Bin Laden: The Greatest Strategic Genius of Our Time

[bigeasy]

Pakistan offers sanctuary similar to Cambodia. There is no evidence Pakistan is really helping to clean up the tribal areas.

We disbursed and interrupted the Taliban and Al Quaeda in 2001 and 2002. I doubt there is much more we can do.

Only the Afghans can secure their own country.

[Bert Rodgers]

"Bin Laden would have proved to be the greatest strategic military genius in the modern age as with an investment of but a few million dollars he had successfully lured two superpowers to their graves and had, in the process, rid the middle east of both of them."

Whle I don't disagree that OBL has lured us into a mess that should have been taken care of in the Fall of 2001 and Winter of 2002, the guy's opinion loose credability when he erroneously credits OBL with a major role in the Afgahn Soviet conflict.

Bin Ladin was at most a very minor player in that war and had almost nothing to do with the Mujahadin, Northern alliance and other resistance groups that wore the Soviets out and eventually helped bankrupt the commie sytem.

He brought a bunch of mercinaries from Saudi Arabia and Yemmen and fought under orders of Mujahdin commanders. Any more than that is myth.

Bert

[Reel Fanatic]

Bligh-

It's fine to be partisan. I know I am but it helps to have your facts and historical context correct. First and foremost, it is Ronald Reagan, Ronald Wilson Reagan. Let Mrs. Nancy or his close friends refer to him as Ron or Ronny.

1) Ronald Reagan presided over a country that had a democrat controlled House and Congress so he was limited on what retaliation he could do. Reagan and Miterand both supported a military offensive but Caspar Weinberger (Reagan's defense secretary) easily put the breaks on it because it wouldn't be fiscally prudent with no clear positive outcome to be gained. It was kind of like the first time the Twin Towers were bombed under the Clinton Administration...who do we attack? We weren't even sure who the hell hit us because there was no intel on these people at the time.

Lebanon was a waste land that was in a civil war and no one group was taking responsibility for the attacks. Our troops were part of a UN peacekeeping force sent there for these sole political purpose of helping to provide a stable environment for the warring factions to find a peaceful resolution. Way to go UN.

2) There were no national security interests to be furthered by staying there because Hezbollah was an underground splinter group at best and the tribal warring factions viewed our presence there as hostile. Furthermore, Lebanon was a wasteland as said before. Did more soldiers need to die?

3) Ronald Reagan didn't pull out of Lebanon to go to Grenada. We were already in Grenada when the bombing happened. Take a look at your time line.

4) In Jacksonville, NC the Marines named the new highway that runs through their base The Ronald Reagan Freeway...not highway or byway or expressway...FREEway. Obviously the Marine Corp wasn't too unhappy with his decisions during that time or else they would have named it the Jimmy Carter road to nowhere or the William Jefferson Clinton French Fry Loving Red Light District Whoring Boulevard.

5) George W Bush (not Bushie) reduced taxes on a lot of people-not just the rich because Clinton raised taxes to a painfully high rate. After 9-11, something had to be done to keep the country from going into a nose dive economically. And, as far as paying for a tax break, it's called reducing frivolous spending. Remember, those tax dollars aren't their dollars. They are ours! If you are an employer or have a job, you would or should know this. I have to run a payroll every week. When Blow Me Obama took office, it took a whopping 3 months before I had a new tax withholding guide that requires me to take more money (substantially more) out of my employees paychecks than during the Bush administration. My employees don't make 250K. They don't even make 50K.

6) I think you are the one who has been snorting something. Your buddies on the left will throw all grades of unsubstantiated shit against the wall hoping that something will stick. Because he [Bush] was a tea totaller, the clowns in the democratic party smear machine immediately assumed he was a drunk and an alcoholic. Hell, your BOY the manchild Blow Me Obama wrote about his drug use unapologetically. It would seem that in the new democrat party, you can't even be a card carrying member in good standing unless you've been convicted of a crime, or at least charged with a drug violation.

[Big Fish Billy]

I think Avenger hit the nail on the head when he said:

"My fear with the Bin Laden issue is that if he is actually captured or killed, the American public, which has the attention span of a flashbulb will say 'Oh, good! Everything can go back to normal now.'"

I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist but wouldn't that be enough reason to NOT focus on capturing/killing him right away?

All momentum (public support) to continue war would be lost at that point because the "objective" would have been met in the public eye.

That's the best point...my feeling is, as the US always does, fight on someone else's turf. Whether Bush let him go on purpose or not, it has kept the terrorism out of this country, the word is out "if you want to fight the US, go to Iraq or Afghanistan." Same for Communism in Viet Nam, Korea, etc. My father used to say, "when the economy is bad, they'll start a war somewhere," well Somalia (Monica's war), Granada (WTF), Kuwait, 1st time Iraq, 2nd time Iraq, keeps your mind off the lowsy economy. Until things get better here, there'll be war.........heck it doesn't even make the nightly news now, it's so commonplace.......

[Bligh]

Bligh-

It's fine to be partisan. I know I am but it helps to have your facts and historical context correct. First and foremost, it is Ronald Reagan, Ronald Wilson Reagan. Let Mrs. Nancy or his close friends refer to him as Ron or Ronny.

1) Ronald Reagan presided over a country that had a democrat controlled House and Congress so he was limited on what retaliation he could do. Reagan and Miterand both supported a military offensive but Caspar Weinberger (Reagan's defense secretary) easily put the breaks on it because it wouldn't be fiscally prudent with no clear positive outcome to be gained. It was kind of like the first time the Twin Towers were bombed under the Clinton Administration...who do we attack? We weren't even sure who the hell hit us because there was no intel on these people at the time.

Lebanon was a waste land that was in a civil war and no one group was taking responsibility for the attacks. Our troops were part of a UN peacekeeping force sent there for these sole political purpose of helping to provide a stable environment for the warring factions to find a peaceful resolution. Way to go UN.

2) There were no national security interests to be furthered by staying there because Hezbollah was an underground splinter group at best and the tribal warring factions viewed our presence there as hostile. Furthermore, Lebanon was a wasteland as said before. Did more soldiers need to die?

3) Ronald Reagan didn't pull out of Lebanon to go to Grenada. We were already in Grenada when the bombing happened. Take a look at your time line. Lebanon marine barracks blown up 0ct 23rd 1983. Invasion of grenada started on oct 25th 1983

4) In Jacksonville, NC the Marines named the new highway that runs through their base The Ronald Reagan Freeway...not highway or byway or expressway...FREEway. Obviously the Marine Corp wasn't too unhappy with his decisions during that time or else they would have named it the Jimmy Carter road to nowhere or the William Jefferson Clinton French Fry Loving Red Light District Whoring Boulevard.

5) George W Bush (not Bushie) reduced taxes on a lot of people-not just the rich because Clinton raised taxes to a painfully high rate. After 9-11, something had to be done to keep the country from going into a nose dive economically. And, as far as paying for a tax break, it's called reducing frivolous spending. Remember, those tax dollars aren't their dollars. They are ours! If you are an employer or have a job, you would or should know this. I have to run a payroll every week. When Blow Me Obama took office, it took a whopping 3 months before I had a new tax withholding guide that requires me to take more money (substantially more) out of my employees paychecks than during the Bush administration. My employees don't make 250K. They don't even make 50K.

6) I think you are the one who has been snorting something. Your buddies on the left will throw all grades of unsubstantiated shit against the wall hoping that something will stick. Because he [Bush] was a tea totaller, the clowns in the democratic party smear machine immediately assumed he was a drunk and an alcoholic. Hell, your BOY the manchild Blow Me Obama wrote about his drug use unapologetically. It would seem that in the new democrat party, you can't even be a card carrying member in good standing unless you've been convicted of a crime, or at least charged with a drug violation.

Are you done trying to rewrite history? Bushie was a tea what? I guess GW, darth cheney the draft dodger?6 deferments??????? and rushie the fat arse with his deferments wernt chicken hawks next? And you probably think ronie defeated the russians single handed in the cold war??? Ronie risked nothing? A union electrician risked his life to bring the russian economy to a stand still. Most cant believe he wasnt killed and made to disapear? but the russians made a big mistake when they didnt stop him from shutting down the polish ship yards and then the whole economy? Yep a union electrician risked his life to bring the russian economy to a stand still! Did we know who did the marine barracks then? I would think so! Before the barracks the same people were responsible for the american embassy being blown up. A guy I happen to know was there! also! the guy I know Don Feiney one of the original delta members. After warning the marines about the next threat to the barracks and also later about who was behind the embassy bombing and the marine baracks bombing. Ronie with drew from lebanon and then don got his insides shot up riding a little bird into grenada? For what? Unlike what you stated I didnt vote for OBAMA. Infact I dont think I ever voted democrat. But little bushie did not get my vote either?What a waste all those lives and limbs lost because GW bushie didnt even know the difference between sunni,shia and kurd Iraqis? And he started the Tzar crap and all the other homeland security crap? Now the obama people are going to take advantage of powers they shouldnt have? Thanks bushie!

[Reel Fanatic]

The question is "Are you finished re-writing history"?

You vilify Reagan, Bush, and Cheney on their military responses yet you contradict yourself...

Reagan was supposed to have done something in response to the Beirut attack... Who was he supposed to attack? No group took responsibility for the bombing. Should he have just starting blowing shit up and randomly killing people? Sounds like fun in the land of sand but probably not the best way to settle a score as a part of a multinational UN peacekeeping force. Case in point why we should tell the UN to suck our left nut and get the hell out of our country.

The US barracks were at the airport which was one of the most dangerous places for us to be. Thank you UN. This was deemed to be the most politically proper place for us to be.

The US Barracks were bombed on October 23, 1983 and we invaded Granada on October 25, 1983. We withdrew from Lebanon on February 7, 1984. Got my dates reversed in the last post- what's 2 days between friends? The entire Granada conflict lasted only 3 or 4 days with a total of 19 soldiers killed and 116 wounded. I hope your friend was just one of the wounded. We had as many as 800 American hostages at the St. Georges University on the island nation powerhouse of Granada and Reagan wasn't going to pull a Jimmy Carter and drag it out for a year. There was a standing order under the marxist regime to shoot anyone leaving their homes or the university with no questions asked. Reagan's rescue attempt was a success and Jimbo's crashed into the dessert.

We are attacked by Al Quaida who was absolutely thrilled to announce that they were responsible and you insinuate that we should have done nothing because you are unhappy with Bush's service records?! Should he have pulled a Clinton and just lobbed some bombs into the middle of that crap hole and called it a day?

Were you unhappy with Clinton's lack of a service record...or should we say dis-service? At least Bush didn't flee to Canada and protest overseas against his country like Clinton did.

I don't give a rats ass about some russian union electrician. One guy isn't going to bring down an entire country because he knows how to wire something. Furthermore, just because he was "in a union" didn't make him a better electrician. It just made him an electrician with a license to beat the shit out of another electrician on a job if he wasn't in the union.

As far as Cheney's checkered service history is concerned, there were 5 deferrements. 4 for educational reasons and 1 because they were expecting the birth of their first child. Considering his long history of heart disease, it's probably just as well that he didn't go. Cheney was not a person of priviledge either. His father was an agricultural extension agent and his mother was a former softball star in the women's leagues...hardly someone of the upper crust...so I doubt that he received any favors that would have been reserved for only the most priviledged.

Last but not least, You didn't vote for Obama or Bush..frankly I don't care either way. You weren't happy with Reagan. You say nothing about Clinton. On another thread, you were very dismissive about McCain and Palin but have a veiled reference to some other candidate (I assume Ron Paul) who also didn't get elected. It just sounds like you have some real anger issues over this stuff. We can sit here and argue all day (well maybe you can, I can't) but history is and will be the judge of which leaders were good and effective and which ones weren't. You or I can like or dislike someone all day long but at the end of the day history will the judge, jury, and executioner if necessary.

[longfisher]

[QUOTE=It just sounds like you have some real anger issues over this stuff.[/QUOTE]

Having anger over the piss poor leadership the U.S. has had in the last four decades is common, understandable, justified and most of all welcome.

It's about damned time!

Much of what passes for debate above is merely what we've been trained by the media to do, blame one another and ignore the pressing problems of our times becasue we're engaged in infighting or partisan conflict over what are by any objective measures irrelevancies.

The media in league with the politicians have pulled off a very fast one on America. They've peddled a false narative that there are two camps in America, the liberals and the conservatives and that one part, the Democrats, own all the liberals and another, the Republicans, own all the conservatives.

Totally false. I for one am a conservative to the hilt but wouldn't vote for a Republican on a bet these days after what's gone on the last 8 years. There are many like me.

Approximately only 25 - 30% of the voting public show absolute allegiance to these two parties (for a total of maybe 60% tops) and the rest, 40% minimum, are indpendents like me. Despite the fact that we get left out of the narrative, thankfully, we decide most elections handily.

But what's the point if the 20% or so of the population who are primary voters for each of the "official" parties pick the politicians. We independents just get to choose between the lesser of two evils. And, I assure you from my perch each party proffers evil candidates.

This merely results in the same dinosaurs being let out of office only to return in a presidential term or two. Nothing changes, ever.

Why can't America change? Why is justifiable anger so impotent in eliciting change?

Anger is impotant and should be welcomed and encouraged because it's all too often drowned out by those of you who are partisans and who quite often vote against your own interests just so you can vote for or against some pet cultural, social or religious (dare I say race) issue that the sly politicians foist off on you as important. Abortion, homosexual unions, Terry Schiavo, immigration, blow jobs for presidents, etc. are all just distractions intended to divert you from acting democratically about real issues.

From what I read above most of you either on the pro or con side fall for them and you are happy to argue endlessly over the pablum issues you were prescribed. So, you vest all your energies fighting straw men constructed by the wiley and connected precisely to keep you from uniting to demand real change in the society.

The greatest trick a politician ever learned was to dumb down democracy by limiting democratic debate to narrow but incendiary & emotive topics no more important than irrelevancies while at the same time convincing the population that debating these irrelevancies was central to democracy. In this fashion, all your energy, patriotism and resources are squandered without any hope of meaningfully addressing those things that really ail this society.

Chumps, that's all. Just chumps.

Maybe one day enough of you (us?) will get angry enough ignore all the misdirection we get and unite. But not many of those who chimed in above seem fitted for that role.

Longfisher

[Reel Fanatic]

Longfisher-

Very eloquently said but we were discussing modern history. We can get pissed about history all we want but it won't do anyone any good. We can learn from history as well- which is what I try to do. It keeps you from making the same mistakes twice.

The only time it will serve the populace to get pissed is when it is election time. Memories are too short and it takes too much energy to stay pissed for too long. Passion should be at it's peak when it can be the most effective.

Most elections that we have had have been a case of the lesser of two evils from someone's perspective. If you allow 25% - 30% of the people to pick a candidate to represent one party or the other, this is the problem you are going to have. Since we don't have a viable 3rd party to speak of (sorry libertarians but you guys just become spoilers in most elections), would it not be better to be in one camp or the other and affect some change from within in how and/or who that party chooses as a candidate?

Sitting on the sidelines angry as hell and pissed at the world while waiting to see what one party or the other is going to prop up as a candidate isn't what our founding fathers envisioned as a democratic republic. We are supposed to be passionate but more importantly, we are supposed to be involved and aware of what's going on. And, in some cases, we are asked to hold our noses and pull the lever to prevent someone far worse from getting the keys to the country.

I thought McCain was a terrible candidate for our party but he was heads and shoulders better than Obama so I voted for him. Bob Dole was a terrible candidate when he ran against Clinton but I held my nose and voted for him because he is a better man than Clinton could ever hope to be. Same thing with Ford when he ran against Carter. The Republican party has allowed media pressure to define who it presently is rather than who it should be. Many of our current members are democrat lite rather than true conservatives and that is a shame. In the democrat heirarchy, you damn well better tote the party line or else you're going to get taken off at the knees. The Republicans don't do that...maybe they should once they figure out who the hell they are.

[canyongear]

here here..reel..rumble grumble..in a diplomatic tone..couldn't agree more..campaign rhetoric and real government is like fishing for Marlin with a Spreader Bar..

[longfisher]

I hope I don't seem presumptious to you guys, but I thought it might be useful to post about issues that I and others like me feel are the pressing issues of our time that don't get addressed in this society because we waste too much time and effort endlessly fighting over Terry Schiavo like issues. I simply listed them in order of when the popped into my head and not in any particular order of importance.

Of course, I invite others to add to the list or partially or totally refute the list. I certainly respect your opinions.

1) Erosion of habeous corpus rights

2) Erosion of Posse Commitatas principles and creation of a "North American Command" replete with it's own purposefully tasked Army infantry division

3) Increasing intrusion of religion into secular government

4) Torture of American citizens and permanent residents by the American Government

5) Arrogation of power to the executive branch by fiat and the related issue of the break down of the principle of separation of powers

6) Shrinking role of congress in determining foreign affairs

7) Increasing influence of lobbying dollars on the decision our lawmakers make (and a related issue, the incredible cost of getting elected in the first place that requires those and many other dollars)

8) Black budget items that are never voted on by Congress and therefore remain unaccountable to the people

9) Significant but unpunished wrongdoing on the part of Presidents (of all parties) and their minions which serves to sanctify and embolden an elite class and diminish the rule of law.

10) American exceptionalism and adverturism

11) Impact of foreign lobby's on our govrnment and foreign affairs (think Israel, Turkey, China, Cuba, etc.)

12) Disenfranchisement of the poorer among us

13) Healthcare (I'm a health insurance agent and believe me there's enormous pain and suffering out there)

14) Public schools increasing being used as propoganda organs of the state

15) Absence of any real accountability in the financial sector for the great harm their unfettered greed causes despite a plethora of regulatory bodies.

16) Class conflicts

17) Increasingly heavy hand that Wall Street plays in our lives (remember when there were pension plans and not 401K's and when health insurance didn't have Health Savings Accounts and when life insurance cash value accumulated without having investment vehicles attached)

18) Incivility in the population which prevents meaningful discourse.

19) Overall disregard for the rights and humanity of foreigners

20) Abuse of the troops by sending them on adventures that are patently illegal, immoral and injurious to their patriotism

21) Culturing a warrior class among the military in a nation that heretofore prided itself on being a peaceful nation

22) Predatory trade and IMF policies that impoverish other nations and cause anti-Americanism

23) Western goepolitical control of world bodies like the U.N. (if other nations dont' feel they can have their grievances objectively addressed they'll splinter from the world community and form their own, separate bodies where we won't have a voice, think Shanghai Cooperation Organization)

24) Encirclement of Russia which remains the single most important mortal threat to America; i.e., encirclement will make them react as history shows they always have, with arms and conflict.

25) Defense budget of the U.S. exceeding that of all the rest of the world combined.

26) Looming hyperinflation and devaluation of the dollar if Obama carries through with his planned expenditures without a significant recovery of the U.S. economy INCLUDING JOBS.

27) Overreliance on technology in the military which leads us to forget how to grapple mano a mano with the enemy (Russian and Chinese strategic war fighting includes immediate resort to EMP weapons).

28) Vulnerability of U.S. infrastructure to EMP weapons (even N. Korea can produce such a weapon with ease).

29) Shrinking water resources world-wide which can and will be a spark for regional military conflagrations.

30) Inadequate support for sciences and technology other than those with medical or military applications.

I guess that's about all anyone would care to read (probably way over did it). There's lots more but I'm tired. I hope most of you agree that these issues are not necessarily partisan but American.

These are the sorts of issues that don't go addressed because the American voter has fallen for head fakes the politicians and the media offer for out daily bread. Sickening to see so many great people like those on this board become so wasteful of their intelligence, passion and patriotism.

Keep it up and we'll either become a banana republic with great poverty and severely limited futures (but the the Masters of the Universe in the financial sector who wil move to Switzerland with their billions) or a dictatorship rivaling the likes of Saddam's Iraq before we unjustifiably blew the place to shit.

LongFisher