Is Pakistan Lost?
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Foreign Policy, The War On Terrorism, The WorldWe could see it coming, but now it’s coming from the White House.
WASHINGTON, July 17 � President Bush’s top counterterrorism advisers acknowledged Tuesday that the strategy for fighting Osama bin Laden’s leadership of Al Qaeda in Pakistan had failed, as the White House released a grim new intelligence assessment that has forced the administration to consider more aggressive measures inside Pakistan.The intelligence report, the most formal assessment since the Sept. 11 attacks about the terrorist threat facing the United States, concludes that the United States is losing ground on a number of fronts in the fight against Al Qaeda, and describes the terrorist organization as having significantly strengthened over the past two years.
In identifying the main reasons for Al Qaeda’s resurgence, intelligence officials and White House aides pointed the finger squarely at a hands-off approach toward the tribal areas by Pakistan’s president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, who last year brokered a cease-fire with tribal leaders in an effort to drain support for Islamic extremism in the region.
And we’ve sat by and let Musharraf give safe haven to al-Qaeda, and most likely Bin Laden.
And this brings about a grim reality for the WoT…
Since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, President Bush has been able to deflect criticism of his counterterrorism policy by repeatedly noting the absence of any new domestic attacks and by citing the continuing threat that terrorists in Iraq pose to U.S. interests.But this line of defense seemed to unravel a bit yesterday with the release of a new National Intelligence Estimate that concludes that al-Qaeda “has protected or regenerated key elements of its Homeland attack capability” by reestablishing a haven in Pakistan and reconstituting its top leadership. The report also notes that al-Qaeda has been able “to recruit and indoctrinate operatives, including for Homeland attacks,” by associating itself with an Iraqi subsidiary.
The question then becomes are we less safe than pre 9/11?
This entry was posted on Wednesday, July 18th, 2007 and is filed under Foreign Policy, The War On Terrorism, The World. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
July 18th, 2007 at 4:30 pm
“The question then becomes are we less safe than pre 9/11?”
That depends on whom you ask I guess. Republicans will quickly point out that the U.S. has not been attacked on our own soil since the attacks of 9/11, holding this up as a kind of measure as to the success of the presidents “War on Terror.”
The idea of “safety” also becomes subjective. Some people tend to see things in their entirety, in a holistic manner and tending to be long term. Yet, other believe their safety is only assured from day to day, hour to hour, that an attack in inevitable and that any means to stop that threat is justified, regardless of the method used.
Anyone can argue that their version or idea of safety is the more “pragmatic” one or the “right” one or the only “sensible” course of action. The fact is, humans are not fortune tellers. Anyone that says they know what the result of this policy or that policy is going to be on our present and future safety is either naive or wishful dreamers.
One thing is for sure. Ignoring America’s role and precedence in the area of basic human rights, the Geneva conventions and the consensus of freedom-loving nations is an absolute must. Anyone
that has two eyes and a pair of ears knows the current administration has utterly killed any respect America held in these
areas before the 9/11 attacks. We are not only becoming fiscally indebted to the world but morally bankrupt.
The reason America fought Germany in WW2 was not only because Germany declared war on us, but because of Germany’s unwarranted aggression, invasion and occupation of neighboring sovereign nations. Germany invaded and occupied other countries under false pretexts. That was wrong and that injustice begged to be righted by the rest of the free-world that remained free and had the ability to fight it.
Skip forward to the present. Who is invading countries under false pretexts today? Whom is occupying a sovereign nation? Whom is waging war against the will of the United Nations and thus the united will of the world? We are. Us, the United States.
Anyone listening to the hyperbolic “statements,” statements, mind you, that are before a legitimate world body that was erected and built with a great deal of American support and ingenuity, listening to Colin Powell rattle off lies before the world to justify a war of aggression on a sovereign nation (albeit, led by a tyrant Saddam Hussien.) It turns out this plan to invade Iraq had long been on the table, as a plan to “remake” the Middle East. In effect, the tragedy of 9/11 was used as a pretext, a casus belli to invade Iraq for God knows what real reasons. And, I
don’t really care to hear that sorry old story about how Iraq had violated U.N. convention after U.N. convention. If, after all, we are holding up the violations of U.N. conventions as the true reason we went into Iraq then how ironic it is so easily lost on us that the U.N. would not, and did not! authorize an military invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003. So, it goes without saying, this is, in every respect, an illegal war and immoral war and dare I say unAmerican war.
We have created hostility and animosity toward the United States with our invasion of Iraq. Where before, arguably, it did not exist to the extent it exists today. From the very start it has been a disaster. Corruption, cronyism and deception have been the order of the day from the word go, concerning this entire diversion in Iraq. Instead of garnering the vast majority of the worlds support and disdain for the attacks perpetrated against us on 9/11 and turning that support into a coalition of [real] support, not a phony coalition such as the “Coalition of the Willing,” which, in reality was the furthest thing from any true coalition or consensus of the world’s opinion as you can get.
Instead we decided to invade, occupy and enrage a population of people that had absolutely nothing, zero, nada! to do with the attacks of 9/11. The majority of the people that attacked us on 9/11 were, in fact, from our supposed “allies” in the middle east, Saudi Arabia, not Iraq, not Iran and not Syria, but Saudi Arabia. So, here we are, spending billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions and billions! of dollars to occupy a country that had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Meanwhile, Bin Ladin still remains free, remember “You can run, but you can’t hide? We will find you and smoke you out of your fox holes?” Well, someone is still running, he’s hiding alright! and the only smoke I see seems to be the continuous smoke being blown up our asses about this *insert obligatory gasp of terror* [THE WAR ON TERROR!]
The fact is we are making more terrorists than we are killing. We are making terrorists out of people that would have otherwise had no reason to commit attacks on the U.S. if it weren’t for one small fact that we invaded their country and killed
their family members.
So, I guess my answer to your question Justin is no, we aren’t safer than we were pre 9/11. Despite the fact we have not seen an attack on our “Homeland” since 9/11. Terrorists have all the time in the world. They don’t have to attack us today, or tomorrow or next year or 5 years from now or even 10. It only takes one extremist, one terrorist with a life long grudge against America for either legitimate or preceived injustices upon him or his family to act out the most heinous and evil attack on the United States. And, it goes without saying, one of these attacks will in due time get through.
Does invading countries that didn’t have anything to do with terrorism make us safer? The answer is simply, NO! it doesn’t. America is terrorizing, not “fighting” terrorism. It will be nice when Heil Hitler leaves office and America can start addressing the real problems that face or country, the real dangers that face our country. Dangers like trigger happy cowboy presidents that go about the world “conquering” nations like communist Russia and Nazi Germany.
I pray to God that the next 4 presidents can straighten out what this moron of ineptitude has managed to get this country into.
July 18th, 2007 at 5:12 pm
I may be completely wrong, and please correct me if I am, but I believe Pakistan will hold elections April 2008.
Let’s pretend it’s June 2008, and Pakistan has decided they’re done with Musharraf, and a new president has been elected. What happens now? The War on Terror has just been completely turned around.