Osama Bin Laden: dead
When I first saw the news I did a double or even a triple take.
Osama Bin Laden? Wasn’t he already dead? Or at least, hardly a presence in the world at all? Sort of like killing a ghost.
His death seems to have involved complex intelligence and an as-yet-undisclosed method of assassination. It supposedly occurred about a week ago, and the delay in the announcement was in order to identify the body, which is in US hands.
In the first couple of years after 9/11, there were so many false alarms about Bin Laden’s death that after a while most of us became skeptical that it would ever occur. But that day has come. The wheels of justice grind slow, but they grind exceedingly fine.
How much did Bin Laden continue to matter to al Qaeda and other terrorists? I have no idea, but it wouldn’t be a surprise if future attacks are claimed to be in retaliation for his death.
[NOTE: One more thing—it’s a good thing he wasn’t captured and tried in a civilian court.]
[ADDENDUM: Obama’s speech was fine.
He seemed to be saying that the operation occurred earlier today rather than a week ago.
Bin Laden was apparently shot in the head.
It will be fascinating to learn the details of the operation. Just heard it was a helicopter and Navy Seals, and lasted about 40 minutes.]
[ADDENDUM II: Remember, also, that al Qaeda was responsible not only for 9/11, but for the Cole bombing and the East African embassy attacks.]
Well, isn’t that interesting.
Just been watching the news here in New Mexico. Its been a long time coming.
Watching people’s reaction on face book. There is both celebration and fear of retribution in their comments. I have tried to remind them the west didnt start this thing- islam has been at war with the rest of the world since its inception….
No champagne in the house, but we busted out the wine for this announcement. (Normally neither my husband or I drink–but this was worth it.)
“Ding, dong, the witch is dead….”
This fellow, Buddy Larsen, at the Belmont Club nailed the speech.
“Hail and Hallelujah —Obama made a good speech. He used some of the mystic chords, without keyword drops, without irony signs, with straight non-code wordings. Yes, yes, i know —it’s squid ink —but —well, ”thanks for the memory” of when it wasn’t.”
Yep.
And Bin Liner has said hello to Old Scratch and Old Mo by now. That warms the cockles of my heart.
I hope he suffered first. Can’t wait for the movie.
Re: Obama’s speech. He is trying to take personal credit for the hit. Did anyone note how many times he mentioned himself versus how many times he mentioned bin laden, that bin laden was tracked down because he ordered it.
A great night and the President is still a card.
I sincerely believe that the world is a better place without him, and it is good that retribution has been served, at least in part, for the death of 3,000 people on 9/11/2001. However, to CELEBRATE his death, or any death, makes me the equivalent of the ululating Palestinian women at the fall of the World Trade Center.
Special Forces guys are the toughest warriors on the planet. God bless them, and thank God (the real one) that none of our men were killed.
Someone said he hoped that we never find out who fired the fatal shot, because he’ll be a target of the assassins. “Besides,” he added, “it’s not like he could actually drink 300 million beers.”
Heh.
Let the ululating begin! and the candy-throwing!
1. Good.
2. Most of the speech was Presidential but, pace Neo, some was Obamaish.
Ululating!!!
Thowing candy!!!
Wrapping bin ladens body in bacon!!!!
Sticking his head on a pike as a lesson to others!!!!!
Drinking a vodka tonic in celebration!!!!!!!
“the equivalent of the ululating Palestinian women at the fall of the World Trade Center”
Wrong. The Palestinians were celebrating the deaths of thousands of innocents. Osama was one of the most truly evil mass murderers ever.
I’ll say I’m glad he’s dead, but I’m also glad we had to go in there and take him out like warriors. I’m also glad we didn’t sink to the level of terrorists and torture him. This is how a bad guy is supposed to go down -to a righteous bullet or with the flip of a switch after a fair trial. It’s bad enough so many Americans pee their pants worrying about *gasp* civilian trials for some of the accused in Gitmo, but equally bad are any Americans who are whining or peeing themselves about “retaliation” for his death. Liberty is never risk free, and right now we have to put liberty first.
Some things ought to be hated. Those that cannot hate evil, can only be its accomplice in the end, never a defender of justice.
The United States is treating Osama bin Laden’s body in “accordance with Islamic practice,” a White House official says.
Great show weakness, Obama still grasping defeat from the jaws of victory.
Brad wrote “It’s bad enough so many Americans pee their pants worrying about *gasp* civilian trials for some of the accused in Gitmo,”
Brad are you aware that at a civilian trial of a captured terrorist it was revealed that the NSA could eavesdrop on Bin Laden’s satellite phone and thereby locate him and that after the trial he stopped using that phone? This was before 9/11. Arguably a civilian trial for terrorist cost 3,000 lives. That is why we have military tribunals.
I hate to ruin the mood by being the mourner at the wedding party but if this gets Obama re-elected or if Obama uses it to withdraw from Afghanistan as Krauthammer foresees then this could count as a national disaster. Fortunately I am confident in Obama’s abilities, but my cheering will be muted until 11/2012.
“if this gets Obama re-elected or if Obama uses it to withdraw from Afghanistan as Krauthammer foresees then this could count as a national disaster”
Do you remember what happened to GHW Bush?
Ninety-percent approval at the end of the first Persian Gulf War, and then… there came Bill Clinton with “The economy, stupid!”
The rest is history.
I just love how Bob From Virginia thinks to frighten me with Tales of the Possible!
The fact is, I don’t trust our leaders with this kind of power an the history of this Republic is on my side in this. You have chosen security (and mostly false security at that) over liberty, and I don’t think history will be too kind to you or others like you.
A real brave people would indeed hold terrorist trials in New York City. A really brave people, that actually held their leaders to their purported Constitution would have a FOIA with teeth in it. But some Americans these days aren’t brave, and don’t value freedom and thus they bite at whatever proposed security measures are proferred, all in hopes of keeping themselves safe and secure *I guess* in the knowledge that our cause is true and just and thus must our leaders be – though, I guess on this blog, there’s an exception if the leader has a “D” behind his name.
In truth, the Republic is already lost, the terrorists have won, and while I celebrate the death of an evil man and know that overall over the past ten years our soldiers and other fighting people have behaved with dignity and bravery, the wars they are currently fighting aren’t going to result in a US that any of the Founders would have wanted to live in. Indeed, if I didn’t value my family, friends, the relative prosperity, and the idea of what this country used to be, I’d gladly refuse to defend it at all and advocate others do likewise. I certainly think most of our Presidents over the last 30 years h ave needed trials for treason.
Brad you freakin’ idiot, it is already being reported in the WaPo that the hunt for OBL involved information from Gitmo detainees. My hunch is they were not questioned real politely. OBL was captured *in spite of* the politically-motivated effort by Obama and other Democrats to use Gitmo as a tool against Bush by making the ludicrous claim that the foreign terrorists interned there had “constitutional rights”.
Expect the 911 conspiracy theories to vanish overnight. With a democrat in the white house at the time of bin laden’s death, the truthers (mainly leftists) will now have no problem admitting that al qaida committed the 911 attacks.
The 911 conspiracy theories were always just left-wing partisan slanders that truthers never honestly believed themselves – and they’re about to prove it.
Gary Rosen:
Do you believe everything the Washington Post says?
The New York Times?
Or are they only partisan when you don’t like the administration they report for?
How the heck could you verify anything really came out of Gitmo? And how the heck did it take ten years or even five years to get this information if they have such effective methods?
I’m afraid I’m not the idiot here. The idiot here is the person who believes everything he’s been fed and can’t use simple deductive logic.
And even though Obama backstabbed people who believed him when he said he was going to close that place, you are still so partisan that Obama keeping the freaking thing open is merely evidence to you that Obama is up to some evil plot involving “Constitutional Rights”.
I’d like to know what gave any President the right to declare War without an explicit Act of Congress, and I’d really like to know : what is the condition for victory in this “war”?
Oh, and I suppose you missed the latest Wikileaks cables, where they showed that almost certainly some of the people in Gitmo were mistakenly interned. Of course the cables are frauds because interning and possibly torturing innocents is embarrassing for us, even though said cables also showed that quite a few real bad evil people are held there.
Oh well, that’s ok. Only “collateral damage” after all.
You people make me sick.
“Do you believe everything the Washington Post says?”
How foolish of me. From now on I will believe only the fevered ramblings of Brad’s so-called mind.
“can’t use simple deductive logic”
OK, what does *your* “simple deductive logic” tell you? I’ll bet it’s a doozy. Let’s have it, we can all use a good laugh.
I watched German news coverage a short while ago. The reporter was talking about the patriotism displayed by the crowds outside the WH. Yet, the pictures I saw were of college students, people who would have been 8, 10, 0r 12 on 9/11. The faces I saw showed the same kind of celebratory emotions I saw around the styrofoam columns. I suspect that some could be Bradley Manning supporters. I didn’t notice any thoughtful expressions suggesting that 9/11 victims or the sacrifices of the military might have been on their minds. I’m sure that some of the crowd was not like this, but the faces I saw depressed me–so superficial.
Gary Rosen, you blooming idiot:
I’m not like you, because I’m not partisan in what I choose to believe and not believe.
The Washington Post has been a known cheerleader for this “war” for almost ten years now. I no more trust them than I trust In These Times.
I recommend the foreign presses of our allies and an assortment of left and right sites as well as whatever leaked cables might come out now and then.
Sometimes *gasp” that disagrees with the Washington Post or New York Times or most of the other papers that don’t bother to actually, you know, perform investigative journalism anymore. Who woulda thunk it?
“I’m not like you, because I’m not partisan in what I choose to believe and not believe.”
I asked for a good laugh, and Brad whipped it right out! What service!
Brad,
I read that an important messenger for OBL was named by several detainees. This gave the intel people someone to look for and follow, eventually leading to OBL’s location. I don’t think you have a very good idea of how intelligence is gathered or how tiny bits must be pieced together, verified and then used to gather still more info. Life is a lot messier than you seem to realize.
“what is the condition for victory in this “war”?”
When all Muslims are subdued, converted or dead. It is a Crusade, historically, do you like it or not. They left us no other option.
Good, at least this Hidden Imam candidate will have failed to graduate. Best of all is they shot him; if they’d taken him prisoner it’d be those trial debates all over again.
Unfortunately, Islamic imperialism does not stand or fall upon one leader; it derives its force from the shared belief in the religion and its inseparable political program.
I tend to believe that only complete eradication of Islam can bring lasting peace. In its core, Islam is a political project of world dominance by violence and terror, and no amount of obfuscation and deliberate lies can change this salient fact.
Another important fact that it is impossible to successfuly fight a religion by anything else than another religion, believed just as fervently as an enemy belives his religion. Which leads us to Ezekiel 38-39.
“”The faces I saw showed the same kind of celebratory emotions I saw around the styrofoam columns””
expat
I got that in my gut too when i first saw it at 5:00 am. A sort of sickening confirmation as to exactly why we have a narcissistic President.
Well of course, but it’s not like attacks weren’t already being planned to begin with. It’s just that the radical islamicists get to call it revenge for striking Bin Laden instead of using whatever other excuse they have in their playbook to excuse their misanthropic, westernphobic actions.
If Bin Laden were still alive, they’d want to strike. Now that he’s dead, they want to strike. That’s just the way they are, so might as well kill the high profile figure, even though it makes little practical difference in what they want to do. Like Michael Totten said, there’s no downside to this for America and no upside to it for Al Qaeda.
One downside is that Obama will preen on about how he kept his promise to exit A’stan. Not seeing the end of this ass til 2016 is a mighty big downside.
Dancing on someone’s grave is always bad form. The young people dancing in the street must have just been looking for a party.
colagirl said:
“Ding, dong, the witch is dead….”
I second that. I wonder if he’s now looking for his 42 virgins amidst the fire and brimstone.
More seriously: I don’t like Obama and didn’t vote for him and am eager to get rid of him in 2012. But at this moment, the whole country won a victory. Kudos the prez at this one time, and kudos also to George W. Bush’s previous policies which set the stage for killing this evil man.
The celebration in front of the White House looked like it had little to do with bin Laden, and everything to do with celebrating Obama’s first actual accomplishment in office. These kids finally saw an opportunity where they could wave flags and not look like their racist teabagging enemies.
It was like a spontaneous celebration that occurs on college campuses after a big sports win. Only here they were celebrating Team Obama, and know that this guarantees his reelection come 2012.
Seal Team Six, the best of the best. This team was formed in the 80s to counter terrorists and for the express purpose of hostage rescue. They were a small version of the Delta Force. It appears their mission has expanded to fit the times.
It is widely reported now that interrogation of Gitmo detainees, some say KSM, revealed the identity of one of Bin Laden’s most trusted couriers, and analysts have been tracking him for over four years. Patience paid off. Bush policies vindicated. BHO takes credit.
I expect that BHO will get a bump in the polls. I think most folks will understand that if he had implemented his intent, nothing would have happened. I also suspect that many will understand that, wonderful though it may be, this is a completely symbolic victory. Temporary bump. Gas prices food prices unemployment, really frightening debt; these are the issues the election will hinge on.
Good call Neo, a ghost was killed and spirited away.
“”the history of this Republic is on my side in this””
“”A real brave people would indeed hold terrorist trials in New York City””
Brad
I guess General Washington having spies and deserters shot on sight was never in your history lessons. Only a fool thinks war can be avoided by simply renaming it litigation and hiring ponytail lawyers.
“Terminal Renal patient slugs it out in last stand against US Navy SEALS is shot and killed by one well aimed bullet to the fore head, body treated respectfully in Islamic fashion and dumped at sea to avoid a shrine.”
Sounds fishy to me.
On Facebook I find Friends who decried waterboarding and the very existence of Guantanamo are jubilant that Navy Seals helicoptered in, broke into the compound and shot bin Laden in the head. Should we release Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, toss him a weapon or two, and hunt him down?
I don’t know why the news of his death does not make me happy. All my Scottish blood, and I can’t seem to muster any joy in revenge.
“…treated respectfully in Islamic fashion…”
Take a body bag well-seasoned with bacon fat on the inside, because who wants to wash the blood out of a perfectly good helicopter, thoroughly with bacon, stuff him in, poke a few holes to ensure it sinks, fly him out.
When you get within sight of the command ship, because the boss wants to watch, put a boot on his head and shove him out. Big splash, probably not in the direction of Mecca.
OBL sleeps with the fishes. Amen.
Alternatively, every ship used to carry a garbage chute. Maybe they got him on board, collected evidence, then launched him via a well-greased chute. Either way works for me.
Amy, me neither. Partly, and only partly, it’s because a cheap little con artist of a president will take the glory that belongs to others, who paid for this day with their reputations, their loved ones, their blood. Partly too because they didn’t bring the body to Ground Zero, turn on the webcams, and feed the remains bit by bit to a herd of pigs.
“”All my Scottish blood, and I can’t seem to muster any joy in revenge””
Amy
I hear ya. Any relief i might have felt got dashed when i saw the creepy college kids dancing in the streets. Who are these idiots coming out of our education system and why do i feel like American exceptionalism has been stripped out of them to the point that they seem foreign to me?
Amy: “I don’t know why the news of his death does not make me happy. All my Scottish blood, and I can’t seem to muster any joy in revenge.”
My feelings exactly. It is anti-climatic and, in the long run, may mean little. As time passed bin Laden had been less and less of a factor in the al Qaeda operations.
That said, I am glad it shows that the jihadis can run and hide, but we we are relentless and do not give up. No jubilation/celebration, just grim determination to stand up to the barbarians until they either reform the religion of “peace” or are defeated unconditionally. Kudos to our intelligence operatives and SOFs for a job well done.
We cannot rest on this success, the job is not done. On to Zawahiri and so many others who set this carnage in motion.
Yep, I just feel old and tired. And my husband the airline pilot will probably still be treated like a potential suicide bomber every time he goes through airport security for his job. Though he has successfully resisted have the full groping treatment. “You don’t want to go there,” he growls, a little like John Wayne.
But for the rest of us, read this horrible description of TSA assault by blogger Amy Alkon.
The Tea Party is not celebrating, too much, because we know, exactly like Sergey states, that there are two wars: One against Islam and one against the propaganda that says Islam is a religion of peace.
I haven’t seen the students or the white house lawn party or even Obama. I wish I could. I consider it a defect of self-control but it makes my blood boil.
Consider it done that the narrative will be established for the programmed, the zombic, the left. Obama, their king, has triumphed. We must merely continue to make them marginal. I firmly believe this: It is in our control which way the future lies. If I didn’t, I would be preparing a survival position.
Just like it is a good thing that Obama’s birth certificate was produced, so it is a good thing that Osama is dead. Both are good wins. I am happy and looking for more.
And speaking of the president taking credit, it’s one day after this unpresidential performance: Obama’s angry comedy routine.
Why is everyone so upset about the college students celebrating in front of the White House? George Washington University is right next door, and the rest of the area is mostly office buildings. And really, who do you expect is going to come out for an impromptu celebration at midnight on Sunday night? All the older people were at home in the suburbs.
I think people in the comments are just pissed because they hate Obama so much. News that’s good for Obama must be somehow bad, the reasoning goes, even if you have to contort a little to figure out how…
As an ex-USA-naval officer, I am VERY PROUD of the Navy Seals today.
And I’m also proud of George W. Bush for laying the groundwork that made today’s celebration possible.
Alex: I disagree. Some people, of course, as you say, won’t give Obama any credit. Some will (I did, for example, for making a decent speech).
But for many people, the criticism of the celebrating students is about something else. I think it’s about the sportslike quality of the celebration, which I wrote a bit about in this post. And note that some commenters here who don’t like Obama still joined in with the idea of celebratory action (see this, for example, and this ). I’ve noticed that same split in the comments section of other blogs between those who approve the celebration and those who don’t, and some of it has to do with the attitude a person has towards celebrating the death of another person, however evil.
What’s more, I’ve never understood the emphasis on who might be president in the event that Osama was captured or killed, whether it be Bush or Obama or someone else. The action that led to Osama’s death was a result of many years of concentrated and focused activity by our military and intelligence. In this case, it most definitely began under Bush’s watch and has ended (as far as Bin Laden is concerned, that is) under Obama’s. But neither was really the main actor or the person responsible for Osama’s death, although each had a role, and part of Obama’s role was to approve the mission. I would expect that of any president, and it was the right thing of him to do.
It is widely reported now that interrogation of Gitmo detainees, some say KSM, revealed the identity of one of Bin Laden’s most trusted couriers, and analysts have been tracking him for over four years.
A question for those who have railed against Gitmo and such: assuming the reports above are true, and also that the intel was gained through waterboarding or other methods you decry as “torture,” do you maintain your position or now support Bush’s decision?
Put another way, would you rather have some terrorists hair mussed a bit, and OBL sleeping with the fishes, or bored terrorists playing pinochle while OBL remains alive?
Furthermore, anyone who opposed Gitmo and celebrates now needs to flush out his headgear.
“”I think people in the comments are just pissed because they hate Obama so much. News that’s good for Obama must be somehow bad,””
Alex
I’ll give you that. Sorta brings to mind what it must have felt like when Al Capone gained in public support after opening another soup kitchen.
Alex,
It’s not that the news was good for Obama that makes me question the celebrations. I don’t have a problem seeing military who may have spents months in that hellhole celebrating, nor do I mind seeing NYC firemen or people who lost family on 9/11 express joy that OBL is gone. It is the silly young people who previously criticized any form of patriotic expression that bother me. As I said before, they just seem so superficial, if not hypocritical.
I am not American but I was personally affected by 9/11 so if as reports say “The wicked witch is dead” then I welcome this news. However, since first hearing the news this morning I have watched and read with interest numerous news items and blogs on this subject and I must say that I am having some serious doubts.
I was pleased to hear that the whole operation was dealt with in a very civilised manner, befitting a society that preaches respect and rights of the individual. By not reducing oneself to the level of the target maintains the core principles.
My doubts come from the level of detail in the stories being put out and the lack of evidence being put forward. A good lie has detail to it, sometimes too much detail which is what gives it away, couple this with the fact that apart from a reported DNA test there is no tangible evidence and the body has conveniently been buried with no photos taken. Not one!
In the digital age where the assault was tweeted and every mobile phone has a camera in it, and in all probability the assault team would have carried one or two operational cameras there is not one picture of Osama?
I am very doubtful of this whole story. Like I said I hope the whole story is true, I truly do but something does not feel right and I cannot stay quiet about it.
Please do not hate me for having such doubts as I am just airing an opinion that I hope is wrong.
Some things mean more than any pragmatic considerations, and justice is one of them. Moral order of universe demands that evil must be punished, and maintaining this order is a categorical imperiative. Symbolism matters. Demonstration of unfettered resolve matters. Patriotism feeds on victories, even purely symbolic. When young people fly national flags without shame and guilt, in joy and celebration, it matters. Especially now, after all attempts to make patriotism a dirty word.
Neo,
The sports-like celebration isn’t really my style either—it’s more just that I imagine that a good number of those criticizing it now might have instead viewed it as an innocent expression of patriotic joy had Bin Laden been killed under Bush’s watch. At least that’s my guess.
I also agree with you that Obama is by no means directly responsible for killing Bin Laden (though he is at least indirectly responsible through his decisions to continue Bush’s policies, give the CIA support, authorize the strike, etc.). It could have happened under Bush. But regardless the symbolism is very powerful, and it will surely help silence people who say that Obama is Muslim, or that he hates America, and so on. I think that the criticism of young people celebrating, for instance, it at least partly a product of the fact that there is very little of substance that people on the right can criticize in the killing of Bin Laden, much as they’d love to find something.
I don’t believe anything coming from the Left. It’s a psychological barrier defense because the Left likes to play with people’s emotions. By denying the truth of their claims, one can sustain balance until the facts come in, allowing an independent judgment to be made.
Thus even now, whether Osama is dead or not, isn’t factored in as “true or false”. What my stance is, “what matters most is what games Obama is playing with this”.
Because I don’t believe it nor disbelieve it, I do not celebrate. I would prefer it to be true, if only to make a point of things and to Settle iT Once and for all. But personal preferences should not be allowed to control one’s judgment.
I do understand how people in New York would wish to celebrate. Good luck to them. Just hope Osama really died, because if he didn’t, it would go hard on them.
See the problems with believing in things too fast for your own good? Too many highs and too many lows, produce depression, despair, and bitterness. Not things that can help to defeat evil or Obama.
Alex: and you may be surprised to discover that one of the people who couldn’t find anything to criticize in Obama’s role in the killing of Bin Laden was Rush Limbaugh.
Well, one thing’s certain, 4 .45s in the coconut will discourage too many new Osama endorsements for the dimocrat du jour .
Well, nice to see that Rush keeps an open mind about some things. (Though for the record I don’t know that I’ve seen it reported that Obama was the *only* one to think of using SEALs.)
It turns out Rush does have some (in my opinion loony) criticisms after all. He seems to think that killing Bin Laden was simply an effort by Obama to move up in the polls, and that if he’d been polling better he never would have done it:
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201105020004
Okay, rain your venom down on me, but I think we should exit Afghanistan asap. (I thought that years ago when the Taliban was knocked down and OBL fled into Pakistan.) There is nothing that can be accomplished in Afghanistan or Pakistan or Iraq that will make us safer or deter radical Islam.
Nation building… gimme a break! No matter how many times you take the horse to water, you can not make it drink. Unless we are willing, and we are not willing, to impose our will upon them, there is nothing to be gained by imposing ‘democracy’. These are tribal people, many live in the 7th century, some live in 500 BC, all of them are Moslems. They stone their daughters after they have been raped. They believe in 72 virgins after martyrdom. Yes, a minority want a better, more modern society; but the majority live in a mindset that has no ability to contemplate democracy, free will, equal rights under the law, women are not slaves, etc.
IMO we should get out and stand off and be ready to rain hell down on them if they dare look our way. The death of OBL is but an hors d’oeuvre at a vast smorgasbord we refuse to gorge at.
Alex (3:47 above)
“. . . it will surely help silence people who say that Obama is Muslim, or that he hates America,. . . .”
I submit it’s not that Obama hates America as much as he hates capitalism.
Hates capitalism how exactly?
Um, by doing everything he can, by every executive order he signs, by every czar appointment he makes, to destroy the very founding principles of this Republic? Crony capitalism, picking business winners and losers, Government takeover of whole sectors of the economy, forcing citizenry to purchase items against their will. You know, simple things like that.
If the Partier-in-Chief were trying to destroy this Country, what exactly would he be doing different?
All liberals have a degree of disdain for free market capitalism. They are certain an appointed comittee of liberal ideologues knows better than 300 million Americans do about what the assigned value of goods and services should be.
Control freakishness pretty much sums up the modern liberal progressive.
It’s rare that something will cause me to break my lurking habits, but I just have to chime in to second SeanAC’s thoughts. I would love for this to be true, but I can’t help but be struck by the complete lack of evidence presented thus far. I do not care much for conspiracy theories and those who peddle them, and am more inclined to place the blame for my doubts on Obama and his administration, who have eroded my trust to such a point where if Obama was to say “good morning” I’d need to check my watch, but it does surprise me that everyone appears to have immediately and fully embraced this story.
Perhaps, in time, doubts will come out. I appreciate that no one wants to be That Guy, the one who stands up in the middle of the celebrations and says, “This would be great news, but I think you’re lying.”
It all seems very convenient. Obama is back into full-time campaigning (not that he ever leaves that mode for long), but things aren’t going particularly well domestically, and he’s been challenged by Trump and others – but lo and behold! A sudden bit of unexpected, fantastic news! (And, yes, I am more than a little embittered by lefty acquaintences crowing about how Obama managed to do in two years what Bush couldn’t in seven, as if his personal initiative had much of anything to do with it.)
So what we have is a story. No compelling photographic or video evidence, when surely the operation would have been recorded on film, as with Saddam. A body which has been conveniently disposed of, in a place where no one will ever be able to find it. Apparently there is “DNA evidence,” which amounts to more of the same: “this is proof because we’re saying that we have proof and this is it.”
I don’t know. I would like it to be true, because I would like to think that there are some lies beyond even the Obama administration. It would seem to be a foolish lie, because Bin Laden could easily disprove it – but when has sheer foolishness stopped the WH from doing anything? Once upon a time I might have felt some emotion over Bin Laden’s death, but now the thought only brings me a brief, grim satisfaction. If he’s dead, I’m glad of it. A bullet in the head was, perhaps, kinder than he deserved, and a “respectful burial in accordance with Muslim traditions” was – if true – far, far too kind, but sadly in keeping with our society’s weakness vis a vis Islam, and that in itself leaves me with a feeling of distaste, even if all the rest that’s been reported is true.
RickZ and SteveH:
There’s a notion popular in certain quarters, which is that good capitalism = completely unfettered markets. I can understand where this might come from, as it is more or less what they teach on the first day of Econ 101. However, if you stick around for Econ 102 and beyond you learn that there are many situations where government intervention can be a very positive thing. And indeed, these situations resemble the real world much more closely than do the hyper-idealized markets of Econ 101.
To be clear, I am talking about such things as asymmetric information, coordination problems, public goods, externalities, commitment problems, behavioral biases, and so on and on.
As for “forcing citizenry to purchase items against their will,” by which I assume you’re referring to health care, let’s take the example of fire departments. The government regularly forces people to “purchase” (through taxes) a share of their local fire department. Why might this be a good idea? Many, many reasons. If people opt out, it might be very hard to credibly commit to not save them if their house is on fire (see the recent case in TN). Also, fires are catching. A person weighing the value of a fire department is not likely to factor in the spillover value of protection to neighbors, and therefore will undervalue it. There are other arguments too, but the main point is that few people question the wisdom of government provision of fire departments.
Switch over to health care and people start freaking out. Yet health care is similar in many ways. Preventative health care is generally much less expensive than emergency care. However, we as a country can’t commit to not provide emergency health care (for humanitarian reasons) via emergency rooms for the uninsured, but we refuse to provide preventative care. This is a gigantic and unnecessary waste of money.
There is also a problem that comes from “adverse selection” in opt-in health insurance markets. If people have more information about their own health risks than health insurance providers do, providers can’t offer a price tailored to the individual. People for whom this approximate price is a good deal will opt out, raising the risk in the remaining pool. The will cause the provider to raise their price because the pool is worse, and in response a new group of people will opt out. The result is insurance rationing for more healthy people, and extremely high prices for sicker people. This problem can be solved by universal provision. (See George Akerlof’s paper “The Market for Lemons,” for which he won the Nobel Prize in Economics.)
So the takeaway from all this is that good capitalism does not equal completely unfettered markets. That isn’t what the economics profession says, and it isn’t what the last couple of years tell us either. Certainly some segments of the population stand to gain from a complete lack of regulation (see: the wealthy), and it may have a philosophical appeal to the Randians among us, but it is bad policy for the country as a whole.
Meant to write: “People for whom this approximate price is a *bad* deal…”
I’d need to check my watch, but it does surprise me that everyone appears to have immediately and fully embraced this story.
I suppose all that can be done is to hope that their feelings and beliefs are not betrayed by cynical power mongers. And if they are, to deal with that bridge when are at it.
Obama taught many Americans why evil should be mistrusted at all times. That is a valuable lesson.
Firefighters have unions and there are volunteer firefighters as well. Thus while doctors require accreditation and experience, there are far more people available to be firefighters then the actual demand. Not the case for medical personnel.
Also, whenever something is funded by federal funds, it becomes an arm of the federal government. While there are many counter balancing checks to prevent arsonists from creating artificial fires in order to use firefighting power for political gains, there are almost zero checks against medical decisions made by the government for political power, not medical efficiency.
Terry Schiavo is the most recent example, but not the only one.
“” few people question the wisdom of government provision of fire departments.””
Alex
I do. They make more money than the architects who design the buildings they put a fire out in and retire at 48. Just another fine example of how beauracrats with taxpayer monies have screwed this country up for the last 100 years.
So yea lets give the same idiots control of a healthcare system that somehow was affordable and the most advanced in the world before govt decided to fix it.
Alex: a few quick thoughts—
We don’t actually buy a share in the fire department, nor are we compelled to purchase fire insurance. We are taxed to support the fire department (among other services). One of the objections to the HCR bill was that, for the purposes of CBO scoring and for other political reasons, the individual mandate was NOT called a tax. I believe that one of the judges who declared the individual mandate unconstitutional said that it was not a tax, although the government was changing its tune and arguing for the purposes of that lawsuit that it WAS a tax rather than a mandate to purchase something. People were and still are quite angry about the hypocrisy of the government talking out of both sides of its mouth that way.
Another thing is that the example of a fire department is that of a local tax and a local service. Many people who are against the individual mandate at the federal level are not against a state passing such a law if it wishes to. There are many things permitted states under a federalist system that are not permitted the federal government (I can even imagine that if the federal government tried to take over fire departments and make them a federal service there would be a hue and cry about it).
In some ways the individual states afford a kind of local experiment in trying out solutions to certain problems. If the experiments are a success, they are often adopted by other states.
If I’m not mistaken, Massachusetts’ health care system includes an individual mandate. By most reports the Massachusetts system is not working out well. But the individual mandate at the state level is allowed.
Ymarsakar:
First of all, unions are generally thought to limit the number of people in a profession, not expand it. Second, doctors have their own union-like AMA which rations access to the profession, keeping out many people who might make great doctors and driving up wages. (I’d love to see access to the medical profession liberalized, but that’s another story.) Third, none of the arguments I made have anything to do with the relative supplies of doctors or firefighters, so your point in bringing this all up is unclear.
And as for the rest, what exactly do the culture wars over Terri Schiavo have to do with health care reform? If that’s your best example…
SteveH:
You do realize, I assume, that that statement is nowhere near correct. The first google hit on “average firefighter salary” gives the mean at $41,349, which sounds pretty reasonable for a highly dangerous and very important job:
http://www1.salary.com/Fire-Fighter-Salary.html
Plus, “a healthcare system that somehow was affordable”? Are you and I talking about the same system here? Because the one I’m talking about has costs that are spiraling out of control, which is why everyone is trying to come up with ways to limit the costs.
Neo:
Whether it is framed as a tax or a mandate to buy it amounts to almost the same thing. A mandate simply preserves a bit more individual choice than a tax. But in both cases the end result is very similar.
I agree that in principle health care mandates might be a good candidate for the federalist treatment. However, over time this could become untenable as people sort across states. Say you’re sick and poor? Go to the state where you can get treatment. Say you’re healthy and rich? Better to leave that state. Any state that tries to unilaterally enact health care reform is going to have a tough time in the long run. Of course, these sorting issues are much less of an issue for firefighting, as a region’s need for firefighting services generally does not vary much according to who lives there (and firefighting services are a MUCH smaller portion of a person’s total expenditures).
Alex: those problems are small in comparison to the problem of federal control, IMHO.
And legally, there’s a good deal of difference between a tax and a mandate. This was discussed interminably in regard to the HCR bill, and it is a very important question in determining the constitutionality of the individual mandate at the federal level. Go to any law blog such as volokh.com, or read some of the court decisions (such as this one).
Third, none of the arguments I made have anything to do with the relative supplies of doctors or firefighters, so your point in bringing this all up is unclear.
If none of your arguments care whether the government plan has a eye squint’s chance in hell of working, that speaks for itself as its own problem.
Eventually things like government promises have to produce results, not magical thinking.
The state with the interest of someone who cared nothing for the well being of Terry, Michael Schiavo, decided that she had to die by starvation regardless of the costs. That meant even if people were going to spend private capital on her healthcare, the state said it wouldn’t be fair or appropriate.
This applied on a national and federal level, is a problem you ignore at the peril of people actually dying for no good reason. Is that of so little consideration for Obama’s healthcare supporters.
I wasn’t referring to the legal ramifications (which I know nothing about) but the economic ramifications (which are basically identical). I will say that if the law treats these two methods differently then that seems like a problem with the law.
And I do think that the sorting issue would make it very hard for a single state’s law to serve as a good test case for the national law. There really wouldn’t need to be much sorting in order to tip a program from black into red.
People do indeed sort. Not that people will necessarily move expressly for the purpose, but it can be a strong factor in decision-making, especially for sick people. Speaking from my own experience, I myself was living in Massachusetts recently and when I left I delayed officially switching my state of residency until my new job started 6 months later. I am relatively young and healthy so this didn’t cost MA a dime, but they would have been on the hook if I’d gotten ill. I doubt I’m the only one who took advantage of MA residency, and costs will only mount with time as more people sort. So it really is hard to say that any cost overruns seen at the state level would be reproduced at the national level.
“However, if you stick around for Econ 102 and beyond you learn that there are many situations where government intervention can be a very positive thing.”
If you make it to Econ 202, Professor Coase tells you that most of the interventions were unnecessary.
Stick around for Econ 302, and Professor Hayek will ask you how you calculate that the interventions were net positive.
foxmarks:
Actually, Professor Coase won’t. If you read “The Problem of Social Cost” you’ll see he frames it as an idealized case that rarely if ever obtains in the real world because in the real world bargaining is “often extremely costly, sufficiently costly at any rate to prevent many transactions.” Please read Section V:
http://www.sfu.ca/~allen/CoaseJLE1960.pdf
“The argument has proceeded up to this point on the assumption that there were no costs involved in carrying out market transactions. This is, of course, a very unrealistic assumption.” (p. 7)
Coase allows that in some cases the government could do a better job than private markets:
“It is clear that the government has powers which might enable it to get some things done at a lower cost than could a private organization… there is no reason why, on occasion, such governmental administrative regulation should not lead to an improvement in economic efficiency. This would seem particularly likely when, as is normally the case with the smoke nuisance, a large number of people are involved and in which therefore the costs of handling the problem through the market or the firm may be high.” (p. 9)