"Simple prediction; I'd say that if anyone is going to get bin Laden it'll be MI6 or DGSE." Absolutely. No arguement there. I think we've gotten our wires crossed. Catching or eliminating bin Ladin is good and necessary...but that's not the only mandate for action in Afghanistan and elsewhere. That's what I am arguing. "You can't stop terrorism unless you recognise fault on your behalf first. Ask yourself this; why have Australians never suffered a terrorist attack?" Because they are not the superpower al qaida is gunning for. Bin ladin thinks that they brought down the Soviets in Afghanistan, and wanted to bring down the Americans next. Saddam knows his enemy is not Europe or Australia, though they are all on board against him. He doesn't consider them his enemy because alone, they cannot do anything about him. America, and the targets selected, were attacked for symbolic value and maximum casualties. It is modernization that Islamists fear and disdane, and the driving force in the world for that eminates from America. More importantly, the power that protects and drives that modernization comes from America. Yes, this is about power in part. Yes, there have been displays of American or western power that has angered and fueled Islamist disgust and anger. Yes, there are things we should do differently in the future. But the arguement that America is at fault or somehow to blame for what transpired (aside from inability to stop it and unwillingness/inability to deal with al qaida before 9-11) is wrong. That's analogous to if Kiwis rammed a tanker into the Golden Gate bridge and toppled it at rush hour, and people pointed and said 'America deserved this because they did not ratify Kyoto!'