In grade school, I was often entertained by a friend who recounted his elaborate dreams from the night before. The plot never changed: he was a macho Delta Force commando on a secret mission to assassinate Muammar Gaddafi. Uzi's blazing, my friend always managed to heroically take out the dictator in some local public restroom or Pizza Hut.

Yes, Libya's Colonel Gaddafi, the mid-eighties Osama Bin Laden.

Back then, killing Gaddafi was the cause celébre. Libya was a sponsor of terrorists and evidence showed the Libyan government had supported the Lockerbie bombing. Ronald Reagan's tough talk against Libya in the '80s foreshadowed Bush's current "you're with us or you're against us" tone against Al Qaeda.

But today Gaddafi seems to be tired of being the global bad boy. He's turning over his illegal weapons programs, shaking hands with European diplomats, and renouncing his former ways. His own Web site announces his belief that America has the right to defend itself against terrorism.

While Libya's terrorist tactics never came near the severity of 9/11, there is an interesting parallel that can be drawn between Gaddafi's revolutionary career and Osama's stint as a Jihadist warrior.

Bin laden and Gaddafi both used powerful rhetoric to gain followers, even if, in practice their messages were worthless. Gaddafi took control of Libya in a coup, promising to spread his revolutionary power to every citizen through local committees and socialized government. In reality he was a tyrannical dictator who allegedly still imprisons his political adversaries -- but hey, the image is what counts right? Meanwhile, Bin Laden uses a distorted version of Islam to urge his followers against Christian invaders, even as many Clerics denounce his violent teachings.

With Gaddafi, this democratic promise from his early days has afforded an excuse for the softening of his regime in his old age -- all the while saving face with his long-time supporters. Today the colonel chases after the same goals he originally outlined: peace and freedom for all people -- these days he just does it without employing terrorism.

Defeating Bin Laden tomorrow might mean allowing Al Qaeda the opportunity to fulfill some of the same empty promises it's making today. By doing so, we might give the terrorist network an "out" -- a chance for a graceful retreat. As Richard Clarke pointed out in his 9/11 testimony, we are doing the opposite. By invading Iraq, we did exactly what Osama predicted we would: we invaded an oil-rich Arab country.

I would never argue that we should back down in the war against terrorism. We should never let a terrorist act go unpunished, and never allow terrorist organizations to thrive. But, there is no reason to add insult to injury by verifying Al Qaeda' own rhetoric against us through our own actions.

Organizations like Al Qaeda and Gaddafi's revolution need popular support to be legitimate. As one of the most outspoken leaders of any Arab country, Gaddafi planned to find way to unite the Arab world, but found himself rebuffed by many as a lunatic. Now, he's wooing the entire International Community for legitimacy while pushing to unify the nations of Africa.

Stripped of its popularity, a network like Al Qaeda would be forced change its focus, just as Gaddafi has to maintain his legitimacy.

The irony is that the former Libyan terrorist has found refuge and redemption in Bush's anti-terror policies. By complying with the demand to hand over his weapons, the Libyan strongman will be able to maintain his regime-even with a questionable human rights record and a reckless history.

Gaddafi has always been a showman in search of an audience, using his position as the leader of Libya as his grandstand, and this transformation is no different. Every thing is spectacle, from his self-designed rocket car, to his female bodyguards -- who make Charlie's Angles look like a Girl Scout troop. To the coalition of the willing, Libya's reformation is a public relations victory and Gaddafi is writing the press releases himself. The catch is, he's publishing the same rhetoric he's been purporting for 30 years.