Capturing bin Laden is a top priority :

[rodbarnett]

Reports in the British press over the weekend have it that U.S. forces have Osama bin Laden and his bodyguards surrounded in a remote area of mountainous Pakistan.

So the story goes, the U.S. forces are waiting to extract bin Laden in a lightning maneuver rather than conducting an all-out assault.

Surrounded or not, bin Laden is clearly the world's most wanted man. His capture or death continues to rank at the top of the U.S. priority list, even though critics have suggested the war and occupation in Iraq have shifted attention away from the hunt for the world's leading terrorist.

<snip>

Politics or not, bin Laden is a top priority While the intentions and capabilities of Saddam Hussein are clearly debatable regarding a threat to the United States, there is no question bin Laden and his organization intend to strike at the United States and its interests at every opportunity. His capture would not end the threat of terrorism, but it certainly would be an undeniably large blow against those who would not hesitate to reek mass destruction upon our nation and its people.

http://www.timesanddemocrat.com/articles/2004/02/24/opinion/opinion1.txt

[0007]

1. Politics or not"

Dickie and Tony are enthralled that the US is getting close to Binny baby

[Drifter]

2. Wasn't he a top priority ...

on 9/12/01 ?

While I am against the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan, I think AWOL was asleep at the wheel in attempting to get Bin Laden.

We should have been in Afghanistan on 9/12/01 taking out Bin Laden. Clinton left AWOL a ton of intelligence on Bin Laden, warned him about the threats, and AWOL chose to backoff Bin Laden.

Instead AWOL facilitated the escape of Bin Laden relatives during a no-fly period.

Cheers
Drifter

[leesa]

3. Now he's a top priority again. Before he didn't matter. Could Bush

be waffling?