# Osama in Afghanistan



## asdf;lkj (2 Apr 2006)

I just watched 60 minutes where they interviewed a guy who was Osama Bin Laden's chief bodyguard just before 9-11. He said he believes that Osama is currently hiding in Afghanistan - and he sounded very sincere and truthful about this. With everything that has gone on recently in Afghanistan, I wonder if that means we're getting close to catching Osama in Afghanistan. It may be a good explanation for the sudden increase in fighting.


----------



## Patrolman (2 Apr 2006)

Or maybe it is the same as every year in Afghanistan. Fighting increases with the melting of snow in the mountain passes.Spring allows more freedom of movement for the Taliban and Al Quieda forces.
 It probably just seems like an increase in violence now that the Canadian media is focusing more on a region that has remained hostile since the initial invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.


----------



## Cloud Cover (2 Apr 2006)

asdf;lkj said:
			
		

> I just watched 60 minutes where they interviewed a guy who was Osama Bin Laden's chief bodyguard just before 9-11. He said he believes that Osama is currently hiding in Afghanistan - and he sounded very sincere and truthful about this. With everything that has gone on recently in Afghanistan, I wonder if that means we're getting close to catching Osama in Afghanistan. It may be a good explanation for the sudden increase in fighting.



Well, I am glad that someone working for T1 "sounded" "sincere and truthful" on TV. I hope it came out that way under the art of persuasion as well.


----------



## tomahawk6 (3 Apr 2006)

AQ will be a problem long after the current leadership is dead.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (3 Apr 2006)

I suppose I would have to quit before turning him in wouldn't I.


----------



## SweetNavyJustice (3 Apr 2006)

Although there is definitely a ton of hiding places in the mountains and villages in Afghanistan I still find it difficult that you can continue to hide a 6'7" individual who needs kidney dialysis on a regular basis......


----------



## Centurian1985 (3 Apr 2006)

Osama is in Afghanistan only in US dreams; try over the border - ever hear of Waziristan? Pakistan! Pakistan! Pakistan! The only the US hasnt invaded yet is that Pakistan has nukes.  :skull:


----------



## pbi (4 Apr 2006)

Centurian1985 said:
			
		

> Osama is in Afghanistan only in US dreams; try over the border - ever hear of Waziristan? Pakistan! Pakistan! Pakistan! The only the US hasnt invaded yet is that Pakistan has nukes.  :skull:



Hmmm....that was a joke, right?  ( I'm a bit slow on these things sometimes.)

Cheers


----------



## Kurhaus (4 Apr 2006)

I don't think that the US is giving much of a priority to catching Bin Laden.  It is more effective having him on the run and looking over his shoulder, instead of letting him have breathing room to plot the next terrorist attacks.  If they happen to catch him during an operation then bonus. :cheers:


----------



## Centurian1985 (4 Apr 2006)

PBI, why do you think I'm joking? It's been my theory since he first disappeared.


----------



## wbbfan (4 Apr 2006)

Binladen may well still be in Afghanistan. I mean, what better place to hide in all the world? Those mountains are soo tricky. Alexander the great died trying to take them. They are virtually impenetrable.
But he can't stay in there forever.
If he isn't there, then he was probably gone before a soldier stepped foot in Afghanistan.


----------



## pbi (4 Apr 2006)

Centurian1985 said:
			
		

> PBI, why do you think I'm joking? It's been my theory since he first disappeared.



I'm referring to the reason you suggest the US does not invade Pakistan, not where OBL is hiding. IMHO such an invasion would cause way, way more problems for the US than it would solve, and would require so much effort to mount and complete that OBL would probably be miles away by the time they reached Islamabad.

Cheers


----------



## Centurian1985 (4 Apr 2006)

Yes, exactly.


----------



## SHELLDRAKE!! (4 Apr 2006)

And yet what can we hope for when he is caught? Years of dragged out court scenes and inevitably he would most likely die in a jail cell that would spark a wave of conspiracy theorists. Milosevic, hussein?


----------



## m410 (4 Apr 2006)

Hopefully the Milosevic farce and continuing Hussein farce will result in a "shoot them in their hole" policy when it comes to capturing future "ace of spades" personalities.


----------



## Cliff (4 Apr 2006)

asdf;lkj said:
			
		

> With everything that has gone on recently in Afghanistan, I wonder if that means we're getting close to catching Osama in Afghanistan.



I think OBL was cancelled out a long time ago.


----------



## George Wallace (4 Apr 2006)

Cliff said:
			
		

> I think OBL was cancelled out a long time ago.


He had some forsight to leave a lot of doctored tapes to send to the media and keep his existence, or lack of, from being doubted.


----------



## Peacenik (5 Apr 2006)

The US is probably already in Pakistan, albeit, likely with ISI handlers.  Mussarraf won a lot of good will
in the opening stages of OEF-Afghanistan by acquiescing to all of the US State department's requests.  
Invading a cooperative country makes little sense.

Osama is likely in the Pak-Afghan border region, whether he is on one side or the other of an imaginary line
makes little difference especially when there is no one patrolling the border...


----------



## pbi (5 Apr 2006)

Peacenik said:
			
		

> The US is probably already in Pakistan, albeit, likely with ISI handlers.  Mussarraf won a lot of good will
> in the opening stages of OEF-Afghanistan by acquiescing to all of the US State department's requests.
> Invading a cooperative country makes little sense.
> 
> ...



When I was in Afgh in 2004/05 there was definitely a working relationship between US forces and the Pakistani forces: there were two Pak LOs in the CJF76 HQ. There were probably US LOs on the other side. The Paks often described  CI ops of division size or bigger, (which interestingly seemed to always kill or capture "foreign fighters" rather than indigenous Paks.) However, the Paks seemed to be very concerned that neither Coalition nor Afgh forces actually entered Pak territory to conduct ops. Cooperation on the ground did not always appear to work very well, and I picked up a distinct impression from the Paks that they were quite cynical about the possibility of Afgh as a successful country, and actually enjoyed it  when their forward troops gave AMF positions a retaliatory pounding on a few occasions, in response to cross-border incidents.

Based on what (little) I have read, ISI may not be a very trustworthy organization, as IMHO it has somewhat split loyalties between Musharraf and the west on the one hand, and a pretty fundamentalist strain of Islam on the other. It may be a miracle that Musharraf has lasted this long.

Cheers


----------



## 043 (5 Apr 2006)

Who cares where he is............it's not like it will change the world when and if he ever gets captured. The Global War on Terrorism will still continue.


----------



## Quag (5 Apr 2006)

As Sweet Navy Justice stated, it's hard to hide such a big man that needs KD treatments everyday.


----------



## Centurian1985 (5 Apr 2006)

PBI, Im glad somebody else realizes that!  Its very difficult to disseminate info on threats to our boys when we are not sure about the loyalty of some of our 'allies'.

I.E. cant say who, but after 911, a couple of guys I worked with were visiting an unspecified 'allied' country and saw a picture of Osama on the conference room wall! (it was reported as 'removed' a week later)  Even worse some of our 'allied' CIVPOL were disseminating fundamentalist-extremist material to locals!


----------



## scoutfinch (5 Apr 2006)

Michael Scheuer, author of Through Our Enemies' Eyes (2003) and Imperial Hubris (2004)  (both originally printed as by *Anonymous*) is of the unequivocal opinion that the ISI is not to be trusted and that Musharref has to play a very astute political game at home lest he be removed from power by the ISI and replaced with a more fundamentalist general.  

By the way, I highly commend both of the above books.  Scheuer was a senior analyst with the CIA (17 years) whose career focussed exclusively on terrorism, Islamic insurgencies, militant Islam and the political machinations of Afghanistan and Pakistan.  He ran the first CIA desk not associated with a geographical region (ie. the South Asia desk) when he was charged with creating, staffing and managing the OBL desk at the CIA.  

I would be very interested in hearing comments from others who have read either of these books.


----------



## Centurian1985 (5 Apr 2006)

I havent read either of these.  Hope they are better than some of the other supposed books by 'experts' who were cashing in on the terrorism craze the last few years.


----------



## scoutfinch (5 Apr 2006)

Both of Scheuer's books were very good, in my opinion.  In a nutshell, he states that OBL has stated his policies aloud for years and that the US _et al_ has failed to listen.  OBL's issues have nothing to do with Western notions of freedom, liberty and democracy as much of the western rhetoric would suggest.  Rather, OBL has his knickers in a twist about what he perceives as anti-muslim American policies including, but not limited to:

(1) US support for Israel; 
(2)  US troops on the Arabian peninsula (particularly in Saudi Arabia);
(3)  US pressure on Arab oil producers to keep the prices of oil artificially low;
(4)  US support for apostate, corrupt and tyrannical Muslim governments (ie. Saudi Arabia); and 
(5) Continuing US presence in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Scheuer basically argues that the US Intelligence Community attempted to warn both the Clinton and Bush admnistration of the threat posed by Al-Qaeda but that most in both administrations thought the OBL Unit was exaggerating the threat.  Moreover, he argues that the current administration is blowing smoke up the American electorates' ass by making OBL into a "anti-Western ideology" demon when in fact they should cast their eyes to American foreign policy if they want to figure out why half of the Middle East wants to exact some sort of revenge against the US.

Scheuer pulls no punches.  He basically says that if the US wants to win the war on terrorism, it will have to go whole hog with the war and stop pandering to international oil conglomerates and stop dancing around troublesome foreign policy issues like Israel.  Bottom line is that the US could win but the electorate might not like the cost.  He bluntly states the facts and then advises Joe Q. Public to deal with it.


----------



## rvdklok (6 Apr 2006)

Bin Laden could have been captured a long time ago.....the only reason why is wasn't, is that his second in command would just take his place, and nothing would change. They're waiting for the oppourtunity to disband the Taliban all together. When this is possible.......it will be then....that Bin Laden is brought to justice.


----------



## scoutfinch (6 Apr 2006)

Haywire said:
			
		

> Bin Laden could have been captured a long time ago.....the only reason why is wasn't, is that his second in command would just take his place, and nothing would change. They're waiting for the oppourtunity to disband the Taliban all together. When this is possible.......it will be then....that Bin Laden is brought to justice.



Source?????

If you can't provide a source, I am calling bullshit on your *opinion*.


----------



## Patrolman (6 Apr 2006)

Osama is Al-Quieda not Taliban!


----------



## 0007 (7 Apr 2006)

Kurhaus said:
			
		

> I don't think that the US is giving much of a priority to catching Bin Laden.  It is more effective having him on the run and looking over his shoulder, instead of letting him have breathing room to plot the next terrorist attacks.  If they happen to catch him during an operation then bonus. :cheers:




_"It's not a matter of whether the war is not real or if it is, victory is not possible! The war is not meant to be won, it's meant to be continuous"_.  I think George Orwell may have been on to something?


----------

