Which brings up one of my pet peeves: the whole use of code names these days. I'm thinking particularly of names for military operations--"Iraqi Freedom," "Desert Storm," but the example of Geronimo/bin Laden shows the same confusion.
Code-names are supposed to be CODE. They are meant to conceal, not reveal. Historically, the names given to operations had nothing to do with the objective; that was the whole point. So, the invasion of North Africa was Torch, of Sicily Husky and of Normandy--as we all know--Overlord. None of the titles had anything to do with the target. During WWII, the names were picked at random from a long list (sometimes a name was rejected as being perhaps too revealing or perhaps embarrassing if known).
That's the other thing about code-names: they are not revealed at the time; that would defeat the purpose. They are held secret until revealing them will not hurt anyone.
What we have today is clumsy propagandizing meant to evoke heroic warmaking. Arrogant foolishness.