WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President-elect Barack Obama wants to renew the U.S. commitment to finding al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, according to his national security advisers. Osama bin Laden remains on the run despite a $25 million reward for his capture. The Obama team believes the Bush administration has downplayed the importance of catching the FBI's most-wanted terrorist because it has not been able to find him. "We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al Qaeda. That has to be our biggest national security priority," Obama said during the presidential debate on October 7.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/the-hunt-for-bin-laden-what-exactly-em-did-em-obama-do In 2005, then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld reportedly called off such a mission, despite the fact that intelligence officials had "unusually high confidence" about the whereabouts of Ayman al-Zawahiri, Al Qaeda's then-second-in-command. According to a 2007New York Times report revealing the aborted raid, Rumsfeld was concerned about both the size of the operation -- which grew to include several hundred military personnel and CIA operatives -- and the potential reaction from the Pakistani government.
In 2011, President Obama was faced with a similar decision that obviously ended differently.http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/10/this-is-50-50-behind-obamas-decision-to-kill-bin-laden/263449/On May 26, 2009, four months into his presidency, [President Obama] had ended a routine national security briefing in the Situation Room by pointing to [then-Deputy National Security Adviser Tom] Donilon, Leon Panetta, his newly appointed CIA director, Mike Leiter, director of the National Counter Terrorism Center, and Rahm Emanuel, his chief of staff. "You, you, you, and you," he said. "Come upstairs. I want to talk to you guys about something." As Donilon would tell [Bowden], Obama said: "Here's the deal. I want this hunt for Osama bin Laden and al-Zawahiri to come to the front of the line. I worry that the trail has gone cold. This has to be our top priority and it needs leadership in the tops of your organizations [...] And I want regular reports on this to me, and I want them starting in thirty days." At his regular daily briefings, [President] Bush would routinely ask, "How're we doing?" and everyone knew what he was talking about. It was the same with Obama. After that impromptu meeting in his office with his new intelligence chiefs in 2009, he would bring it up at nearly every security briefing. "Are we any closer?" "What have we learned?"
I apologize, since this dynamic candidate that's 10x better than Hillary is not really cracking the one percent mark she's not really referenced in anything these days. I guess this means that Trump is like 100x the candidate Hillary is.
Ten times a better candidate yet she's not actually a candidate that makes it easy since I would have to assume that once she announces, she will immediately get 70 percent of the Republican support lol
We would have used the bomb on Germany if they were still a threat when it was finished. Germany was the reason we created it in the first place, and our lack of knowledge of where they were with their program helped make the bomb project the number 1 priority in weapons development. Our firebombing attacks on Japan were more devastating than the atomic attacks.
I get what the guy is saying but I think he's wrong telling us it's not about 'cheap' oil because that's what it is about. There are economic benefits to having access to cheap oil but you really can't compare it to Japan or Germany's issues in WWII for example, they had no choice but to rely on outside countries for their basic industrial raw materials and had to eventually send conquering armies to secure them. We can get oil right here if we need it, it's just that the costs of doing so, along with the environmental issues, compared to getting it cheap from the middle east, makes it unnecessary. That's "blood for oil".