Pierre Legrand’s Pink Flamingo Bar

From the Strategy Page comes this interesting take on Osama.�I think this misses the point but that doesn’t mean it is entirely wrong.

Winning: The Joke’s on Osama The chatter is on again. This time there is talk of an al Qaeda video featuring the long unseen Osama bin Laden. The recent reports of his death began as rumors in Arab countries about bin Laden passing away in some inglorious and painful fashion (Typhoid was mentioned.) Actually, many of the “death reports” were actually jokes. Al Qaeda’s fortunes have sunk so low in the Moslem world that he is being mocked, via jokes about his demise. While the Western media may not be picking up on this, al Qaeda certainly is, and is eager to do something about it. The chatter also indicates that the new video release may be followed by the long rumored, and oft delayed, “major attack.” Either al Qaeda delivers this time, or the organization continues to fade from the Moslem memory.

Osama is dead, has been dead since Tora Bora.�While that may screw up Democratic talking points it is a�certainty that Osama, the camera whore,�would have shown up on camera by now if he were anything but�a slowly decomposing pile of crap. If our enemy’s will to fight�originated from one man’s life, Osama’s death might be something to celebrate. But again sadly for Democratic talking points Osama being alive or dead matters not one bit in the drive of Islam’s Holy Warriors.

Furthermore while some in the Middle East�may be making jokes about Osama being dead that isn’t the same�as making jokes regarding the war against Dar al-Harb. Making war against Dar al-Harb is every Muslims religious duty. (Thank god there appears to be a vast majority�who don’t take that very seriously)�They are laughing at a the failure of a man, not the failure of a cause. They may even be laughing at the failure of an organization, Al Qaeda, but we should not derive much comfort from this since other organizations are waiting to fill the void. Also using the lack of an attack as some measure of success�may be misunderstanding the strategy.

Rampant speculation follows…

We have not been attacked simply because we are not ready to be attacked again. Attacking us now galvanizes the side of the debate which believes in taking the war to the Jihadists and their families. Attacking us now risks�saving the Republicans who managed to shoot themselves in the foot at every turn over the last 6 years. But who regardless are more diligent at�bringing the war to the Jihadists.�At this point the Jihadists may have realized that we are not quite the toothless tiger they believed us to be.�Additionally they do understand that there is a party in the United States which is a toothless tiger a party dying to surrender. Jihadists understand that the other-side of the aisle is filled to the brim with folks who truly believe surrender to be the best option.

Some have said that they have not attacked us yet because we have stopped them. No doubt this is true, to a degree. But only a fool, seeing how easy it is to hide inside of the United States (Homeland security taking over 1st place from Military Intelligence in the list of oxymorons), believes that it is impossible to attack us again. Which leaves us with the threats which are in themselves attacks against our country, witness the terror mere threats creates. Furthermore when they attack us again it will be larger than 9/11 simply because to do less would be to attract ridicule since they have been promising a devastating attack for quite some time now.

We will be ready to be attacked again when there exists majorities in congress willing to surrender to make the attacks stop. We will be ready to be attacked again when the Jihadists see those in office who have been pleading for an end to hostilities. When those who have been pleading for us to stop killing the Jihadists gain power then the Jihadists will strike again. It will be their way of saying thank you to their no doubt shocked appeasers.