2. A dim Texan with a smelly tie wants to fight Osama Bin Laden "to the death" at the park by Lufkin City Hall. Go get em, Hoss! I think most Americans feel the same way. They'd like to personally throttle OBL, and I daresay most of us would brave the trip to Burnt Scrotum, Waziristan (or wherever he is) to personally kick that spindly diabetic bitch's ass.
But that's the whole point. After 9/11, average American citizens shouldn't feel as if they must become traveling duellists or citizen bounty-hunters so that proper justice can be meted out to extremist leaders who murdered 3000 of our own.
===
[Alright. That set me off. Commence Iraq rant in 3...2...1...]
Today, the White House renewed Bush's vow to get OBL, as Bush had done shortly after 9/11. But a funny thing happened after Bush made that vow-- a few months after the U.S. went into Afghanistan in late 2001, Bush sent Special Forces from Afghanistan to Kuwait (and Iraq). Around the same time, Bush began repeatedly saying he wasn't "truly concerned" about Bin Laden. Then, last year, Bush reiterated his position that hunting Bin Laden down with lots of Special Forces is "not a top priority use of American resources". Hmm
And now in 2007 we get White House Spokesmen Tony Snow cautioning us that the war on terror is "bigger than one person". Yes, no kidding, and thanks for the nice straw man! Hey Snow, do you know what else is "bigger than one person" (i.e. Saddam)? This fantastical democracy-building experiment in Iraq!!
Here are the real questions Snow should answer:
If the war on terror is "bigger than one person", why is the apparent American Resolve For Justice after 9/11 smaller than one man (OBL)?
Why is capturing Bin Laden and Zawahiri a question of American resources instead of American commitment? And why do supporters of our fantastical nation-building quest in Iraq argue just the opposite (it's a matter of commitment, not of resources)? In short, mere months after those towers collapsed, why was it a bigger national priority to bring Saddam Hussein to justice rather than Osama bin Laden? Why did we move heaven and Earth to go after Hussein, but we didn't move heaven and earth to go after OBL?
What are we to tell family members of the incinerated and crushed innocents of 9/11?
Sorry, folks! The thing is, Iraq had "better targets" than Afghanistan. And oil. Plus, Saddam tried to kill Dubya's daddy... so, that's why we focused on Iraq-- and hey, look: We successfully invaded a country and scoured it for a bad man named Saddam, who we found hiding in a hole. We made sure he received the justice he deserved. Hurray! But, see, we can't do that with Osama in Waziristan. It wouldn't be a good use of America's "resources". After all, we have to attend to our endless trillion dollar commitment in Iraq.
===
Labels: Afghanistan, Bush, Iraq morass, links, military, music, OBL, Tejas, tv
