How come we can dig Saddam out of a hole in the ground but we can't capture Osama?
821273
I can't think of one excuse... I mean, we only had about a fifth the men in Afghanistan as we do in Iraq... maybe that has something to do with it?\n\nI'm sure you'll get plenty of excuses though...
362115
No! Saddam deserved everything he's getting!Osama will probably end up in a hole too and we'll em!
1045997
america is surely "looking" for bin laden, but even if we do get him, he probably will not die. the u.s. needs people like him to cause trouble so it gives us a reason to place troops in different areas. in a perfect world, the u.s. would keep their noses out of other nations' business. the majority of the terrorism that we suffer from basically started when we recognized israel as a country. it also doesn't help that we are predominately christian and they are muslims either.
532875
you cant because he didn't do it, Bush was the mastermind not bin laden, the link below will opne your eyes to the greed and evil of the right wing.
302138
If anyone knew, don't you think someone would have caught him by now? The reward for information or action that leads to his capture is in the millions. Someone would come forward if they knew and were willing to talk about it.
727445
Saddam's not dead yet.  Do you mean Usama bin Laden?
257079
It was not for want of trying that Bush and Blair failed to find a real reason.   To attack Iraq will go down in history as the dumbest move ever.   Sorry - the second dumbest : the first was to take Saddam alive AND PUT HIM ON TRIAL!!   This farcical process matches the one against Slobodan Milosovich at the Hague and is going the same way, with a fairly good- and straight-looking defendant outshining his prosecutors in every way, just as Milosovich did at the Hague, and Goring and Streicher did at Nuremberg (another kangaroo court).
769090
As some one once pointed out "the big difference between Bin Laden and Saddam is that we don't have Bin Laden's zip code" i.e. The USA couldn't find him, so they opted to go after some one else who they knew where to find.
687630
We have Special Forces on hand.\n\nIf we invaded Iran, he'd just escape again, like he did in Afghanistan.  We'd just send in Delta Force (or other relevant group) and capture him.  No one would even know we were there.\n\nIf we are going to disengage from Iraq (which we should), it's not goignt to be just to chase after bin Laden.\n\n'Cause when we invade, we like to make sure the country in question is NOT involved in international terrorism!
607178
Yes, he is protected by factions of the IIS, the Pakistani counterpart to our CIA. I think we will get him, but I don't understand why it's taking so long. I also think he's in a more urban area than people realize.
173142
What will the the good thing if we catch him. There are no good reason. The dumb people in middle-east will be out-raged and plan more attack on U.S. But mainly, why would Bush catch Him? He is practically an ally of Conservatives. Employed by CIA.
276742
Exactly. I never understood why we went into Iraq.\n\nBy the way, read these real Bush quotes:\n\n"The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him." \n--GW Bush, 9/13/01\n\n"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."\n--GW Bush, 3/13/02
577510
It seems that our government has failed us at every level to me... first with Clinton, as you have stated, but his failures is no excuse for the current presidency not taking further action to catch bin Laden now... I'm not even going to talk about pre-911 failures, which I think there were some by both Bush and Clinton\n\nNow that we have seen what he is capable of, we still haven't caught him... which to me is much less excusable than not catching him before we knew what he was capable of... and I think we're open to other attacks now... \n\nwe should not look to the past and pointing fingers anymore, at Bush or Clinton, but talk about what we should be doing now... which if you ask me, is focusing on Bin Laden
1155408
People seem to have forgotten how the Taliban and rebels in Afganistan whipped the butts of the Russians when they tried to capture Afganista. The United states helped the Afganis with intel and arms, and Russia still lost. Bin laden was involved then, we supported him and his fight against the Russians. Bush policies had nothing to do with 9/11, that was a result of failed policies and promises made by Carter and his administration. It just happens that Bush was on duty when Bin laden put his plan into action. It's all about oil. It has always been about oil. Chasing down zarqawi is more for the press and to show the people back home that progress is being made in Iraq. We don't know what is really going on off camera. Zarqawi was self appoined to lead al-quida in Iraq. There have been reports that binladen didn't like him pitting shiites against sunnis and killing other muslims. The question still remains, should we be in iraq? It doesn't matter now, we are there, we need to send more troops, clean up that place and  get out. Then send our Iraq troops to Afganistan, and clean house there also, then build that darn pipeline.
1182805
I wouldn't say Baker gave Saddam permission.  It was more of a the US will look the other way.
433364
You know, I've wondered that myself. Don't forget, Osama worked for the Central Intelligence Agency back in the 1980s when he was fighting the Russians in Afghanistan. I have wondered if they never dropped him off the payroll.\n\nAs to why he hasn't been arrested, even though the CIA knows where he is. It is because he is in Waziristan, which is in western Pakistan. The US government, and rightly so, is worried that an incursion into Pakistan to arrest Osama would destabilize the Pakistani government, potentially leading to their overthrow by fundamentalists.\n\nAnd as you probably know, Pakistan has nuclear weapons. Having fundamentalist loons with nukes is about the worst case scenario, period. So Bush lets Osama roam free because he wants to keep Musharraf in power.
665492
No, my guess is that we've already found him and are monitoring him heavily. If it were publically annoucned that he was captured, then a LOT more people would want America to pull out of Iraq/Middle East. So I think we've found him, I mean, he's not really a major threat anymore. Did you see his last tape? It was a 'Oh well I guess I'll compromise and stop killing people if you leave Afghansitan and Palestine, but if you don't and you do find me, I will die a holy man.' the point is is that he is clearly beginning to fear his own death, so something's up.