05/09/11 Beijing, China – Times have changed. When governments sent out hit squads to kill someone, they used to keep quiet about it. But this time, Obama called a national press conference to claim credit. His poll ratings rose.
Rarely has a killing been such a crowd pleaser. There was dancing in the streets. It recalled the happy mob that kicked around Louis 16th’s head or the crowd that spat upon Mussolini’s corpse. Americans were jubilant. The newspapers were universally joyful and upbeat. “Mission accomplished,” said the editorials.
Arms maker Berretta took out a full-page ad in the weekend USA Today to applaud the Navy SEALS who pulled the trigger. Beretta and other handgun makers typically apologize when their products are used to kill unarmed civilians. This time, they were using it to gain market share.
And feeling their oats, US officials decided to try to make it two for two, with a drone attack on a “terror suspect,” in Yemen. The radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaqi survived, reported the Hong Kong paper.
Asked where in the Constitution the federal government was given the right to murder people, Eric Holder, US Attorney General, replied that this was certainly not murder. And not an assassination either. This was war! Osama bin Laden was an enemy combatant. US forces mounted an operation to kill him, as they might target an opposing general. Fair and square.
But if Osama bin Laden were an enemy general, his was a strange army. How many divisions did he have? Where were his warships? His aircraft carriers? His submarines? Where were his tanks? And his trained legions? He had no army. No navy. No marines. No air force. Not even a few praetorians guarding his headquarters. He was almost alone. No Swiss guards, no home guard; for there was no homeland to guard. And not a single troop carrier, for there were no troops and nowhere to take them. He had no tanks. No fighter planes. No bombers. No artillery. In fact, his most effective weapon was the lowly box cutter.
A fanatic with a box cutter can be dangerous; but he is no Grande Armée…no Wehrmacht…no Japanese Imperial Army. He is not a worthy opponent for the Pentagon, in other words; for there is no glory in picking on someone who’s not your own size.
As the week moved on, glory turned to embarrassment. The terrorist was not armed. He didn’t use his wife as a human shield. He didn’t live in a mansion surrounded by armed guards. Instead, it began to look like the SEALS had gunned down a sick, broken old invalid.
But what an opportunity! Forget the messy court trials. Who knows how they might turn out…or what information they might reveal? The government spends a fortune trying to convict mobsters and drug pushers, for example. Why not just declare war on them, and send in hit squads? And now the SEC is laboring hard to convict a fund manager in the Galleon case. It would be so much simpler to label SEC violators ‘financial terrorists’ – and let drones take care of them.
But wait, we’re missing the biggest opportunity of all. Other countries have done it for years; why shouldn’t we? Instead of defeating political enemies at the polls, why not just say you are at war with them and take them out? Take Donald Trump, for example. Here at The Daily Reckoning, we are warming up to Mr. Trump. He is our kind of politician. Too rich to steal. Too dumb to lie. But he is surely a threat to the Republic. So why not call in a drone attack?
Why waste drones on Osama bin Laden? He posed no real threat to the government of the United States of America. Even in his own backyard, he was a loser. He was unable to take over a single woebegone, Muslim-drenched country in the Mid-East. There was never any question that he would be able to defeat the US.
Nor was he a substantial threat to the American people. For all his box cutters and suicidal followers, statistically – according to The Financial Times – he did less damage to Americans than accidents caused by wild deer. In the 10 years following the announcement of the War on Terror, as far as we know, he was not responsible for a single North American casualty. As a general, he was worse than any we ever heard of; even Sir Douglas Haig was not that bad.
Osama bin Laden didn’t pose a threat to the US or its people; instead, the danger he posed was more like the danger of an interest-only, low-doc, automatically reset mortgage with a teaser rate. Bin Laden, in an early video address, announced his strategy. He could sucker the US into spending an enormous amount of money to combat him. He would not try to defeat the US on the field of battle; instead, he would lure the giant into expenses it could not afford.
And lo, it has come to pass just as the bearded one forecast. According to The Financial Times, the US has spent $2 trillion on the war against terror…or about a million times more than Osama bin Laden spent.
Regards,
Bill Bonner
for The Daily Reckoning
Bill Bonner
Since founding Agora Inc. in 1979, Bill Bonner has found success and garnered camaraderie in numerous communities and industries. A man of many talents, his entrepreneurial savvy, unique writings, philanthropic undertakings, and preservationist activities have all been recognized and awarded by some of America's most respected authorities. Along with Addison Wiggin, his friend and colleague, Bill has written two New York Times best-selling books, Financial Reckoning Day and Empire of Debt. Both works have been critically acclaimed internationally. With political journalist Lila Rajiva, he wrote his third New York Times best-selling book, Mobs, Messiahs and Markets, which offers concrete advice on how to avoid the public spectacle of modern finance. Since 1999, Bill has been a daily contributor and the driving force behind The Daily Reckoning. Dice Have No Memory: Big Bets & Bad Economics from Paris to the Pampas, the newest book from Bill Bonner, is the definitive compendium of Bill’s daily reckonings from more than a decade: 1999-2010.
The Daily Reckoning is your premier source for making sense of the news Washington and Wall Street generate. Each business day, The Daily Reckoning calls on its stable of world-class writers and thinkers to show you how to get ahead.
Start your 100% FREE subscription to The Daily Reckoning today and you’ll get a free research report, “How to Survive the Fall of Social Security.” Simply enter your email address below to get your free report and join over 495,000 worldwide Daily Reckoning subscribers!
We Respect Your Privacy and We will
Never Share or Sell Your Email Address
That would make Clinton’s round of golf (the one where they tried to get clearance to strike the bearded one and he blew them off) the most expensive in history. But then, dresses didn’t come cheap during his administration, either….
A most excellent piece, worthy of the author.
How many people would Al’qaeda taken hostage and killed in order to secure Bin Laden’s release? think about it.
He was not a sick old man, he was the head and mastermind of a global terrorist network that was waging war on the western world.
You’re absolutley right Bill, such a waste of human potential! Bin Laden should have been taken alive and then sent to reform school. Who knows, he may have one day gone on to become the governor of Oklahoma.
Obama is Don Corleone and the Navy SEALs are his hit men. Even the disposal of the corpse reminds me of the Mafia. And Americans cheer this on like it’s the Super Bowl and their team just scored the winning touchdown. A rather shameful display all around.
Are you kidding??? That bullet was 15 years late, but the freak had it coming.
If only Clinton had the balls to pull the trigger then he was in the cross hairs back in the 90′s.
The constitution is not a suicide pact.
Mr. Wirth,
You must be a public school graduate. Am I right?
Being a “freak” is not a crime; planning terrorist attacks against innocent civilians is.
Capture the guy, put him on trial, present the evidence. If he did what is alleged, no jury would let him go. Heck, he’d probably admit to it openly. I don’t see that as a suicide pact. It’s the law, and it sure beats making a Navy SEAL judge, jury, and executioner.
I don’t have much pity on Bin Laden. He knew the consequences of his actions. Like Bill said, he got what he wanted. A costly war. At least we got some return on our investment.
I do, however, find great amusement in watching Liberals try to explain how Gitmo and water boarding are clearly illegal and against human rights,
Yet assassination is perfectly acceptable. Hahahaha!
Bin Laden’s legacy is far more dangerous than the man ever was.
Steve-
Are you a public school graduate?
I am, but hopefully you won’t hold that against me.
Bill-
I tried to go along with you on this article but really I can’t. Do you want to rethink this line? “Nor was he (Bin Laden) a substantial threat to the American people.” Maybe he isn’t as dangerous as wild deer, but 2,000+ dead unnecessarily still counts as a substantial threat to me.
Unless you feel he was framed and had no involvement in the attacks on the twin towers I think you are out to lunch on this one.
Cheers.
I’ll have to agree with JRod on this one Bill, but I get the idea of what you are saying in economic terms. Unfortunately an empire like ours has made a fool of itself trying to wage a war against terror, especially when it begins to target its own citizens. To paraphrase Ben Franklin I believe it was, ‘Those who give up their personal civil liberties in the name of security deserve neither liberty nor security.’ Security is gained only through liberty.
The Constitution is no suicide pact, but continuing to stray away from its guiding principles is. Beware of big government, and beware of the MIC (Military Industrial Complex) We are our worst enemy it seems, doesn’t it?
We have over half of government politicians telling us that you cant trust anything the government tells you and yet wonder why when we are told the story of Ben Laden we are skeptical.
BL was a threat to the U.S., but not in any military sense. Yeah anyone can kill so we techincally are faced with “terrorist” threats daily. But BL’s greatest weapon was US.
In football, if a larger man is running the ball to the sideline and you are not big enough to tackle him – just use his mo with a little push and he will go down.
BL used our mo against US. He knew we would go overboard in spending to get him. Our debt would be out ultimate undoing. We’ll find out if his tactics prove successful.
I say send seal team 6 in to get Loyd Blankfein, John Mack, Jamie Dimon and the other terrorists.
That of course all depends on whether or not Bin Laden was actually even alive before the alleged “raid”!
Seems some people around the world including the CIA claim Bin Laden died nearly 10 years ago from kidney failure or a Tora Bora.
If he were already dead it would explain why nobody has heard from him for all these past years!
Seems this raid is as phoney as President Obama birth certificate which ahs the wrong hospital name on it. Seems he was born in 1961 but the hospital name only came into being in 1978 when two hospitals merged into one.
It’s interesting to see how much support Bill gets when he writes columns like this now, whereas in the dark old days of 2003, when he advocated against invading Eye-rack, DR readers reacted with hysteria.
Only took you sorry sadsacks eight years to come round to Bill’s vision of the world, eh? I remember a time when the DR fora were full of fulminating fools frothing at the mouth to invade Eye-rack, Eye-ran, and every -stan this side of Japan.
My, how the DR’s readers have changed their views.
Our countries knee-jerk reaction to ObL terror has been instrumental in bring us to our financial abyss. While at the same time making us a Superpower laughing stock.
ObL may not be around to see the finish of what he started, but he died knowing we aren’t the same country he attacked in statue both militarily and financially.
I am having difficulty wrapping my head around this one. When I watched the news the evening of the announcement of OBL’s demise, I was very, very uncomfortable with the Street Celebrations. Though I was pleased with the news, the expression was completely inappropriate. This is NOT who we (USA) are. With this, I agree with Bonner. However, to claim that OBL was not a substantial threat to the American People is preposterous. Killing Americans was his stated goal in every video that was released by OBL following 9/11. Yes, the events of 9/11 caused the US to spend a helluva lot of money, but doing so has thwarted many US based plots following 9/11, a point he does not address. The monetary cost was tremendous because we spent 30-years with our collective heads in the sand about how badly Radical Islam despised US, and we have been playing “catch-up”. Could we have saved 3,000+ lives and a $1 Trillion had Clinton taken his shot at OBL when he had the opportunity? Bonner really lost me when he offers support to Trump as a viable Presidential Candidate. Trump has picked all the low-hanging fruit with respect to hot-bed issues, but is weak on deeper issues (foreign policy), his past campaign contributions, and voting record (or, lack of one). Bonner’s sixth paragraph I think actually makes the case as to WHY OBL should have been taken out. OBL had something much bigger than an Army, Navy, Marines, or an Air Force; he was the face of Jihad and was influential in whipping up the furor of Radical Muslims against “Infidels” worldwide. And, I think Bonner is taking a cheap shot by suggesting the OBL’s most effective weapon was the box cutter. OBL’s most effective weapon was instilling fear and uncertainty as the “where” and/or “how” the next attack would take place. OBL was much, much more than a fanatic with a box cutter. Finally, in re-reading the article again and again, I also believe that Bonner is latently “anti-gun”.
Mr. Bonner,
I have been a Daily Reckoning subscriber for some time, as I find your articles interesting, even if it is the same thing day after day (buy gold, Dow is going to crash, Bernanke is an idiot).
But must you find a dark cloud in EVERYTHING? Do you honestly think that the USA killing bin Laden is not a good thing? Would it have been better if we would have done nothing?
I am not naive enough to think that the world is a whole lot safer now that bin Laden is gone, but so what? Didn’t Clint Eastwood say in one of his movies that one of the bad guys “needed killing”? Well, if nothing else, bin Laden needed killing!
The only unfortunate thing about bin Laden’s demise is that he went out much too quickly and painlessly. It would have been better if he would have been spirited away to some secret CIA prison, interrogated heavily under extremely severe conditions that would make a day of waterboarding seem like a nice cool dip in a swimming pool.
That piece of scum deserves nothing but the worst and for you to cast aspersions on the operation that took him out has caused me to cancel my e-mail subscription to your Daily Reckonings.
To all you hot heads frothing at the mouth over Bill essay, take a pill.
Bill has creating these types of excellent narratives for over a decade now. What have you been doing?