And it's also a place where they can't attack Americans.
Is that so? Americans use drones, piloted from thousands of miles away to guide their instruments of death. Al-qaeda does the exact same thing but instead of drones they use people to place the bombs in place and detonate them. They're not piloting a sophisticated air craft or pressing a button to fire remotely, but are they not pointing to a map and a calender and setting a plan in motion? The end result is the same except that al-Qaeda targets random people where as the US doesn't. And we know this because if the US was targeting random people they have such a vast array of fire power that they would lay them all to waiste. The US is using an incredible amount of restraint where as al-Qaeda is putting everything it has into killing random people.
You could just put people around the compound, cut him off. Could Osama arrange a helicopter? Maybe, but even then you could follow him. You've got the man power to just take him into custody.
Location and politics prevented that and you know it. Pakistan is not trusted. He was just down the street from Pakistan's "West Point", I'd be suspicious that someone in the know would tip him off. Sure the US could have tried to play fair and follow the Fluffy rules of engagement, but that most likely would have allowed him to get away. There's no prize for finishing second place even if you're really really nice.
They could have taken out O.J. Simpon at any time on that long chase (and they likely would have done if it wasn't O.J.) but the point is that they don't NEED to.
They would have taken him out if he flashed a gun.
Sure it matters - if you are the "Good Guys". If you have overwhelming power and capabilities and superior morals, how can you justify acting like terrorists? What other compounds would you blow up? Is there a bad neighbourhood nearby where all the trouble comes from? Would you blow that up too? Is there room for morals and fairness in the war on crime?
There are a lot of factors involved here. Obviously if you can rely on regular police to do the job, that's how it's done. We've seen al-Qaeda guys arrested throughout the US and Europe and we didn't take them out with a drone strike. We've even seen al-Qaeda guys arrested in some parts of Pakistan and that was because the location was in an area where the Pakistani police were willing and trusted to capture the al-Qaeda guys. Again, no need for a drone strike. But when the al-Qaeda guys hide in the lawless mountain areas that are difficult to reach we've seen that the Pakistanis are reluctant. Similar situation in Yemen and parts of Africa. The question is, what to do about them? If we call off the drone strikes, would al-Qaeda decide to call off their terror campaigns? I seriously doubt it. Most certainly they'd re-establish their madrassas and churn out more, higher quality terrorists. We'd be following Fluffy's rules of engagement but more people would die. Thanks but no thanks.
Well there's a nice admission at the end of that but let me skip back to the start.
Admission of what? Only the guilt make admissions. Stating facts isn't an admission. But that's an interesting ploy to make it look like you're the "Good Guy".
Al Qaeda is not fighting "capitalism" per se but decadence - or, at least, this is the philosophy that spawned it.
Nah, they're not fighting that either. Or at least, that's not why they picked a fight with the US. We covered all this in the lead up to the Iraq invasion. Al-Qaeda wants to topple the House of Saud. They accuse the House of Saud to be illegitimate (and they're probably right about that) and they want to topple it and replace it with their own twisted brand of Islamic rule. I really don't think al-Qaeda gives a shit about America but they care lots about Saudi Arabia. When they attacked NYC in 2001 they made sure most of the attackers were from the Kingdom along with a few from Kuwait. I'm guessing they thought that would create a rift between the US and the House of Saud that they could exploit. It didn't pan out that way and in the end al-Qaeda got hammered in Afghanistan and pounded in Pakistan. I'd bet that al-Qaeda was probably more surprised than anyone to see the US invade Iraq (if they wanted that outcome they probably would have included some Iraqis in the 9/11 plot).
Decadence destroys faith and corrupts the soul - it takes you away from Allah, the pleasures of the world blind you to the rewards of the spirit.
Now you sound like George Bush before the Iraq invasion. "They hate us for our freedom". I thought we were all in agreement that that was a load of BS.
Certainly there are more sophisticated people who plot and carry out attacks and who operate on more sophisticated economic and geopolitical theories like the guys that hit the financial district, the pentagon and quite possibly were hoping to hit the White House too. That was clearly an attack on the US instruments of world power and not a religious statement or a campaign of terror - those were targeted attacks on actual organs of influence projection.
Those were all world famous symbols of US power and everyone was supposed to know that those who did it were from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.
It could be a way to tie Israel's Independence Day to Patriot Day and make it a future Israel/America Solidarity Day. (If it were something like that then don't ever expect the case to get solved).
Nice setup. There's always a chance that they'll never find the bombers regardless of who they are, but now you planted a seed to point us in your favorite direction. There's also a real chance that Israel was behind the attack and that they will be exposed.
One of the things that makes it terrorizing is the senseless randomness of it - but what if there was a specific runner they were trying to kill? Then the dead and injured would just be collateral damage and we'd all feel so much better.
Well, that could be more terrorizing than anything actually. They set of two bombs at the biggest marathon event outside of the Olympics and they failed to kill a single runner. That kind of ruthlessness and capability mixed with bad aim is scary indeed!
But to address that more directly with some examples... A Colombian drug cartel placed a bomb on an airline in an attempt to kill a presidential candidate. The target missed the flight but 110 random people were killed. Oops. Would you call that terrorism or just extreme ruthlessness? I'd probably go with the latter. North Korea bombed Korean airlines flight 858 in an attempt to discourage people from attending the Seoul Olympics in 1988. That was terrorism.
