Where's Bin Ladin? - Page 2

**The Reaper** · 07-07-2007, 14:30

I think that once the next POTUS is installed, I will be very surprised if he is heard from again with a confirmed voiceprint referring to current events.

If we denied he was alive, claimed that he had was dead, he would have to reappear to deny it.

I do not think it could damage our credibility further, and if he were alive, it might be more intel or another opportunity to take him out.

TR

x-factor · 07-07-2007, 14:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

I think that once the next POTUS is installed, I will be very surprised if he is heard from again with a confirmed voiceprint referring to current events.

I'd actually go a step further and say that I'd be surprised if he doesn't try to shake our cage during the 2008 election season like he did in 2004.

The Dave · 07-07-2007, 14:33

I'm going with the dead option. With the dialysis and unlikelihood that he's getting the treatment he would need, that alone leads to me to think he's muerte. On top of that, his lack of any apppearances on video.

JMI · 07-07-2007, 14:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by x-factor

Still, your point is valid. The last time he was seen moving on tape was October 2004 (so 33 months or so).

So I was 7 mos off. Still been a long time. Considering he was in video quite a bit after 9/11, I assume he is either dead, or not doing very well.

**The Reaper** · 07-07-2007, 14:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by x-factor

I'd actually go a step further and say that I'd be surprised if he doesn't try to shake our cage during the 2008 election season like he did in 2004.

That could be true, if he is alive.

I wonder how many voted for President Bush after OBL backed Kerry?

I do not think that he got the outcome he wanted, but could he have made a difference in getting the POTUS re-elected?

Does an attack on the US, threats, or violent rhetoric by terrorists favor the Dems chances, or the Repubs?

TR

x-factor · 07-07-2007, 15:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

That could be true, if he is alive.

I wonder how many voted for President Bush after OBL backed Kerry?

I dso not think that he got the outcome he wanted, but could he have made a difference in getting the POTUS re-elected?

Does an attack on the US, threats, or violent rhetoric by terrorists favor the Dems chances, or the Repubs?

The polls showed that Bush got a bump after the Bin Laden video came out, but I've never seen any electoral analysis call it decisive.

Its a bit of a stretch to say UBL backed Kerry. He did bash Bush pretty vociferously (including on the "my pet goat" Michael Moore line), but he must have considered that might have the reverse effect of helping Bush, so who can say what he was actually trying to do. I think he was probably just trying to sow dissension on all sides. In anycase what he said in addressing "the American people" was neither candidate can protect you, only by total withdrawal from Muslim affairs can you achieve security.

Its hard to say who he would have preferred win in 2004. Its true that Kerry wanted out of Iraq which would have given UBL a major victory but Kerry was also promising to step up operations in AF/PK which UBL might have viewed as a threat (if he put any credence in it). In any case he knew Kerry's election wouldn't have resulted in a full US withdrawal from Islamic lands. I think UBL likes having Bush as President for a couple reasons. Bush because of his straight ahead demeanor (for better and worse) is easier to paint as a zealous "Crusader" which reinforce's UBL's self/public image as a Muslim savoir and helps rally the Muslim world to AQ's cause. Plus Bush has been such a divisive figure in Europe (partly through his own doing, partly through the Europeans' own ridiculousness) that it benefits an AQ divide-and-conquer strategy. Honestly, I think UBL probably viewed the 2004 election as a win-win scenario.

Jihadists generally operate under the assumption that the longer the war goes, the better off they are (regardless of how many individual battles they lose) because they are fighting the "good fight" and so their victory is inevitable. So in some ways I think they view Bush as a guy who plays into their hands by keeping after them. You can hear this in the contemptuous way Zawahiri taunts Bush (like inviting him for a drink at the Iraqi Parliament cafeteria after the bombing)...in some ways, they want him to keep coming because they think thats how they're going to break us.

I think the jihadi strategic blindspot is for the adaptability of the American character. They don't realize that we're not the type of people who just keep blindly moving forward (like the Russians), we're going to find new ideas and better solutions as fast as we can. I think Bush's perseverance in Iraq may actually end up carrying the day by buying time for that quality to come out...so they may have thought they wanted Bush, but they may have been wrong.

As for the domestic side of it...I'm not sure which side, if any, is helped by the perception of threat. People still think of Democrats as soft on national security, but after Iraq alot of them think of Republicans as incompetent. It'll probably come down to a judgement of the individual candidate.

rubberneck · 07-07-2007, 15:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by x-factor

If he were dead, there'd be no way for AQ to contain the news or the infighting. I think he hasn't been on TV because AQ has not had any substantial victories to crow about and they don't want UBL's imaged mired in the day-to-day stuff.

The last known video tape showing OBL was released on October 29th 2004 just a few weeks prior to our general elections. Since then AQ has pulled off two rather large mass murders in Bali (10/1/05) and London (7/7/05). To say that AQ has had no big victories to crow about since the last known video tape is flat out wrong.

x-factor · 07-07-2007, 15:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubberneck

The last known video tape showing OBL was released on October 29th 2004 just a few weeks prior to our general elections. Since then AQ has pulled off two rather large mass murders in Bali (10/1/05) and London (7/7/05). To say that AQ has had no big victories to crow about since the last known video tape is flat out wrong.

Which would explain why there were four Bin Laden audio statements in early 2006 when they had momentum, but none since Zarqawi's death.

Your argument only works if you believe the audiostatements are not actually UBL. That is not unthinkable, but I disagree.

rubberneck · 07-07-2007, 15:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by x-factor

Which would explain why there were four Bin Laden audio statements in early 2006 when they had momentum, but none since Zarqawi's death.

Your argument only works if you believe the audio statements are not actually UBL. That is not unthinkable, but I disagree.

Why audio and not video? Number two never has any problems getting his ugly mug on video, but OBL can't get it done. It is harder to fake audio and video than it is to fake audio alone.

You would think that the head of AQ couldn't pass up the chance to rub our noses in it after those two operations and yet we only got poor quality audio tapes in an era of readily available high fidelity audio eqiupment. You can't swing a dead cat in that region without hitting a cheap knockoff MP3 player and computer, but the head of the worlds largest terror group is using reel to reel recording equipment. If it looks like a duck, walks like at duck and quacks like a duck, chances are it is a duck not an elephant.

x-factor · 07-07-2007, 16:02

There's any number of reasons that he might have preferred audio statements in 2006. In anycase, like I said, its not unthinkable that he's dead and the audio statements are faked, but I don't think its the case.

2018commo · 07-07-2007, 16:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

That could be true, if he is alive.

I wonder how many voted for President Bush after OBL backed Kerry?

I do not think that he got the outcome he wanted, but could he have made a difference in getting the POTUS re-elected?

Does an attack on the US, threats, or violent rhetoric by terrorists favor the Dems chances, or the Repubs?

TR

I believe it depends who enriches the media enough to make it to the main event, could help Rudy or Obama and I kind of expect Clinton and Thompson to implode.
On the way home today, I was thinking it was time to re-read "The Rise and Fall of an American Army". Do you think we might see a jihadist version of Tet prior to the election?

JMI · 07-07-2007, 16:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by x-factor

There's any number of reasons that he might have preferred audio statements in 2006.

Besides being dead, what do you think are some of those reasons?

**The Reaper** · 07-07-2007, 16:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2018commo

Do you think we might see a jihadist version of Tet prior to the election?

Funny you should ask.

Or is Petraeus just hedging his bets?

TR

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,288534,00.html

Gen. David Petraeus: Expect Big Strikes From Al Qaeda
Saturday , July 07, 2007

BAQOUBA, Iraq —

Sunni extremists are likely to try a series of high-profile attacks to grab the headlines ahead of a watershed report to Congress in September on political and military progress in Iraq, the top U.S. commander said Saturday.

"We expect they will try this — pull off a variety of sensational attacks and grab the headlines to create a `mini-Tet,"' Gen. David Petraeus said in an interview with The Associated Press.

He was referring to the 1968 Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Tet offensive that undermined public support for the Vietnam War in the United States. The offensive failed to achieve most of its tactical goal but it shattered political support for the Vietnam War among the U.S. public.

Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker are to present a report to Congress by Sept. 15 on the situation in Iraq. Several Republicans say if progress is not made by then, they may call for a new strategy in Iraq.

The general would not say what he and Crocker plan to tell Congress in the report.

But he added that the two top American officials in Iraq "have a responsibility to produce our assessment of the implications" of "different options."

He would not elaborate, but other U.S. generals have warned in recent weeks against drawing down American troops too rapidly before Iraqi security forces can cope.

Petraeus would not say what measures he would take to prevent a spate of spectacular attacks. He spoke at a U.S. base, Camp Warhorse, on the edge of Baqouba, which had been the self-declared capital of the Al Qaeda front group, the Islamic State of Iraq.

On Saturday, a homicide truck bomber hit an outdoor market, killing and wounding dozens, in the Shiite town of Armili, 100 kilometers (60 miles) of Baqouba. The night before, a homicide bomber hit a funeral in a Kurdish Shiite village northeast of Baqouba, killing 22.

The attacks suggested Al Qaeda militants and other Sunni insurgents have moved further north, to avoid U.S. troops and strike where security is weaker.

U.S. troops have gone on the offensive in Baqouba, 55 kilometers (35 miles) northeast of Baghdad and have gained control of the western half of the city.

U.S. forces have also launched an offensive in areas south of Baghdad, where Al Qaeda and other Sunni insurgents are believed to rig car bombs that strike in the capital.

If U.S. troops can drive the extremists away from strategic areas around Baghdad, they hope to minimize attacks in the capital that draw international attention.

Petraeus said there had been progress in restoring stability in some areas of the country, notably Anbar where Sunni sheiks have turned against Al Qaeda. Last weekend, U.S. troops killed 35 insurgents in what commanders believe was an attempt reinfiltrate Ramadi, the Anbar provincial capital, where extremist attacks have dropped sharply.

At the national government, however, reconciliation efforts among Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish politicians have faltered because of deep differences on power-sharing. Some of the issues, including sharing oil wealth and regional powers, are at the core of the Iraq conflict.

Last year's wave of sectarian killings, which escalated after the February 2006 bombing of a Shiite mosque in Samarra "really tore the fabric" of Iraqi society, Petraeus said.

"At the national level, progress to foster true reconciliation is still a work in progress," Petraeus said. "In some respects we should recognize that these issues are fundamental, that they are doing it in an environment shaped by very bad sectarian violence" last year.

x-factor · 07-07-2007, 17:01

JMI - Maybe there's no video crews in the media arm that they trust enough to bring to a meeting with UBL. Maybe UBL is alive but looking a little weathered and they don't want him to be perceived as weakening. Maybe UBL doesn't want to go back on camera until he's got something really big to say.

Lots of maybes...

2018commo · 07-07-2007, 17:20

[QUOTE=The Reaper]Funny you should ask.

Or is Petraeus just hedging his bets?

TR

I think he might be more afraid of having the carpet pulled out from underneath of him. Which takes us to your other post, are we hearing the truth? I suspect we are not, but without sand in my boots, its just a guess.