If we had killed Osama in 2001 or 2002, it would have served as a symbol of our retaliatory capabilities against someone who really hurt us.

I’m pretty sure, though, if OBL was captured or killed on Bush’s watch, the Netroots would find something wrong with it.

Had OBL been captured or confirmed dead in 2002, much of the left– especially the Netroots — would have been calling for the immediate end of the war on terrorism. After all, OBL is the only terrorist in the whole freakin’ world.

I realize we have sandbox geniuses like Chrissy who have never served and whose military experience comes from playing with their GI Joes but really such comments don’t pass the laugh test.

A handfull of special ops troops destroyed the Taliban, a feat 150,000 Russian troops couldn’t do in years of hard combat. So much for Chrissy’s analysis.

Chrissy your friends shouldn’t let you post while you’re so drunk, if you had any friends and they cared.

I thought my comment was clear but I should have been more specific. I don’t care if a Republican or a Democratic President gets OBL.

I’m glad he’s still around to spread some healthy disillusionment among the faithful. I can’t imagine a more potent weapon.

Molon Labe – If that is what people are asking, then that, in my opinion, is the problem. We are not fighting Osama bin Laden, we are fighting Islamism. Once the West actually understands that, then we will be closer to ending this war. But, right now, the West is still capitulating to the demands of the Islamists all over the world, including here in the United States.

Militarily in Iraq, we have made much progress with the Iraqi people and helping liberate them and get them on the road to democracy. However, we have made no progress in the ideological war since 9/11. And, I would argue, that we have regressed, what with President Bush calling Islam a “religion of peace” and capitulating to the likes of CAIR and the ISNA and the MSA and the Muslim Brotherhood and bending over with regards to the Mohammad Cartoons and “Islamophobia” and the Swedish Cartoons, etc.

In WWII, we were fighting Naziism and Communism and we recognized that Ideological reality. In Viet Nam, we were fighting the spread of Communism and recognized that Ideological reality. Now, because of our politically correct society, no leaders are coming out to state the fact that we are at war with Political Islamism.

Instead, we are sitting here having meaningless discussions about the “importance” of Osama bin Laden.

Imagine if we ignored Naziism during WWII and recognized it as some sort of relevant “religion” and only focused on finding and killing Hitler.

Who could watch that and not ask “Why are we spending so much blood and money fighting *that* assclown?”

Zarqawhi was hunted for years within a country we have 120,000 troops in before we got him.
What makes anyone think we can stroll into Waziristan and just kick in a few doors, hook Bin Laden up and leave?

Right now Pakistan is on simmer. The secularists hold sway. An invasion of its territory could topple that delicate balance and in the end it wouldonly maybe net us a figure head.
As long as he stays up in the middle of nowhere Pakistan, I say let him die a slow miserable isolated death and our only response to his videos should be to laugh and mock his ineffective cowardice.

In WWII, Hitler was not the problem. Naziism was the problem.

Here, Osama bin Laden is – and was never – the problem. Islam is the problem.

When I see my political “leaders” with the gonads to actually address the real problem instead of playing politics by talking tough about Osama bin Laden, then I will take them seriously.

To put it simply, I don’t care about politicians’ opinions about Osama bin Laden, I care about their opinion on the threat of Islam and creeping shari’a law in Western Society in general and here in America specifically.

This debate about Osama bin Laden and his importance is a nice way of not talking about the most important issue of this entire “war on terror”.