin Laden, or leaving the command structure of Al Qaeda intact enough to order action while he is still in office.  It wouldn’t just be political suicide on his part, but it could also permanently damage the image of “liberal” progressives (read: the Left) for decades after that.*

       I won’t celebrate until I see the Islamists effectively eliminated in all nations, and their extremist cause diminished.  If the Christians can get rid of the urge for violence which marred the Crusades, the Musmlims can stop their jihad from defining their belief system.  Until then, I won’t consider this war ended.

    *Notwithstanding.  I always considered the Left damaged by their own policies ever since the Carter administration.  It was under Jimmy Carter that Iran fell to the Ayatollah, and the first terror-sponsoring state took shape.  Prior to that, Islamic terror was still very much unofficial activity by renegades who might have had support by an official or three, but not publicly.  The Left in Congress more or less held the water for anti-American activity through the Reagan and Bush #1 administrations, but it was actually Bill Clinton who planted the seeds for what became September 11th, 2001 by handcuffing all enforcement activity that would’ve derailed that attack.

    • ihateliberals

      it is about revenge for our people that were killed at his hands. we all know that OBL has been nothing but a figure head since bush put him out of business in Afghanistan in 2002. The War On Terror will never be over. no matter how many Al Queda we kill unless we kill every last one of them they will always be at war with us.

      If Clinton had taken care of business when he had Osama in his sights none of this would have happened. When Clinton restricted the intelligence community he opened the way for the first attack on the Twin Towers to the one that actually brought them down. The good men of the Cole would most likely still be alive as well as many young soldiers.

  • CJB68

    Muslims, bot “musmlims.”

    Errrrr….

    • mspector

      and perhaps type a little slower

  • Doc Holliday

    and Chief Operating Officer. That was an excellent diary Streiff. I agree with much of it, but hope we continue the WOT. I think Pannetta has done a better job than we would have expected, and I doubt Petraues plans on bailing on the fight.

    Of course Obama does not get a foreign policy pass here, he has still been a very poor leader. His foreign policy as a whole has been sloppy, inconsistent, and at times cowardly. He has damaged alliances and sowed distrust; not exactly textbook super power FP. Of course his goal is to end our super power status.

    Obama might do something right from time to time, but the left did not give him the presidency to do this. They want him to enrich them, while tearing down all that conservatives love about this nation. He will be getting back to that work soon enough, and it is there, where we must defeat him.

  • mspector

    Will Obama get a popularity “bump” from this episode? Almost certainly. Will it last? Almost certainly not.

    Obama is a bad President. Increasing numbers of people know it. And notwithstanding the victory in Abbottabad, all the negative qualities that have come to stamp his administration were in play.

    His ego demanded that he take the credit for himself; a gracious leader would have always used the word “we” and acknowledged readily that the assassination was the product of 9 years work that began in the Bush administration.

    His remoteness demanded that he announce it with a formal little speech rather than a press conference.

    His arrogance demanded that he turn the victory announcement into a lecture on how we are not really at war with Is-LAM. He should have been able to talk this one in his sleep; instead we got another pedestrian peroration that put my cup of coffee to sleep.

    At the end of the day, Obama is Obama and more and more American people simply do not like him in the WH. A single victory, even one that is as important (at least symbolically) as this one, will not change that over any period of time for the simple reason that Obama will continue being Obama. He can’t help himself. And all the negatives will again rise to the surface.

  • ihateliberals

    I am actually very happy he is dead but I have no closure only satisfaction but a sense of emptiness as well. the emptiness comes from the fact that i wasn’t allowed to see his body. I feel a sense of discuss at the fact that he was taken and given a Islamic burial. Our people that lost their lives at his hand were denied that right since most of them were not found in big enough pieces.

    I seriously doubt that Obama had much to do with his killing and everything to do with disposing of the body since he is a good little Muslim himself. I think Obama just happened to be in the right place at the right time and desperately needed a boost in the polls.

    I would not trust any pictures that may come to light now of the body since he has had plenty of time to fake them. This President has done nothing but lie from day one so why should I believe anything he has to say or do now? Even in this story the parts that we heard him say he lied. he din’t assemble any teams. The Seal team was formed many years ago and was still on the original mission they were charged with. I will give benefit of the doubt that he gave the final order but even that I give begrudgingly.

    • gunslingr45

      I am not holding my breath until I see the pictures. If the navy seals could somehow show and verify it then I would believe it 100%.

  • ihateliberals

    Like I said before I think Obama fell into this and if he had been thinking he would have waited until at least next June to take Osama out. If he knew where OBL was and that he had been there for many years and if Obama had just kept doing what he had been doing with the war, Obama could have taken him out in June or later next year. With that he would have been a shoe in to be re-elected. He would have gotten the boost in the polls that he needed and would have been ale to ride it out. Now that boost will quickly fade as we continue to pay $4.00 or more a gallon for gas and rising prices on everything. Once again Obama proves how dumb he really is.

  • Tbone

    1. Does any rational person believe that Osama could live in a fortified, $ million compound less than a half mile from an important military base for a reportedly six years without the Pakistani Government not knowing it?

    2. If the Pakistani Government knew it, can anyone believe we didn’t know it?

    3. If we knew it, why wasn’t Osama killed before now?

    Easy, he was worth more alive than dead.

    1. Monitoring his communications was an ongoing trove of intel.

    2. Alive, he was not a Muslim Martyr.

    3. Killing him would establish a benchmark for winding down the war on terror.

    The Pakistanis were fully complicit in his death. I mean really, you have a firefight 800 yards from a military base and everyone wakes up and says,’It’s only a car backfiring”? I assume some big bucks are changing hands and that drone strikes in Pakistan will suddenly cease.

    Why wasn’t Osama captured and interrogated, after all it worked with Saddam?

    1. Having monitored his communications for years, he didn’t know anything we didn’t already know.

    2. Keeping him alive would not be the closure benchmark for ending the war on terror.

    So, the only reason Osama was killed now is that to Obama he became worth more dead than alive.

    1. Obama cares little about getting continuing intel to fight the war on terror in that he has no interest in pursuing it.

    2. It scores political points. Note all the “I’s” and “me’s” in his comments and speeches. Would Obama put his interests ahead of the good of our Country? Well, so far.

    3. It gives Obama the benchmark he needs to shutdown Afghanistan to shore up his leftwing base.

    4. It may well have been Osama’s physical condition was deteriorating and a “dead of natural causes” Osama wouldn’t be worth much politically.

    In short, bring home Petraeus, kill Osama, declare victory and exit Afghanistan, stage Left.

    When viewed as a campaign event, it makes perfect sense.

    • acat
    • Common_Cents

      Just that Osama was still alive but rendered impotent by Bush. Bush made the hard choices of Iraq, Afghan going cave to cave, house to house rooting out and killing countless operatives. Obama just got to take credit for the symbolic part.

      Obama had no choice either, with solid intel he had no choice but to go ahead. There was no tough decision.

      • Tbone

        The Pakistanis have known, we have known. Come on, do you really want to believe that Osama could live in a nice villa, in a small town, down the road from a military training academy for 6 frickin’ years undetected?

        There was no “Oh good, we finally found him let’s kill him before he gets away”.

        Osama just became worth more dead than alive to the political dog, Obama.

        • Common_Cents

          My points are:

          Osama was rendered impotent by Bush years ago.

          Obama didn’t make a ‘tough’ call whether we knew for years or there was solid newer intel.

    • Menlo

      As I said elsewhere, the so-called “war on terror” is not going anywhere as it has become too ideal a vehicle for bigger, more intrusive federal government and less individual freedom and privacy at all levels.

      How else do they defend the virtual rapes at airports? How else do they defend the oversized, intrusive, and incompetent DHS? How else do they defend national ID cards?

      I don’t know about Afghanistan, but the “threat of terror” is vital for anyone wishing to increasing the size and scope of federal government.

  • annplato

    of a sudden Osama is called Usama by the media. Could it be that too many people confused the only consonant differentiating the President of the United States from the most vicious terrorist of the 21st century?

    • uselogic

      And I’ve caught myself inadvertently juxtaposing the two (Osama, Obama) in the last day and a half. So if someone gave forethought to that…. they actually had good reason. To-may-to, to-mah-to.

      • uselogic

        damned fine diary, Streiff.

    • blooch

      That popped out of Geraldo’s mouth on Fox while he was waiting for Os—Obama to make the formal announcement the other night. I thought the color on my TV needed adjusting, but it was just his red, flustered face that threw me off. Poor guy lost it for about the next fifteen minutes…stumbled over his words more tha Os—- Obama did in his speech a few minutes later.

      I wonder If Barry has ever accidentally called himself Osama.

      • uselogic

        “I wonder If Barry has ever accidentally called himself Osama.”

        Just got back to the office from Bojangles and now I have to clean my keyboard. Thanks, blooch!

        • acat

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ID91mi5c0OQ

          Obama’s about the only one not confused about who’s who…

          Mew

    • Bill S

      I noticed the same thing and it hadn’t dawned on me what the connection was there. Great catch.

  • bassethound

    Top 10 reasons why I?m glad Bin Laden?s dead
    1. We won?t be embroiled in months of arguing over which country will get custody of him.
    2. We won?t have years and years of arguing over whether he gets a military tribunal or a civilian trial.
    3. We won?t have an attorney general decide to try him in a civilian court in NYC.
    4. We won?t have years and years of appeals and procedural wrangling.
    5. We won?t have a brain dead jury with a political grievance turning him loose because of ?lack of evidence?.
    6. We won?t have to provide three hots, a cot, gym equipment, a tennis court and pedicures for him.
    7. We won?t have to worry about him escaping.
    8. We won?t have to deliver a university commencement address via satellite.
    9. No loyal U.S. serviceman or prison guard is ever going to be hit in the face with a Zip-loc bag full of his excrement.
    10. We won?t hear him petition for a humanitarian release claiming he?s within days of dying from prostate cancer only to have him experience a ?miraculous cure? once he?s free.