It is always good to know how one's "opponent" thinks. Let's see.


Bin Laden stringly opposed Iraq's invasion of Kuwait and was ready to fight against the Iraqis. He even submitted proposals about how to help the Kuwaitis to the Saudi leadership. But he was upset when American and other troops landed on Saudi Arabia to fight Iraq. Saudi Arabia is home to the two holiest places in the Muslim religion. To visit these places one needs to be a devout Muslim, and not just any other casual believer. To visit Saudi Arabia one needs to pass numerous screenings. Then he might get a visa, for a specific and short period of time. (You should see the offices of the Saudi Toursim Bureau. Tell me, if you do!) So, the presence of "infidel troops" on Saudi soil was a sacrilege for millions of Muslims, and anyone who protested against it a true faithful.


The seeds of bin Laden's terrorism were sown then & there, not because of some American show of support towards Israel.


So, before sending troops to land and occupy a place, it is wise to gauge plausible reactions & developments. Unless of course someone is being strictly a short-term player, relying on luck, intuition and "good intentions".


....The U.S. is after a band of terrorists, who can do disproportionate damage . These terrorists are not numerous, they move secretly, they have a network of safe but known havens, they obey no laws, and they will provenly fight to the death rather than surrender. It's a no-brainer how to handle that situation but the United States will never do it the right way. Not for moral reasons. But because they are trapped in their own grandiose size. Unlike Israel.