Bush should use his argument against Pelosi to catch bin Laden
We all know the disdain President Bush has for Speaker Nancy Pelosi, which is particularly heightened with her trip to Syria. Bush has the right to express his opinions; however a significant element of his arguments raise the debate to a higher level and in fact illustrates he does not adhere to his own foreign policy on terrorism. Bush violating his own policy allows Osama bin Laden to remain free.
According to Dubya, states that support or harbor terrorists are enemies of the U.S. and he vows to “fight” them. We’ve heard that ad nauseam. In a New York Times article on Bush’s criticism of Pelosi, the Times reports:
The Bush administration has resisted the idea of opening such a dialogue, citing its view that the country is a state sponsor of terrorism. It accuses the Syrian government of providing militants with safe passage into Iraq and of interfering in Lebanon’s politics after its army was forced to leave there in 2005. Syria denies the accusations.
For Bush, one size does not fit all; with respect to Pakistan and frequently Saudi Arabia, he violates his own policy. That violation allows America’s greatest enemy, Osama bin Laden, to remain free.
It is a well known fact that Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda are in the northwest region of Pakistan, but what’s being done about it? Zip. Yes, Pakistan’s president Pervez Musharraf played a significant role initially in the U.S. retaliation against the Taliban in Afghanistan, but don’t we now have a double-standard in place that is highly contradictory to Bush’s policy and our national security? Why, at this point in time, does Bush not enforce his policy and seek with all vigor America’s greatest enemy?
Musharraf is in a precarious situation; he is pulled in multiple directions, even at the risk of his own life, but what tilts the balance in his favor at the risk of our national security?
I will dial down the rhetoric and make my point. Bush cannot credibly employ his argument against Pelosi in her efforts to bring peace, when he does not enforce his own policy, which allows Public Enemy No. 1 to wander freely.
The reality of the situation is, Bush is trying to enforce a Karl Rove policy - no Democrat shall be allowed to succeed at anything, especially at the expense of a Republican president, even if the president is a delusional idiot.
It is a most stupid thing to say that USAMA BIN LADIN is in northernwestern area of Pakistan as nobody knows where exactly he is (If he is Alive) & as an Afghan,he must be in AFGHANISTAN as there are only nearly 45000 ALLIED forces of U.S & other countries within AFGHANISTAN & only in some parts of Afghanistan but its PAKISTAN who has its 80,000 troops at Afghan border only to help the U.S & remaining 6 Lack & 20 thousand army is within PAKISTAN & this army is also one of the World,s most disciplined & loyal army………..So HOW COME USAMA BIN LADIN BE IN PAKISTAN? ……..THE Afghan Govn.is simply making PAKISTAN a SCAPEGOAT & putting a veil on their negligence……….
My objective was to illustrate Bush’s double standard and not necessarily focus on Pakistan. As to bin Laden’s whereabouts, the vast majority of publicly available information, primarily mainstream news media, places bin Laden in northwest Pakistan. That of course assumes he is alive as you note.
The secondary objective was to draw attention to the failure of the administration to resolve the problem of bin Laden regardless of his location or health status.
I could have just as easily used another country - my comments were not intended to be untoward Pakistan.