RECENT POSTS
- Oprah, Health Care Lobbyists, Among Recent Visitors to White House
- An Obama Thanksgiving Menu, with an Extra Serving of Pie
- White House Thanksgiving Traditions: Broken and Observed
- Obama, GOP Air Differences Over Jobs, Economy In Thanksgiving Addresses
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Is PEBO Changing the Goal When it Comes to Capturing or Killing bin Laden?
January 14, 2009 6:31 PM
In an interview with Katie Couric to air on CBS Evening News tonight, President-elect Obama uses new language when discussing how critical it is to capture or kill Osama bin Laden -- language that seems to cast the capture or killing of Osama bin Laden as less critical than he once said it was.
Today Mr. Obama said the following when asked what he will do differently to bring Osama bin Laden to justice.
OBAMA: "Well, I think-- I talked frequently during this campaign that we took our eye off the ball when we invaded Iraq. And now it's done. My job is to withdraw in a responsible way from Iraq and stabilize the situation there. But our real focus has to be on Afghanistan, the border regions between Afghanistan and Pakistan. And we have to put as much pressure on them as possible. I've already spoken to my National Security team about how we're going to do that. And I'm confident that we can keep them on the run and ensure that they cannot train terrorists to attack our homeland. That's my number one priority as President of the United States."
COURIC: "How important do you think it is, Mr. President-elect, to apprehend Osama bin Laden?"
OBAMA: "I think that we have to so weaken his infrastructure that, whether he is technically alive or not, he is so pinned down that he cannot function. My preference obviously would be to capture or kill him. But if we have so tightened the noose that he's in a cave somewhere and can't even communicate with his operatives then we will meet our goal of protecting America."
Video can be watched HERE. (Please excuse the commercial for the sitcom "Gary, Unmarried")
Mr. Obama's language today seems to lower the bar on how critical he thinks it is to capture or kill bin Laden.
On 60 Minutes on November 16, 2008, Steve Kroft asked the President-elect "Where does capturing or killing Osama bin Laden fall" in terms of military priorities, Mr. Obama responded: "I think it is a top priority for us to stamp out al Qaeda once and for all. And I think capturing or killing bin Laden is a critical aspect of stamping out al Qaeda. He is not just a symbol, he's also the operational leader of an organization that is planning attacks against US targets."
In both instances, Mr. Obama emphasizes bin Laden's role as operational leader of a terrorist group, but in November he said capturing or killing OBL was "critical." Today he said it would be his "preference" though cutting OBL off from communication with his operatives would meet his goal.
-- jpt
January 14, 2009 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (28)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
The campaign is over and now those silly promises look, well, silly. Nabbing bin Laden was never of vital importance to the overall GWOT. Why do you think Bush/Cheney toned down the "dead or alive" rhetoric? I mean besides the fact that they really couldn't get him...
Posted by: matt | Jan 14, 2009 7:19:41 PM
Obama is the twin brother of Bush.
Posted by: kennedy | Jan 14, 2009 7:19:10 PM
"And all this glory for a president elect who won't even raise his hand to our flag."
Raise his hand?
Don't you mean place his hand over his heart?
Raising his hand would be a different salute, would it not?
Posted by: Ryan C | Jan 14, 2009 7:15:27 PM
"whether he is technically alive or not"
"Technically"?
Obama knows bin Laden has been dead for years.
So why the charade? Who is making these tapes?
The "War on Terror" has been a massive fraud to justify resource wars of aggression and a bonanza for the Pentagon and the spooks, and bin Laden has been its official bogeyman.
Posted by: dragon | Jan 14, 2009 7:11:44 PM
"I guess everyone also chooses to forget the 911 attacks and that the very soldiers they insult regarding the war in Iraq are protecting us from what could be further attacks."
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and Iraq was not planning on attacking us.
But like a true right winger you use the valor of American service men and women to hide behind while you tell lies.
Posted by: Ryan C | Jan 14, 2009 7:11:19 PM
I think this nation will soon find out that our president elect will be "backing up" on alot of issues. Everyone is looking at him for change and I hope for the sake of this nation, his idea and America's idea is the same and not some hidden agenda. I have lost a lot of respect for him for disrespecting our current president so obviously and by his comments. Bush may not have been the greatest president of all times but he deserves to go out with a modicum of respect. I guess everyone also chooses to forget the 911 attacks and that the very soldiers they insult regarding the war in Iraq are protecting us from what could be further attacks. And all this glory for a president elect who won't even raise his hand to our flag. Shame on him and those who follow so BLINDLY.
Posted by: Kroyal | Jan 14, 2009 7:08:33 PM
How is this changing the goal? Senior Bush administration officials admitted that they quit looking for Bin Laden. Bush himself said he didn't "spend much time thinking about him."
The fact that Obama wants to go in there and choke Bin Laden out is already a ratcheting up. And I'm all for it. It's how we should have been operating all along. Well done, Barack!
Posted by: ElodieStClair | Jan 14, 2009 6:41:34 PM
To be honest, I see the skepticism that Bin Laden is even alive in his 2nd answer.
Posted by: Ryan C | Jan 14, 2009 6:40:56 PM
Post a comment
