Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (37525)	11/19/2001 8:01:21 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

The man was rich and could have lived anywhere in the world. One of his half brothers lives a comfortable life in Switzerland, several other relatives were happy in the West. Osama chose to run terrorist camps and live on the run. For him not to hide when we came to get him would be stupid. It has nothing to do with cowardice. When the US loses men behind enemy lines we consider them brave when they survive to fight another day. We don't expect them to be "brave" and walk out to be shot. I think you are allowing your prejudices to confuse you. Osama is a very dangerous man. He is not looking for a life of privilege and comfort, he seems to be motivated by real religious zeal. No doubt he values the safety of his person, for he probably sees himself as an important leader in his divine cause (and I suspect he is right about that). He probably also realizes that he will make a very good martyr. Which he will. He dared us to come to Afghanistan because that is what he wants. He wants a holy war between Islam and the West. He would love to see the entire area in flames. I don't think (judging from his interviews) that he is afraid to die, and his "soldiers" certainly are not. I think their actions are motivated by religious zeal and are crazy from my POV of logic and agnosticism. But I do not underestimate the man or his followers by thinking they are cowards. They are committed followers of a holy cause, and those people rarely exhibit cowardice. They exhibit all sorts of other behaviors dangerous to other humans, but rarely cowardice.

To: Bill who wrote (37525)	11/19/2001 8:01:25 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 82486

Not wise to underestimate our enemy. His strategy to go to the caves shows good sense. He has caused the greatest super power of all times to stretch our resources to the max at his challenge while continuing to taunt us. I agree with X; he could have opted for comfort and safety. "And when he's found, he'll surely beg like the coward he is." This is not characteristic but we'll see what the future brings.

To: Bill who wrote (37525)	11/20/2001 7:48:34 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 82486

Whether bin Laden is a coward or not is a somewhat speculative question, at the moment. We can only gauge bravery by a person's behavior at moments of high risk or trouble. Those emergency workers who ran towards the World Trade Center to help were clearly brave, for example. Although it is reasonable enough not to undertake unnecessary risk, it does not speak to the issue of bravery. The general inclination to call terrorists cowards derives from their sneakiness in choosing sporadic targets of opportunity, their failure to identify themselves clearly as combatants, and their propensity to target defenseless civilians, particularly women and children. Admittedly, the introduction of suicide missions complicates the picture. But even suicide is often referred to as "the coward's way out", if it is embraced in lieu of dealing forthrightly with one's problems and responsibilities, so it does not obviously contradict the pattern. The presumption is that terrorists, like bullies, will not only seek a tactical advantage, which is merely prudent, but will solely pick on easy targets, and will cut and run if credibly challenged. Whether or not the paradigm is correct, surely there is plausibility to it: what kind of person deliberately blows up a school bus, for example? Any decent person would rather put himself in harm's way, by mounting an attack on a military target, than sink so low. There is, of course, further reason to presume the cowardice of bin Laden and his associates. They denied responsibility at first, then jeered and dared us to come after them; they hid behind the Taliban, not even, so far as anyone can tell, fighting side by side; the Taliban itself collapsed pretty easily, despite its tough talk; and bin Laden appears to have been bluffing when he foretold some massive retaliation. So far, there is no real evidence of bravery, only the attempt to counter the charge of cowardice. Overall, I would say that there is better reason to suppose him a coward.........