Glenn Beck raised a brilliant point today. Our security people knew where Osama was. They knew exposing his whereabouts, either through an arrest or a kill team, would likely rupture our relationship with Pakistan. Politicians would rightfully demand to know why we were sending billions to a country that must have been complicit on some level with osama. That aid is all that keeps radicals from seizing powere there. The pakistan government would face a tremendous backlash from osama supporters. Even freeing the american diplomat being held illegally in pakistan would become more difficult, not that the media seem to give a crap about him any more.
Taking action against osama would also risk tremendous upheaval throughout the middle east and possible retaliation against us or europe.
Moreover, by killing him or openly arresting him, we would forfeit the priceless opportunity to interrogate him, not least about a possible rogue nuke that al qaeda supposedly has. After a thorough interrogation under the supervision of ACLU lawyers, then we could have tried him. Only kidding, after waterboarding him and torturing him for months, we could have dragged what was left of him out to some desert and pretended to have captured and killed him there.
Now the question is, why would Obama give the order to send in a kill team, when killing osama or arresting him, would lead to all these problems and missed opportunities? Why not do a snatch and grab operation, kill everyone else at the compound and disguise it?
Beck hypothosized three alternatives. 1. Obama wanted the political boost from a public triumph. 2. They had other plans, but the crashed chopper scuppered them. 3. For some reason, perhaps not wanting to be put in a position where torture was called for, they didn't want to take him alive.
It's all very fascinating. I also find it interesting that they are releasing pictures, knowing the likely impact. This is an administration after all that criticized an obscure pastor for burning a koran because the act would offend muslims. Isn't releasing pictures of a trophy kill infinitely more inflamatory?
Taking action against osama would also risk tremendous upheaval throughout the middle east and possible retaliation against us or europe.
Moreover, by killing him or openly arresting him, we would forfeit the priceless opportunity to interrogate him, not least about a possible rogue nuke that al qaeda supposedly has. After a thorough interrogation under the supervision of ACLU lawyers, then we could have tried him. Only kidding, after waterboarding him and torturing him for months, we could have dragged what was left of him out to some desert and pretended to have captured and killed him there.
Now the question is, why would Obama give the order to send in a kill team, when killing osama or arresting him, would lead to all these problems and missed opportunities? Why not do a snatch and grab operation, kill everyone else at the compound and disguise it?
Beck hypothosized three alternatives. 1. Obama wanted the political boost from a public triumph. 2. They had other plans, but the crashed chopper scuppered them. 3. For some reason, perhaps not wanting to be put in a position where torture was called for, they didn't want to take him alive.
It's all very fascinating. I also find it interesting that they are releasing pictures, knowing the likely impact. This is an administration after all that criticized an obscure pastor for burning a koran because the act would offend muslims. Isn't releasing pictures of a trophy kill infinitely more inflamatory?
