>>5
Well, for one thing he isn't fighting numbnuts, that's why we can't catch him. He's *hiding*, he isn't riding out with an AK-47 gunning for the Marines. He's blending in with local tribesmen in Pakistan.
Secondly, from what I gather, the USA Millitary isn't in those regions anymore. What we have going over Tora Bora and Western Pakistan is a remote controlled airplane. So it isn't that easy to pin the man down.
The airplane thing is retarded for a couple of reasons. First, technology can't substitute for boots on the ground or imbedded spies. All OBL has to do to avoid being spotted by the aircraft is *be inside when the plane goes by*. We're monitoring his cell phone and his e-mail. Easy to avoid. Write a fucking letter, tie it to a goat, and pay a shepard $5 to lead the goat to town and send the letter.
The problem we have -- and honestly I think its cultural -- is that we think that throwing enough technology at a problem will solve it. It won't, and in this case, it makes it very easy for Osama to blend in to a low-tech tribe and not have to worry about getting spotted beyond hiding from a drone every few hours. We need more spies, more arabic speakers, more double agents -- people who can pick up on the roumors of OBL. That's the only way to stop terrorism -- have a mole in the cell. There's no substitute for the human touch in this case.
Well, I'd agree with you on Iran, however, with pakistan, the only person even talking about sending in SF troops is Obama. If we were using Osama in Pakistan as a pretext to invasion, why aren't we talking about invading? In fact it's pretty much the excuse for why we *can't* get bin Laden "He's in Pakistan, and Pakistan is our friend. So until he leaves, we can't do anything". So no, OBL in Pakistan isn't about invaasion.