Thoughts on Osama
After a few days of mulling over the death of Osama bin Laden and what it means for our country, along with witnessing the media go crazy over certain aspects of the story and Facebook light up with crazy arguments, I thought it might be a good time to sit down and write a blog post. Not because anyone actually reads this blog, but because sometimes you need a release from all of the insanity being spewed around you.
This is good.
The death of Osama bin Laden is definitely a good thing. Regardless of how much influence he still had on his fellow terrorists, he was a figurehead. I think they are weaker with him gone, although I’m sure that, from an organizational standpoint, he had already delegated many (or all) responsibilities once he had to cut off most communication with the outside world. It’s weird to celebrate death or to wish death upon anyone, but with so many lives cut short under his orders (both in the U.S. and around the world), the world is better off with him not in it.
The plan was amazing.
I’ve always been impressed with our country’s military capabilities. But it’s not every day that you get to hear the details of such a risky operation. They built an exact replica of the stronghold to practice on. They used just a handful of men on the ground. And they were in and out of the compound in 40 minutes, without losing a single guy! Plus, they killed Osama and took away a ton of hard drives and other materials. I’m sure Harrison Ford will end up starring in the movie depiction of this event. That’s how awesome it was.
It was risky.
President Obama had a number of plans to choose from. From what I’ve gathered from TV shows (mostly the West Wing and 24, which I’m sure are accurate), it seems like the president is usually presented with options. They all have their advantages and disadvantages. President Obama could have chosen to bomb the place in March, which would have ended this thing earlier. However, it would have also destroyed evidence and might have left a big, unanswerable question: Was Osama actually killed? Instead, President Obama went with the riskier option, which also would provide concrete proof that Osama was there or was not there. The riskier option also would put American troops in harms way, along with invading a sovereign nation, which I’m sure is something that doesn’t sit well with a president.
There’s a crazy amount of criticism, considering this was a success.
I’ve seen a lot of criticism of President Obama in the last few days regarding this operation. People have said that this is an American victory, not an Obama victory. Or that this success isn’t the result of Obama, but the result of our military. Or that this is the result of Bush’s initial push to find Bin Laden, and Obama had nothing to do with it. Or even that Obama was wrong to have waited this long to storm the compound — he should have done it months ago, when he first found out.
All of this is ridiculous. First of all, President Bush failed at finding Osama initially, and then made it a lower priority. When President Obama took office, he made finding Osama the number one priority for our military. He made that very clear. And now Osama is dead. Maybe it was sheer luck, or perhaps it was because we focused on finding him again.
Secondly, this is absolutely a victory for our military. It’s also a victory for America, especially those who lost loved ones on September 11th, 2001. And it’s also a victory for people around the world who have lost loved ones from other attacks orchestrated by Osama bin Laden or have seen their religion torn apart because of false stereotypes reinforced by the acts of Osama bin Laden.
President Obama happens to be the president of America and the Commander-in-chief of our military. I think he deserves a little bit of credit too. Imagine a much different scenario: President Obama sends the Navy Seals into Pakistan. Things go wrong. Americans are killed. Osama escapes. We’re back to square one. Who do you think the people would blame in that scenario? The military? Absolutely not, nor should they. President Obama would be blamed for it all, because it was his decision. He was the one working with the intelligence and military commanders, looking at the risks and making the final plans. Fortunately, a positive scenario played out instead — a scenario that not only took down that stronghold, but also provided solid proof that Osama is dead. Even though he was not the one that literally pulled the trigger, he is the one that helped come up with the successful strategy and made the right decisions.
Finally, are we really complaining that Obama took too long to storm the compound? This mission was a success. Why are we second-guessing a success? Is there no way to be content with a decision by a president that you might disagree with on other issues? I don’t understand why people have to find a way to disagree 100% of the time. Sometimes it’s nice to just be content after a job well-done.
So yeah, this is good.
It’s unfortunate this has become political, especially with 2012 still so far away. (Just take note of all of the Republican press releases from Monday either not mentioning Obama, only mentioning Obama after mentioning Bush, or just mentioning Bush.) However, this event demonstrates that we have a president who won’t cave under pressure — one who can think clearly to get the job done in the best way possible (ie, a manned mission) rather than a quicker (and I’m sure more tempting) alternative (ie, a drone attack).
I’m hoping that eventually the debate will cool off and we’ll all look at the big picture. Osama Bin Laden is dead, and the world is a (slightly) safer place as a result.
May 4, 2011