Originally posted by Tinny:
Sounds more like allowing him a greater chance to escape.
TK is correct, Tinny. You're labouring under a misapprehension.
The situation you describe doesn't make any sense. If the Taliban wanted to give Bin Laden time to escape, they would perhaps have claimed that they did not have any knowledge of his whereabouts. They could have claimed any number of things. Instead they asked for evidence and offered to turn Bin Laden over to a third party. That's not a method of stalling for time, it's a direct statement that they had the man and were willing to turn him over under certain circumstances.
Do you seriously think the Taliban were fools? Idiots? Do you think they wanted Afghanistan to be invaded by US troops? Pshaw.
What the Taliban did was ask for evidence to support the accusations of the US government... and offered to turn Bin Laden over to a third party (a neutral party). Both are reasonable requests. As stated before, the US demands no less in similar situations. When was the last time the US agreed to extradite someone to another country without any evidence whatsoever? Hell, the US doesn't extradite people to other countries even when they're given quite a lot of evidence of their wrongdoings.
So if it's okay for the US to demand evidence, it's okay for everyone else to demand evidence. And if you're saying that the US DIDN'T have to give any evidence, then nobody else has to give evidence either... which would mean that the US should have given up all the terrorists and international criminals it's been harbouring over the years.
Either way, simple moral universality disproves your contentions. I presume you want your nation to behave morally? Well so do I.
Furthermore, let's for the sake of completeness accept for a moment that your assertion is correct, (even though it is not correct) and that the "Taliban were merely stalling for time" to allow the evil Bin Laden to escape.
Well does that give the US the right to invade a country causing death, poverty, misery and suffering to the populace of that country? Nope. It still doesn't give them that right. You don't get to smash a whole country just in order to catch one man. That's insanity, plain and simple.
There were plenty of other options of course. That just makes the decision to go straight in to war even more reprehensible.