Comparing and contrasting Osama Bin Laden and Pablo Escobar - Essay Example

Comparing and contrasting Osama Bin Laden and Pablo Escobar Osama Bin Laden and Pablo Escobar are in the public limelight for the wrong reasons. While Osama engaged in a campaign of terrorist acts against the United States, Escobar, on the other hand, used all means, and including acts of violence to ensure his illicit drugs penetrated United States streets. While Escobar saw the United States as the key market destination for illicit drugs, Osama, on the other hand, considered the United States as the key target for his global terrorism agenda.

While their agenda of targeting the United States were dissimilar, these two men made public headline as the most wanted by the American Authority (Sutcliffe 449). As such, this paper examines the similarities and differences between Osama Bin Laden and Pablo Escobar. Similarities Both Osama and Escobar became the most wanted men globally due to their involvement in narco-terrorism. Further, both Osama and Escobar were considered to be a threat to the United States interest. Both men also controlled a network that stretched around the world.

For example, Osama established terror cells in different parts around the world. Similarly, Escobar also established a drug smuggling network in different parts around the world. Both Osama and Escobar were also ruthless and showed no mercy to those considered as enemies to their cause. The similarity between Osama and Escobar is also evident on how they attracted a huge following, and particularly those who considered them to be philanthropic or helping the poor in the society (Levistsky 498).

In addition, both men also used the money they received from selling illicit drugs to arm themselves with the intention of waging war against those they considered their enemies. Innocent civilians have also died because of the actions of both men. However, at some point, the United States also benefited from both men. For example, the U.S worked together with Osama, who operated as a liaison between the CIA and the Mujahedeen during the 9-year occupation of Afghanistan by the USSR army (Balderson).

Conversely, Pablo helped anti-narcotics agents to understand how drugs are smuggled from Colombia to the United States. These helped to reduce illicit drugs in the streets of cities in the United States. However, both men were later assassinated by the United States authorities (Chiesa 1372). Differences On one hand, Osama was a terrorist with the intention of destroying America. On the other hand, Escobar focused on smuggling illicit drugs to the United States where he earned millions that helped to expand his drug empire to other countries such as Mexico.

Osama used religion as an excuse to unleash terror on the United States soil. He managed to convince his followers that their war was against the infidels. On the other hand, Escobar engaged in drug wars in the American soil to gain control of the smuggling routes and the drug market in the United States (Levistsky 499). Conclusion Both men are similar in the sense that they brought mass murder in the streets of the United States. However, their interests were different in the sense that, Osama wanted to retaliate against the United States foreign policy in the Middle East.

Escobar, on the other hand, was influenced by the money he earned from smuggling illicit drugs to the United States. Works Cited Balderson, Keelan. Soviet Afghan War, Al Qaeda and the Muslim Rebel Formula. Wide Shut, 30 Sept. 2013. Web. 17 Sept. 2015. . Chiesa, Luis and Greenawalt, Alexander.Beyond War: Bin Laden, Escobar, and the Justification of Targeted Killing. Washington & Lee Law Review 69.3 (2012): 1371-1470. Print. Levitsky, Melvyn.Behind the Curve: Governments versus Criminal Networks.

International Studies Review 9.3 (2007): 498-500.Print. Sutcliffe, Kathleen. A Review of: "From Pablo to Osama: Trafficking and Terrorist Networks, Government Bureaucracies, and Competitive Advantage by Michael Kenney". International Public Management Journal 10.4 (2007): 447-451. Print.