>>This point goes to you. I don't have a problem with him hiding. Or retreating, assuming that Afghanistan is the battle rather than the war. If it's the war, then there's cowardice involved. I can also find cowardice in his putting Afghan civilians at risk to the extent that they would have been safe had he just turned himself in. Yes, indeed.<<
In order to retreat you have to first put up a fight. Did you see Osama fighting anywhere?
He's hiding. He's allowing others to fight for him. Obviously he not forcing the Taliban to fight, but he is most decidedly using their willingness (sporadic and weak thought it may be) to give him more time and cover hiding.
I specifically brought up him donning a burqa because I had heard a report that he might have in fact done just that. The military analysts suggested that it would have been most likely an unsuccessful attempt to escape since he is so tall, he would have been noticeable in any event. Especially wearing a burqa. <vbg>
However assuming the guy wasn't 6'4" or whatever he is and he donned a burga in an effort to escape, I would consider that a cowardly act. It would be yet another situation where he put his well being and safety over others. Inserting himself into a group of fleeing refugee women exposing them to potential deadly crossfire should he be detected.
So I have a big problem with hiding when hiding CREATES an atmosphere of harm for those not so well equipped to hide. The children of Afghanistan do not have the money and wherewithal to hide in a cave or move about surreptitiously. The are simply "exposed". They have to rely on their parents and concerned other's ability to spirit them out of harms way. They are dirt poor, unlike the muli-millionaire bin Laden.
So it does appear you are seeing at least some acts of cowardice on his part since he is in fact putting Afghan civilians at risk.
So why you are having such difficulty in calling him a coward, I'm not sure I understand.
Finally, and I do not wish to belabor this point any further, I believe by including a substantive (though disputed) descriptive term like "coward" along with your non-sensical list of terms has the effect of "equating". And that is why it appears to trivialize. Saying he is "ugly, cold, dishonest, dirty, violent, disloyal, stupid, unmanly, [and cowardly]. And short, fat, and can't dance, too [sic] boot>>"
connotes the same value to coward, imo(irrational or nonsensical). It may not be your intent, but I do think it is the net effect.
Along with your "Osama is Bad" therefore "Osama is a Coward" logic. It implies there is no real rational thought given to the notion as to underlying reason WHY one might consider him a coward, only that he is "bad" person.
And, btw...you're arguing bin Laden is NOT a coward is no more courageous than my arguing that the hijackers WERE brave.
<gg> |
