Did “enhanced interrogation” lead to Bin Laden?
At this point, we really don’t know.
But the NY Times does what you’d expect with the meager information it possesses: claims that enhanced interrogation was not a factor in Osama’s capture.
And Ace quite carefully deconstructs that point of view. Well worth reading.
[ADDENDUM: More here from Ace.]
The question of whether waterboarding was critical in capturing Bin Laden is mostly beside the point. Its covering up a larger issue.
That is – did Obama (or his people) order that Bin Laden be killed so that he wouldn’t be taken into custody? Why would they do that? Because if he were taken into custody, then Obama would have to decide whether to waterboard Bin Laden.
That would have been an impossible question for Obama. The ironies are so deep, you can’t even find the irony at the bottom of the pile.
I for one hope they ‘enhance’ a few more.
What most people fail to understand is that we needed to learn so much more than just the whereabouts of OBL. We needed to get a handle on money transactions, network hubs, local imams, and mosques recruiting cannon fodder. There are still plenty of people who don’t think we should be suspicious of CAIR or Muslim student groups. Iguess that if a person has been raised to think he knows everything all those strange puzzle pieces that don’t seem to fit become irrelevant.
“I guess that if a person has been raised to think he knows everything all those strange puzzle pieces that don’t seem to fit become irrelevant.”
That’s our current president.
“That is – did Obama (or his people) order that Bin Laden be killed so that he wouldn’t be taken into custody? Why would they do that? Because if he were taken into custody, then Obama would have to decide whether to waterboard Bin Laden.”
That would assume collusion by JSOC, I’m doubtful they can be co-opted on something as critical as this operation. IMO, BHO would have beamed with joy to put OBL on trial in order to demonstrate the savagery of Bush-Cheney.
I’m all for ‘enhanced interrogation’. If it contributed to locating OBL, good, let the water boarding re-commence. If it didn’t let the water boarding re-commence. After all, you never know unless you try, try, try again.
Hi Parker,
I don’t think I follow. It seems to me that the President ordered JSOC to kill him – so they did. Where is the collusion in following orders?
James said, “That is – did Obama (or his people) order that Bin Laden be killed so that he wouldn’t be taken into custody? Why would they do that? Because if he were taken into custody, then Obama would have to decide whether to waterboard Bin Laden.”
According to the WH the primary objective was to capture OBL. That makes sense. If OBL could be captured he was a potential source of very important info. If the order given to the boots on the ground was kill, do not capture, then everyone involved (hundreds of people, including the JSOC) would have known the order was to kill, not capture. That would not remain secret for long. (I am a skeptic of grand conspiracy theories, so I take the announced official objective at face value.)
Obama via Panetta and the JCOS gave the command to commence the operation. I believe they followed orders. OBL was killed because the boots on the ground made decision to kill based upon circumstances, not because they received orders to kill, do not capture.
Clear? If not, its my “failure to communicate”.
The military has already seen what their politicians will do with captured terrorists. So they had an intense interest, a national and patriotic one independent of obedience to the chain of command, to kill OBL.
And Obama’s procrastination on the matter of the mission go order, either gave them enough motivation or enough time to fiddle with their on site cameras.