Why is it so important to catch bin Laden?

Question

I hear this over and over again, folks saying that we need to drop everything we're doing and catch the man: get out of Iraq to catch him. Get out of the Philippines to catch him. Get out of Malaysia and Indoniesia to catch him. Cease our operations worldwide to commit every ounce of our resources to catch the man.

Does it occur to anyone that al-Qaeda is much larger than some guy in a cave? Does anyone know how autonomous the whole operations is? Wouldn't it be a better use of resources to actually focus on the people carrying out operations, and the people financing the operations?

Yeah, it would be a nice morale boost to catch him, like landing on an aircraft carrier, but that won't do anything but incite the membership further, especially if he is killed and made a martyr. (He had a dozen bodyguards, all instructed to kill him if he is under threat of capture)

Correction: he HAS a dozen bodyguards

A question for some, especially Beach Bum: Are terrorists affected by morale? A terrorist isn't just someone loves the smell of cordite. These guys are driven by their absolute religious devotion. Their kingdom is not of this world. To them, the victory of Islam is a done deal, Allah has said it. If they are killed, or everyone one of their friends and leaders are killed, it doesn't matter. They have done their duty and earned their reward. Like I said, they are not motivated by worldly concerns.

This is, I think, the most fatal misunderstanding that the western world has of this movement.

Answer 1

Catching Bin Laden would be a purely symbolic victory. It would be good but is not worth spending to much resources on when we have other cats to take care of. The demo politicians are in bad faith trying to use that to make GW look as bad as they possibly can. Remember that while Bush is fighting a war on terrorism, the democrats are fighting a war on Bush. They do not care if they have to hurt the country and help the terrorists to harm Bush.

Answer 2

It would be a moral and just victory. It would both boost American morale and lower Al-Qaeda's morale. Even though the terrorist organization is not as regimented and the capture of bin Laden wouldn't be a huge logistic victory, he is still their figurehead and would be seen as a major defeat for Al-Qaeda. His continued survival, in the face of all that we have already thrown at him, allows him to be a banner that terrorists and wanna-bes can flock around. It shows that someone can stand up to America with relative impunity. (emphasis on relative)

I don't believe we should commit everything we have in the field just to his capture, but we should never have gone into Iraq and left Afghanistan the way we did. Iraq was a major distraction from the "War on Terror" and has only created more problems, not solved any. Because we left for Iraq, bin Laden was able to escape, the Taliban was allowed to go into hiding and is now able to effect a resurgence now, and Afghanistan is now back in turmoil (not to mention the things that happened to Iraq). Unfortunately it may be too late too pull out now...

Answer 3

you talk a lot... but the issue is... no one knows how autonomous they are or how important he is...

I personally think a man that has links to some of the wealthiest people in the middle east and has extensive experience fighting with gorilla tactics is very important... there aren't many out there with his expertise...

and what are you talking about the Philippines for? what do we have like 10 people there?

the key here for me is... you don't know how important he is and it's taking a HUGE GAMBLE that he's not important... I DON'T WANT TO GAMBLE WITH AMERICAN LIVES ANYMORE... WE'VE DONE ENOUGH OF THAT THANK YOU VERY MUCH...

and the other key is... do you think that killing a bunch of foot solders will EVER get us ANYWHERE?

I mean we committed the majority of our forces to Iraq FOR WHAT? their freedom? to not find WMD?

I think bin Laden is infinitely more important than any reason we had to invade Iraq... and if we sent that same force to find bin Laden, I believe we would have caught him by now... and I would rather take him out and it do a lot of good or maybe just some good, than sit around going "MAYBE it won't do any good, so let's not bother"... that's a big maybe...

Answer 4

The "liberals" use Bin Laden's freedom as a cudgel with which to beat Bush about the head (NOT that he cares one whit!).

Otherwise, the whole thing is purely symbolic. I mean, the bum's holed up in a cave making videos! What more could we ask for? He's out of the loop and not a martyr - sounds like the best of both worlds to me!

Answer 5

It is true that he has many bodyguards and that he definitely will not allow himself to be captured alive. These kinds of people cannot face justice (It's like Hitler; some people cannot possibly face justice. So, their only option is then suicide.). But capturing bin Laden would be a symbol of some success in the campaign. Without ever capturing him, there would remain the general perception that terrorism itself can elude defeat. Without capturing the culprits ("dead or alive"), how could success ever be measured? And it is true that his death would make him a "martyr" (in the skewed, non-Christain slant), but this is just the price of gaining a measure of success in the war against terrorism. Remember that, in a war that cannot be won by conventional means (battlefield-type conflicts), you must still find a way to measure your successes.

Answer 6

He is responsible for the September 11 attacks here in the United States

Answer 7

Who said drop everything? You obviously have selective hearing.

He's important to catch because he is a leader and figurehead of Al-Qaeda. Plus he was key to 9/11 and other attacks on US interests-- or did you forget that? His leadership and direction is directly attributable to 1000's of deaths.

Answer 8

Catching the master mind who is responsible for the creation of the worst terrorist group in the world. That act alone would let the others know that any one can be found ......

Answer 9

I think the issue of stopping the financiers and supporters is key. The problem is that are some of our "close allies"--i.e., Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc. And, oh wait, didn't WE support Al Qaeda, just 20 years ago? Let's face it, the U.S. trained those who attack it, , and deliberately ignore those who provide the most support.

Answer 10

He is important bc he is now an icon. He has symbolism. He has meaning. He represents to the American people everything that is wrong in the world: Terrorist.