Was it Bush's plan to lure Bin Laden into a false sense of security by doing almost nothing to find him?

Question

I'm sure there's a good explanation.

Answer 1

yes and it's working, if we do nothing long enough he will eventually die of old age. That will show him not to mess with us!

Answer 2

(Damn, I hate sounding like a Bush supporter, but...)

Just because the media didn't report on something doesn't mean nothings being done. It only means that the media isn't reporting it.

They'd love to be the first to report the headline "Bin Laden Captured Alive, To Stand Trial". Do you have any idea what that would do for their ratings?

Problems arise when they report too much on a particular subject: people become disinterested and change the channel. Want an example? I stopped watching TV for several months during the O.J. Simpson trial because I simply didn't care enough. I'm sure I wasn't the only one.

Headlines such as "Raid Misses Bin Laden by Mere Moments" get old pretty fast.

Answer 3

Bush abandoned the serious hunt for the terrorists and Bin Laden as soon as he could to attack Iraq. He was so desperate to attack Iraq that he accepted flimsy evidence as reasons to do so. Then, after finding out the intel was bad, he moved ahead anyway. Nothing was going to stop Bush from attacking Iraq. Not while he had a nation grieving over 9/11 and ready to jump on the war bandwagon at a moment's notice. We all supported the attack on Afghanistan. I'm not a warmonger but I was thirsting for the blood of Bin Laden and the terrorists. Then, poof! Iraq became the priority. When it started to get dicey was when a great many of us realized that there was no proof that Hussein was going nuclear and no WMDs could be found. When it really hit the fan was when Bush had to admit that Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. For just a little while there the whole nation was collectively going...okay...um why are we there again? Not to worry, the Bush Machine just pushed another button - the "we have to save these people from Saddam" button. There was and still is no shortage of outrageous reasons we ended up in Iraq. Bin Laden? If I have my time change figured out right, he's eating lunch about now and considering making yet another taped message for the rest of us to gnaw on.

Answer 4

Oh I don't know But I think it was best spoken By The President when one of the new reports asked him about Ben Ladin and The President replied BEN Who!!! Think that says it all.

As for the person who's brother is fighting in this war. The question was mostly meant as a dig. Many people feel that President Clinton didn't do his job by not finding Ben Ladin when he had attacked During the Clinton Administration. It has been over five years since the attack of 9/11 with miltary and The Bush Adminstration has still not found Ben Ladin. People are saying 9/11 is Clintons fault for not find Ben. Bush still hasn't found him either.

Answer 5

i think of that's a tactic. you are going to be waiting to grant a very good pretext for sending troops to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan. intentionally not shooting Bin encumbered is a very good excuse to proceed occupying those international places and lead the full international to have confidence which you're struggling with a conflict against terrorism.

Answer 6

Iraq has taken our eye off of Bin Laden.

Answer 7

Is this about them playing hid and seek in the White house?

Go big Red Go

Answer 8

President Bush thinks he has changed his name from Osama to Obama and is hiding in Congress.

Answer 9

i don't think you guys have your facts straight....my brother is over there right now looking for Bin Laden.....but hey let's make light of the situation and take for granted that are troops are over there fighting and dying everyday......

Answer 10

Yes, good isn't it. Subtle George, that's our man.