CIA Rushing Resources to Bin Laden Hunt
March 05, 2007 3:47 PM

Brian Ross Reports:

Armed with fresh intelligence, the CIA is moving additional man power and equipment into Pakistan in the effort to find Osama bin Laden and his deputy Ayman al Zawahri, U.S. officials tell ABC News.

"Reports that the trail has gone stone cold are not correct," said one U.S. official. "We are very much increasing our efforts there," the official said.

People familiar with the CIA operation say undercover officers with paramilitary training have been ordered into Pakistan and the area across the border with Afghanistan as part of the ramp-up.

Although never publicly acknowledged, Pakistan has permitted CIA teams to secretly operate inside Pakistan.

Pakistan officials say they are aware that CIA teams have increased their presence in northern Waziristan since last September when Pakistan withdrew its troops from the area under a much-criticized "peace deal" with tribal leaders.


Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell testified last week that current intelligence "to the best of our knowledge" puts both bin Laden and al Zawahri in Pakistan. It was the first time a high-ranking U.S. official publicly identified Pakistan as bin Laden's hiding place.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/03/cia_rushing_res.html


I thought Bush had forgotten about Bin Laden? You liberals have been crying "where is Bin Laden"....well it looks like he is in Pakistan......

boy I bet if we followed him into Pakistan without the Pakistan approval you libs would be crying and whining about how we were invading another country.......

you libs dont care about finding this terrorist...only how you can blame America for everything while under republican leadership.....

"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."

"I am truly not that concerned about him."

Guess who said both quotes? But let's not let facts interfere with agendas.

bin laden turned 50 yesterday. maybe thy can detectth heat of the birthday candles on the cake?

Wow, what a change an election makes, huh? Suddenly we're back on task.

Wow, what a change an election makes, huh? Suddenly we're back on task.


Like FL said.

And.. I just heard Bush outed the CIA agents hunting OBL..:p

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/03/cia_rushing_res.html


I thought Bush had forgotten about Bin Laden? You liberals have been crying "where is Bin Laden"....well it looks like he is in Pakistan......

boy I bet if we followed him into Pakistan without the Pakistan approval you libs would be crying and whining about how we were invading another country.......

you libs dont care about finding this terrorist...only how you can blame America for everything while under republican leadership.....

He should have been dead 6 years ago. He attacked the United States and walked away from it, and that's something that you're proud of?

OBL's continued survival is political power to the democrat party. The last thing they want to see is him being de-liced like Saddam was.

Capturing and killing OBL will not do a thing now. Six years ago? Perhaps, when AQ was largely centralized and little known. Now, however, so many years on, the organization has grown beyond this one guy. In the post-Iraq invasion era, no one guy defines radicalism anymore.

I'm not saying it would be a bad thing to capture him but it won't change a thing in the larger scheme of things. Al Zarqawi's death in Iraq changed what, exactly? :|

couldn't even make it through 10 words without crying 'lib'...

Capturing and killing OBL will not do a thing now. Six years ago? Perhaps, when AQ was largely centralized and little known. Now, however, so many years on, the organization has grown beyond this one guy. In the post-Iraq invasion era, no one guy defines radicalism anymore.

I'm not saying it would be a bad thing to capture him but it won't change a thing in the larger scheme of things. Al Zarqawi's death in Iraq changed what, exactly? :|

This is where I disagree with you. There were voices that said the exact same thing with every top AQ leader and opponent we took out. Captured Saddam, "doesn't mean anything". Killed Saddam's sons, "doesn't mean anything". Take out AQ's top man in Iraq, "doesn't mean anything". It does mean something. You can't keep taking out the guys at the top without forcing the organization to ungergo fundamental changes. At the very least, it disrupts plans and chains of command. Even if the organization is set up to handle disruptions, killing the top leaders causes problems. And the higher you go, the more disruption it causes. Taking out OBL would be a big morale booster for American troops, and Bush would reap rebound credit. I think that's one reason why some people keep insisting that no matter how big or small a step we take, "it doesn't matter".

Osama is hero to many on the left but they lack the backbone to admit it.

how do you figure? back that up...

how do you figure? back that up...

What, you've never seen or spoken to radical leftists living in the U.S? The enemy of my enemy is my friend has never been more true. Factor in the lefts indulgence to stop the war in Iraq, the western front in the war against Osama, is just as treasonous an act as if they were accepting campaign donations from Bin Laden himself. Democratic action since the election has damaged the U.S. militaries ability to win this war more than Al Quaida or it's proxy fighters could ever hope to.

This is where I disagree with you. There were voices that said the exact same thing with every top AQ leader and opponent we took out. Captured Saddam, "doesn't mean anything". Killed Saddam's sons, "doesn't mean anything". Take out AQ's top man in Iraq, "doesn't mean anything". It does mean something. You can't keep taking out the guys at the top without forcing the organization to ungergo fundamental changes.

But the fundamental changes you mention already occured. That's my point. Zarqawi's death was a good thing, to be sure, but it did not alter the savage nature of the insurgency. Even Saddam's execution didn't change the course of things measureably (indeed, if anything things may be getting worse since that event...)

Taking out OBL would be a big morale booster for American troops...

...and that's about all it would be. Imagine the boost to the country had Bush stuck to it and gotten the guy in the days or months following 9/11?

and Bush would reap rebound credit. I think that's one reason why some people keep insisting that no matter how big or small a step we take, "it doesn't matter".

One measures the comparative importance of a "step" by the real impact it would have. Getting OBL now, six years or so after 9/11, after six years of AQ morphing and OBL's personal importance within the organization waning would actually have little effect on your security in terms of operations planned and financed by the guy. And who knows, it might backfire: a martyred OBL may prove to be more deadly to you than a cave-dwelling one...

Bush, as a 30%-approved lame-duck, might now see the potential for tremendous political gain in getting OBL (as opposed to several months after 9/11 when he simply didn't care and said as much) but again, this doesn't resonate as a particularly important gain from the perspective of your national security.

What, you've never seen or spoken to radical leftists living in the U.S? The enemy of my enemy is my friend has never been more true. Factor in the lefts indulgence to stop the war in Iraq, the western front in the war against Osama, is just as treasonous an act as if they were accepting campaign donations from Bin Laden himself. Democratic action since the election has damaged the U.S. militaries ability to win this war more than Al Quaida or it's proxy fighters could ever hope to.

radical to the point of having osama as a hero? yeah maybe, but very few and far between...
I agree that dem's actions have undermined the military's abilities and efficiency, but the same can be said of members of the gop...

If OBL were to be caught, it would be a great morale boost for both our troops and the citizens. The fact he is still running around free has the oppostie effect.
Perhaps capturing him would adverse affect AQ, maybe it wouldn't. Either way, it would be beneificial.
And this idea that "liberal" equals "terrorist" is ridiculous. The expression of oppossing viewpoints is what has made our country a world power. The lack of it will remedy that situation though. When all you care to deal with is one narrow way of looking at the world, you run a high risk of being wrong for a long time due to an inability to examine your own belief systems.

Killing Bin Laden would serve as a morale boost for American troops and citizens, and it would ALSO serve as a morale boost for Al-Queda. You gotta remember, these guys glorify death. If you think you can defeat the organization by killing its leader, you don't understand our enemy. The only way to defeat them would be to remove their reason for existence, which is not love for Bin Laden, but rather hate for Israel.

OBL's continued survival is political power to the democrat party. The last thing they want to see is him being de-liced like Saddam was.

Seems Bush is in step with the dems on this one though.

Killing Bin Laden would serve as a morale boost for American troops and citizens, and it would ALSO serve as a morale boost for Al-Queda. You gotta remember, these guys glorify death. If you think you can defeat the organization by killing its leader, you don't understand our enemy. The only way to defeat them would be to remove their reason for existence, which is not love for Bin Laden, but rather hate for Israel.
Our enemies love martyrs, yes. And killing Bin Laden might do nothing more than make him a martyr. That is no reason to let Bin Laden live though.
He organized an attack on the US that killed thousands. Under our system, that means he should die. I don't give a damn how that affects AQ's morale. But I'm pretty sure it would boost ours.

OBL's continued survival is political power to the democrat party. The last thing they want to see is him being de-liced like Saddam was.

This is why Red Party nutjobs are so afraid of Democrats. Because this is how they think and they assume it must be how their oponents think.

Our enemies love martyrs, yes. And killing Bin Laden might do nothing more than make him a martyr. That is no reason to let Bin Laden live though.
He organized an attack on the US that killed thousands. Under our system, that means he should die. I don't give a damn how that affects AQ's morale. But I'm pretty sure it would boost ours.

If your objective is revenge, then yeah killing Bin Laden would make us all feel great. But if your objective is to win the war and prevent future terrorist attacks, killing Bin Laden won't make a difference. It might even push us in the wrong direction, because he would become a martyr.

If your objective is revenge, then yeah killing Bin Laden would make us all feel great. But if your objective is to win the war and prevent future terrorist attacks, killing Bin Laden won't make a difference. It might even push us in the wrong direction, because he would become a martyr.
So the message we want to send to our enemies is if you kill thousands of US citizens we'll let you live because killing you might make you a martyr? I whole heartedly disagree if that's your position.
I think you do have a point with the martyr argument. However, letting OBL live is a sign of weakness on our part. If we do intend to continue as a superpower in the world, enemies that attack us cannot be allowed to walk free. OBL must either be killed or captured and tried in our legal system. Death or due process are valid options, but letting him walk free...I don't think so.

If your objective is revenge, then yeah killing Bin Laden would make us all feel great. But if your objective is to win the war and prevent future terrorist attacks, killing Bin Laden won't make a difference. It might even push us in the wrong direction, because he would become a martyr.

That could be overcome by this. Bin Laden isn't just a figurehead. He's the brains behind AQ. Unless he has retired and isn't leading anything any more, taking him out certainly would at the very least force AQ to change, as they would have lost their leader and organizer.

That could be overcome by this. Bin Laden isn't just a figurehead. He's the brains behind AQ. Unless he has retired and isn't leading anything any more, taking him out certainly would at the very least force AQ to change, as they would have lost their leader and organizer.

You are really giving these guys way too much credit. Running this kind of a guerilla war is hardly brain-surgery. I think too many people see OBL as this guy in a control room in a secret mountain lair devising evil plots. In reality he's just a guy with some money and some connections running a guerilla war. The command and control structure that they did have, which must have taken more than a few years to build, has been essentially destroyed. It is now small, independent cells getting the occaisional pre-recorded pep-talk from a guy hiding out in some of the crummiest parts of the world.

You are really giving these guys way too much credit. Running this kind of a guerilla war is hardly brain-surgery. I think too many people see OBL as this guy in a control room in a secret mountain lair devising evil plots. In reality he's just a guy with some money and some connections running a guerilla war. The command and control structure that they did have, which must have taken more than a few years to build, has been essentially destroyed. It is now small, independent cells getting the occaisional pre-recorded pep-talk from a guy hiding out in some of the crummiest parts of the world.
These guys to whom we are giving too much credit did bring down the Twin Towers on 9/11 did they not?
Plus, I don't see how you can claim to have knowledge about whether AQ is capable of damaging us again. If our government can't find Bin Laden, I'd wager you don't know more than they do about the state of terrorist organizations.