Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
May 4, 2011
Eric Robert Bin Laden

There is a lot of criticism in the U.S. about Pakistan "not knowing" about the whereabouts of ObL and with some idiots, like Salman Rushdie, calling for declaring Pakistan a "terrorist state".

It might have been that some folks in Pakistan did know that the alleged ObL was there where he is said to have been murdered (though I am not convinced of that "fact"). But asserting that 160+ Pakistani million people are responsible for him being there is idiotic.

BTW – where were those people when an acknowledged terrorist, Eric Robert Rudolph, was hiding in the U.S.? Shielded by neighbors, friends and all kinds of admirers for more than five years. Back then, a mere six years ago, did Salman Rushdie ask for declaring the U.S. a "terrorist state"?

It is again back to the old slogan: "Do as we say, not as we do."

To me it seems that this "we took revenge by killing bin Laden" moment will unfortunately not be used to reduce the U.S. War On Abstract Nouns and to retreat from Afghanistan but instead will be used to widen the war. The War on Pakistan scenario may become real earlier, with more U.S. involvement and more intense than I anticipated.

Comments

“more US involvement and more intense”….
the empire will blunder, and flounder, and flail, and fall… crushing legions of the innocent as it goes down. that seems to be what they do. I wish we (species) could figure out how to stop doing this. murder, rinse, repeat.

Posted by: DeAnander | May 4 2011 20:14 utc | 1

pakistan a terrorist state? so does that make the US a victim state in Rushdies bizarre world? what a strange fellow! He looks like he deserved his fatwah!

Posted by: brian | May 4 2011 21:35 utc | 2

To me it seems that this “we took revenge by killing bin Laden” moment will unfortunately not be used to reduce the U.S. War On Abstract Nouns and to retreat from Afghanistan but instead will be used to widen the war.
I don’t agree. For me, the main point of the OBL moment was to be able to declare victory and leave. At least one part of the policy. It is certain that the US can’t leave without a “victory”. As happened in Iraq. It wasn’t a real victory in Iraq, rather a loss, but they have to present it as a victory.
The fact is, OBL’s death is going to subtract a lot politically from US determination to continue in Afghanistan.
Why continue when the major objective is dead?
The subtext of continued war in order to support the military budget in the US is going to be more difficult to argue.

Posted by: alexno | May 4 2011 21:58 utc | 3

Alexno
spot on.

Posted by: slothrop | May 4 2011 22:06 utc | 4

They should have left him where he was in his hidey-hole, if the main objective was to continue the war in Afghanistan, and maintain the military budget.

Posted by: alexno | May 4 2011 22:07 utc | 5

The boffo media event around killing OBL is all for domestic consumption; it’s about the adrenaline rush for the nitwits. Obama is now the King of the Mountain. Nothing will change on the battlefields unless it is another escalation, and there will probably be another, or a series of escalations, because the masters of war are definitely not through screwing our future.
What really sets my nerves on end, are the photos of Obama, Clinton, and the others in the Situation Room, at the moment when the kill shots were happening. This image pretty well defines where America’s leaders are now. What a dystopia! Maybe next time they will have their own joysticks and can literally do it themselves.

Posted by: Copeland | May 4 2011 22:14 utc | 6

Why continue when the major objective is dead?
The subtext of continued war in order to support the military budget in the US is going to be more difficult to argue.

Are you joking? Do you really think they are just going to pack it all in and leave, allowing this resource-rich area to be left to arbitrary allocation?
Not a chance. They’re making money squatting on these vast resources….in the squatting itself, not to mention sequestering the treasure beneath their money-making adventure.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | May 4 2011 22:20 utc | 7

Are you joking? Do you really think they are just going to pack it all in and leave, allowing this resource-rich area to be left to arbitrary allocation?
Afghanistan is not really resource-rich. It has some, but not enough to justify the expense made. The US has spent much more on the war than they could ever recover from mining profits. I await the figures, which I have not studied.

Posted by: alexno | May 4 2011 22:31 utc | 8

Per 10,000 repetitions they have told us the Taliban is the enemy, Pakistan is in the echo chamber as another enemy; Libya is the once and future enemy. Yemen, Syria, et al. There is and never shall be a shortage of enemy.

Posted by: Copeland | May 4 2011 22:37 utc | 9

The problem that I saw in killing OBL, is that they have killed the bogey. Who will be the successor? You all have said this already, I think.
He wouldn’t have wanted the bogey killed, if such was still useful.
No, he wants out of Afghanistan, and “victory” is necessary.

Posted by: alexno | May 4 2011 23:02 utc | 10

murder inc.

Posted by: noiseannoys | May 4 2011 23:03 utc | 11

By the way, refusing to release the photos is foolish. They will have to in the end.

Posted by: alexno | May 4 2011 23:31 utc | 12

@alexno –

The US has spent much more on the war than they could ever recover from mining profits

no one is keeping count, at the moment, of how much the “US”, that is the Us as a nation, has spent on war; it’s an archaic formulation that doesn’t even make sense under the current dominant post-political ideology;
let’s see: the corporations practically don’t pay taxes, so wars don’t cost them anything; the Pentagon gets more resources allocated, so it’s profiting; the politicians ride the current rhetorics, and are satisfied, and anyways can freely adjust their benefits to inflation; so “everybody” – all those who count in a neoliberist / neodarwinist society – wins …
the only constrain is that it must be an “easy” war, that is, one in which the Us isn’t at any time menaced (a real menace, not “terrorism”); otherwise the menace would force it to react as a real nation, and maybe even impose real taxes on corporations, etc (see how WW2 improved workers’ rights and progressive taxation);

Posted by: claudio | May 4 2011 23:41 utc | 13

Claudio @13
Of course I understand that one major point of the war in Afghanistan is to support the US arms industries.
Killing OBL, however, doesn’t do that, rather points to US withdrawal.

Posted by: alexno | May 4 2011 23:56 utc | 14

So the US will release pictures of people killed in the raid, just not pictures of Osama:
(WARNING: This gallery contains graphic and violent images including dead bodies)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/2011/may/04/osama-bin-laden-compound#/?picture=374256182&index=8

Posted by: bokonon | May 5 2011 1:13 utc | 16

Claudio is right. So was Orwell: War is the (new) Peace. War is the glue that holds the ramshackle nation together.
Resources really have nothing to do with it. The aim is World Domination, which means fighting wherever and whenever the Empire chooses. A world dominated by reason or necessity is not good enough: the world dominator does what it chooses. This is a culture that has always preferred a lynching to a picnic. The killing of Bin Laden was the most fun America has had in years.
As to what happens next in Afghanistan, the first question is what was due to happen next last week? because nothing has changed. The great attraction of this theatre of war is that it is relatively hospitable, the country is so fucked up, after 40 years of war, that there isn’t much civilian life to get in the way of the military and their victims. In fact civilian life is considered fair game. The current cost of torturing and dismembering passers-by is the loss of a promotion and a few weeeks waiting as the law, which cannot be used against innocent detainees, is finessed to justify a sentence of time served and drinks on the house at every Legion Post in the land. Plus political careers if at all suited.
The US isn’t going to leave Afghanistan, hell, it isn’t even going to leave Germany, and it is staying in Japan until the geiger counters insist otherwise. The US doesn’t leave, though it sometimes deploys its armies elsewhere.
The bottom line is this: the US will leave Afghanistan when it is kicked out. The theory that it needs victories to save face is a media myth, if it needs victories it simply invents them.
Half the world is convinced that it won World War II for Christ’s sake!

Posted by: bevin | May 5 2011 1:15 utc | 17

alexno @14, fundamentally I agree that the bogeyman’s death implies a new “climate” and a new strategic concept for the Us wars; but I’m not sure what this means in practice; certainly not pack up and go home
I think Obama wants to extricate the bulk of the army from Afghanistan, and probably in part from the Middle East (let’s say: from Bush’s legacy and an Israeli-centered foreign policy), and concentrate on China, Russia and Latin America (the real concerns for the “sane” imperialists), rather than the “axis of evil”; certainly, in general, he will give up all ambitions of nation-building (an orwellian expression, in today’s world) and plans of direct occupations, which imply costly, unpopular abroad and risky at home (americans prefer videogamed wars to real funerals) “boots on the ground”
so: mostly special ops, long-range weapons of mass destruction (bombs and missiles), sanctions, permanent military bases (with all the dirty businesses that fluorish around them, beginning with drug trade), all finalized to the financial and commercial exploitation of the world; and a very careful selection of situations where ground forces are to be committed
so we’ll still have permanent war, but without the traditional democrat stance for nation-building; hear the drum-beat on Syria, after that of Libya
and there’s also a compelling need to pose limits to the Pentagon’s ever expanding budget
but there are two big problems: Afghanistan and Pakistan
the real challenge for Obama now is that of the Taliban, which requires secret deals with select groups and above all a compliant Pakistan (“mission accomplished”, on this front? or more difficult?), but will only happen after the “moderate Talibans” accept a Status of Force Agreement (there was an article on this on atimes.com, will try to link to it tomorrow); but the Talibans can’t be dealt without a ground force
and then there’s Pakistan, the new “center of the world” if the Us concentrate on China and Russia instead of Israel’s “security”;
the two problems are interwined; I don’t know what will happen, but I agree with b that escalation is probable, in spite of OBL;
the Us can justify an enduring presence in Afghanistan and Pakistan as long as it wishes; from the death of OBL can be easily deduced the opportunity and necessity to “finish the job”: “help” Pakistan clean up its state apparatus from terrorist infiltrations, prevent Pakistani nukes from finishing in the hands of enraged jihadists, prevent the Taliban from returning to power and host a new generation of terrorists, etc
and then the habitual bring democracy, secure commerce, uphold human rights, etc; rhetorics aren’t infinite, but can be recycled; and the same goes for the GWOT;

Posted by: claudio | May 5 2011 1:39 utc | 18

It’s not like the U.S. never walks away from an “unfinished” war. Seems they have some arcane 10 year limit, when no matter the actual circumstances they declare victory, roll up the cords and go home.

Posted by: anna missed | May 5 2011 1:53 utc | 19

viva baluchistan freedom fighters

Posted by: denk | May 5 2011 2:21 utc | 20

Resources really have nothing to do with it.
Nothing? Really? How, pray tell, are these Wars conducted if not with resources?
Resources have everything to do with it. War can mean everything you say it does, but still be about securing the spice. One doesn’t preclude the other. They’re like Siamese twins, joined at the hip.
And anna missed, it only looks as though they’ve walked away. The War is never finished, it just changes dimensions, and fronts. There are many ways to skin cats.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | May 5 2011 2:22 utc | 21

Hmm Israel Shamir offers evidence that amerika knew where bin Laden was since 2005. The reason they had to top him now was that this knowledge would have surfaced once the final tranche of wikileaks files on Gitmo got published this week.
Even if most of us didn’t put two and two together on how much the Abu al-Libi file revealed immediately if amerika knocked OBL at a later date, say when oblam needed a lift in the polls, then oblamblam would have been placed in the position of appearing either incompetent or deceitful when OBL did get knocked and the ‘torture works’ claims were made.
According to Shamir the truly critical file, that of OBL cut out and courier Abd al Hadi al Iraqi, hasn’t been released in its full uncut version as yet. That will happen later this week.
Shamir also gives the most credible explanation of why it is the NYT and grauniad believe they can claim the Gitmo files didn’t originate with wikileaks.

The treasure trove was copied by a Wikileaks German employee,Daniel Domscheit-Berg, who went AWOL after this profitable appropriation. Domscheit-Bergmade a deal with David Leigh of the Guardian; Leigh used it to cross Assange. He cold-shouldered Assange, declared the deal ‘void’, and used the data to promote his career and to make friends with Bill Keller, editor of the NY Times They published the cables after redacting them, or should we say “censoring” – removeing everything the secret services demanded to remove. We wrote about it at length here in CounterPunch.

Posted by: Debs is dead | May 5 2011 2:43 utc | 22

They’re saying that they have OBL’s wife and daughter in custody.
I assume that the torture apologists recommend that they be tortured, ideally in each other’s presence, to produce ‘high value’ info for the GWOT.

Posted by: Watson | May 5 2011 3:28 utc | 23

It is common knowledge that Pakistan is a puppet state of the American Empire. So if Pakistan is a terrorist state, as Salman Rushdie claims it is, then this makes the US the puppet master behind this terrorist state. It is also common knowledge that the US is conducting a covert war against Taliban and al-Qaeda forces in Pakistan. And this covert war is under the command and control of the CIA.
And since Pakistan is crawling with CIA agents, it should make us wonder how they could be so incompetent as to not know that bin Laden was living right under their noses. I suppose that there is a pretty good chance that they were being complicit in this.
It’s hard to tell whether the CIA was being incompetent or complicit in its dealings with bin Laden. But one thing is for certain: the American Empire has jumped off of a very steep cliff and is in free fall with a faulty parachute strapped to its back. And we can all thank Emperor Obama for this.

Posted by: Cynthia | May 5 2011 3:38 utc | 24

the *next generation* embassy

Posted by: denk | May 5 2011 4:35 utc | 25

The Dalai Lama is on board! At least there’s no dissent amongst any of the CIA assets.

Posted by: Monolycus | May 5 2011 4:37 utc | 26

I seen to remember reading some where, that there is a treasure trove of rare earth minerals in Afghanistan. Minerals that are used in the manufacture of cell phones, and which China is now hoarding.
Alexno @ 10: I would love to believe you’re right, but, I think otherwise. Whether it’s resources or Geo-political strategy, I believe the US will never pull out completely.
MB @ 21: That’s my best guess also.

Posted by: ben | May 5 2011 5:21 utc | 27

Coast is clear, time to Let the eagle soar
Former Attorney General John Ashcroft to Become Independent Director of Xe Services
What a nest of blatant hypocritical incestuous vipers, one and all…

Posted by: Uncle $cam | May 5 2011 6:38 utc | 28

Interesting Comment from here:

you know, these guys the pak army is fight. they have been fighting a war since the soviet invasion. they might not have the equipment, but they more than make up for it in terms of experience and knowledge of the area and any infantryman will tell you, that makes quite a big impact on how things trun out on the ground.
here is an example on how good they are. single sniper. took 2 shots fired at the presidents motorcade which was traveling at over 100 mph. armored cars. the spread between the 2 impacts was less than 2 inch. he got caught so we know it was a single shooter, distance was just over 500 yards. this is the caliber of guys the army has been fighting. they started firing guns as soon as they started walking. shooting comes naturally to them. and therefore the high casualties.
Ghazi is no secret. that is where the US started to operate from during the flood relief. they just never left. the government will never admit to it.
unlike what both the pakistan and the US governments would like you to believe, we have had US boots on the ground for a long time. advisors during raids as well as doing BDA on the ground. they have been flying in pakistan since the beginning with an army aviation officer on board for all the radio work to keep it hush hush.
GCI cant pick up low level targets yes, but the Erieye can. we are actually operating 2 different AEW&C systems. also VERA-E, even though feedback from sector commands is bad about the VERA-E, but its still there and operational. i wont comment on what kind of look down shoot down capability PAF has, but we have it and on multiple platforms not just F-16s. but i will tell u that if its to intercept a US fighter, PAF will never use F-16s, it’ll be either mirages, the F-7s or the JF-17s. the F-16s have this fail safe system, they wont lock on US aircrafts. the guys in the squadrons tried, it wouldn’t.
PMA is a no fly zone. no one goes in or out without express permission from army ADA, otherwise you get shot. a poor guy flying a lonely Cessna152 ended up near PMA after getting lost and losing radio contact. knew though they knew where th plane came from, still the poor guy was chased away with live warning shots and a gunship escort. problem is the exact thing some here have pointed out. PMA is only 80 miles from indian controlled kashmir. low level choppers can sneak in. therefore the order to open fire if unknown and no contact.
ok forget all that. say i am making everything up for arguments sake.
we all agree on 1 thing…PMA is a secure facility. they have their own ADA unit assign to them, plus 2 regiments for defense. right, this is on record so no argument there
now, even if the choppers were flying low. even if army only heard the choppers after their arrival….
what stopped them ADA from opening fire? stingers are very effective on hovering targets u know.
why didnt the sentry guards who patrol around PMA shoot, after all, the choppers were only 500 meters form PMAs boundary.
even to get to that compound, they had to fly over army units based at and around abbotabad. why didnt they react?
forget them…any reason why the police didnt react. the US themselves say they were on the ground for 40 mins. 40 minutes of 3 or 4 helicopters flying less than 500 meters from PMA in the middle of an army cantonment and no one does anything? really? does that make sense?
how long you think an sentry would take to run 500 meters and open fire? even if you cut of both legs off, i think he should atleast get to say 50 meter from the compound in 40 minutes?
unless of course they were expecting the choppers and had orders not to react..
ok fine…say the reaction time of the PAF is pathetic. highly unlikely since i have personally seen their scrambles, plus india is next door. you really think it will take more than 40 minutes for a fighter on QRA to get airborne and reach the choppers who are less than 5 minutes flight from the runway?
one more thing, since i have lived in that area.
i know for a fact most civilians carry guns in that entire region, the province is the gun capital of the world u know ( look for darra adam khail , or pakistan gun market on youtube, you’ll get an idea).
coming to the point. every other guy carries a gun and no one fired a single shot? or maybe they did and thats what brought the chopper down.
40 minutes flying over the city and a crowd didnt gather?? no matter what you do to a chopper, besides installing antigravity drives, they will make a ton of noise and wake people up.
come on
now knowing all that. knowing that army didnt shoot, PAF didnt scramble and the crowd couldnt gather during the 40 minute long op. how can anyone say the pak military didnt know?
oh and another thing, its only been a couple of days and the US is already starting to change stories. what does that tell you?

Posted by: Cloned Poster | May 5 2011 6:39 utc | 29

what color is it now ?

Posted by: denk | May 5 2011 9:12 utc | 30

But one thing is for certain: the American Empire has jumped off of a very steep cliff and is in free fall with a faulty parachute strapped to its back. And we can all thank Emperor Obama for this.
The U.S. is falling off a very steep cliff, for certain, but as Claudio mentioned, it’s a long way down, so the time span until its ultimate demise will be much longer than any of us would care to tolerate, but what choice do we have in the matter? None. We’ve been relegated to irrelevant commentary in some far off distant corner….a sound proof room, even, clucking with each other about the Weather of Empire.
However, even with the demise of the U.S. as it was formerly known, it doesn’t spell the end of Empire. Empire is just changing shape…..because it’s a Shape Shifter. So long as this Planet lives, and it is still living, but its condition is terminal, then Empire will thrive, because the ultimate goal, unwitting to the participants, of course, is the destruction of all life. There will be no compromises or barriers in this ceaseless, determined march, a trot now, to the Abyss.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | May 5 2011 11:04 utc | 31

I seen to remember reading some where, that there is a treasure trove of rare earth minerals in Afghanistan. Minerals that are used in the manufacture of cell phones, and which China is now hoarding.
Correct, Ben. See my links @15. The first link verifies what you remember seeing.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | May 5 2011 13:35 utc | 32

denk @ 30: Thanks for the Kaminski piece. Highly relevant.
MB @ 31: The saying “ignorance is bliss”, has never been more apt, than in the U. S. today.
I would say “trojan horse” Obama. Hired to sound progressive, while actually doing the bidding of the corporate over-lords.
Autonomy does not apply to any modern day U.S. president.

Posted by: ben | May 5 2011 13:45 utc | 33

PS-With regards to the Autonomy issue: I think on social internal issues, our presidents are given a certain latitude to help convince the peons that the system actually cares what happens to the masses.

Posted by: ben | May 5 2011 13:57 utc | 34

The main reason to control Afganistan is to route the Oil pipelines down.

Posted by: boindub | May 5 2011 15:17 utc | 35

Remember the now infamous situation room photo, Hillary Clinton is now saying she was covering her mouth to prevent one of her “spring coughs” rather than trying to make the staged photo seem more dramatic. Apparently the first story that they watched the operation in “real time” is falling apart just like most of the rest of the bullshit story.
Clinton says she “can’t remember” what they were watching in that room.

Posted by: hans | May 5 2011 15:19 utc | 36

It looks to me like Clinton is looking at porn picture of Bill

Posted by: Cloned Poster | May 5 2011 15:36 utc | 37

MB: Yep, tried it earlier, couldn’t pull it up. Just now got it, thanks.

Posted by: ben | May 5 2011 15:51 utc | 38

Monolycus [ 26]
*The Dalai Lama is on board! At least there’s no dissent amongst any of the CIA assets.*
hmdl *officially* stopped his illicit liason with cia in the 70’s
*officially* that is 😉
ben [33]
in a mere span of 10 yrs
i witnessed the rape of exyugo, afghan, iraq, libya
n these’re just the biggies
what more can a man says ?
http://www.harrybrowne.org/articles/FoolMeOnce.htm

Posted by: denk | May 5 2011 16:05 utc | 39

Hans,
We mustn’t forget that Obama was sitting in the safety and comfort of the White House watching real-time footage of the CIA-led raid on bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad. So what makes him think that he can get away with lying to us about bin Laden dying in a so-called “firefight”? What makes him think that he can get away with lying to us about bin Laden hiding behind one of his wives like a weak-kneed coward as he was shooting at CIA-trained commandos? We Americans are pretty stupid, but we aren’t that stupid to not know when we’ve been lied to. We Americans do have very short memories, but our memories aren’t so short that we’ll forget when we’ve been lied to.
More evidence that our Empire is in steep decline, despite what Morocco Bama says about it being a “Shape Shifter”. And having an Emperor at the helm, who is lousy at lying, will only cause this decline to accelerate.

Posted by: Cynthia | May 5 2011 16:17 utc | 40

watching real-time footage of the CIA-led raid on bin Laden’s compound
there’s also the possibility that obama & clinton were being presented w/ pentagon stagecraft

Posted by: b real | May 5 2011 16:26 utc | 41

Remember the now infamous situation room photo, Hillary Clinton is now saying she was covering her mouth to prevent one of her “spring coughs” rather than trying to make the staged photo seem more dramatic.
I call Bullshit! It’s pretty obvious Gates let a lethal one loose. All the rest of them are trying to pretend they didn’t hear it, or smell it. He’s notorious for this kind of thing. People hate to be in meetings with him for this very reason. He has some kind of disorder that makes him flagellate uncontrollably. In private, behind his back, they call him Shitty Shitty Bang Bang.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6q6x9_chitty-chitty-bang-bang_shortfilms

Posted by: Morocco Bama | May 5 2011 17:01 utc | 42

I think you mean ‘flatulate’ Monsieur Morroco Bama

Posted by: Lexical pedant | May 5 2011 17:24 utc | 43

More on the ‘ferocious firefight’ – only one man in the house was armed: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42906279/ns/world_news-death_of_bin_laden/t/bin-laden-firefight-only-one-man-was-armed/

Posted by: Revised revision | May 5 2011 17:26 utc | 44

Very strange, looking more and more like a simple mafia style hit, preordained killing. Which of course speaks volumes about how dangerous the administration thinks AQ has become. If they were still perplexed or concerned about AQ as an immanent threat, why didn’t they simply arrest OBL and take him in for interrogation? One would think that having finally captured the supposed long dreaded kingpin and mastermind of international terrorism, they might have a couple of questions to ask. Seeing that the operation went so flawlessly and without resistance they could easily have concealed the operation for an extended time while they questioned the man and then either arrested him or fabricated some scenario where he was killed at a later date. But no, they instead elected to whack the unarmed OBL on the spot.
This would indicate first, that there is little more to learn about AQ and OBL and that they pose no real strategic or tactical threat any more. How else could they elect to choose the immediate reward of summary execution over the far better, but delayed benefits of extensive interrogation?

Posted by: anna missed | May 5 2011 17:56 utc | 45

Thanks for the correction, Lexical pedant. Love that nickname, by the way. Very appropriate. Although, I wouldn’t rule out flagellation. These folks can get pretty kinky.

Posted by: Morocco Bama | May 5 2011 18:37 utc | 46

“SPECULATION WARNING!!!”
most obviously the man took the honor himself

Posted by: c | May 5 2011 23:15 utc | 47

first thought that comes to mind re cloned posters comment(37) is that this iswhat the audience at a ‘snuff movie’ looks like…hilary obviously is a first timer..the others seasoned butchers

Posted by: noiseannoys | May 7 2011 23:28 utc | 48

confusion?
>Narrative<

Posted by: c | May 8 2011 21:04 utc | 49