In the face plummeting approval of President Bush's handling of the Iraq war, Bush's focus yesterday was on Osama bin Laden:
"Some will tell you al-Qaeda in Iraq isn't really al-Qaeda -- and not really a threat to America. Well, that's like watching a man walk into a bank with a mask and a gun, and saying he's probably just there to cash a check. We are fighting bin Laden's al-Qaeda in Iraq" (Washington Post)
Why do White House speechwriters think this tactic still works? Just after September 11th, the mere mention of bin Laden terrified us and sent Bush's approval ratings up, but that was almost six years ago.
Given all we've learned about the White House's tactics -- starting with the massively flawed intelligence on which it persuaded the public to support the Iraq war -- even if Bush is right this time, will most Americans believe him?
As well as ineffective, the bring-up-bin-Laden tactic seems counter-productive, as it only reminds us taxpayers that Bush failed to capture our archenemy -- despite considerable time and resources at his disposal.
The Christian Science Monitor stated: "scant intelligence, poorly chosen allies, and dubious military tactics fumbled a golden opportunity to capture bin Laden as well as many senior Al Qaeda commanders." I don't know if that assessment is accurate, but the article is worth a read.
Comments