“Experts question U.S. strategy in Pakistan”
By NoQuarter on July 25, 2007 at 3:53 PM in Afghanistan, Al Qaeda, Bush/Cheney, Current Affairs, Pakistan
By Susanunpc … McClatchy (who else) has a great top story today: “The Bush administration’s strategy for pursuing al-Qaida in Pakistan’s tribal region could stoke support for the Islamic militants who are protecting the terrorist network’s leaders and battling Pakistan’s U.S.-backed military regime, some U.S. diplomatic and defense officials and experts warn.” The White House “is also threatening U.S. strikes in the region.”
I haven’t figured out how to upload more than a thumbnail on this new blog software, but I wanted to alert you to the excellent map that McClatchy has put up that clearly shows Pakistan’s tribal areas — including North and South Waziristan — that border Afghanistan.
These idiots couldn’t pour piss out of a boot with the instructions printed on the heel.
I have never seen a more inept foreign policy in my life.
They just don’t learn from their mistakes,
when you tell them it’s hot, they gotta touch it anyway.
I’m curious about your take on the new NIE, all you spooks out there. shrubco says Hezbollah wants to hit us here, AQ is big in Iraq, blah blah blah. Given the track record, I assume it’s more BS vomitted up by Dick Tater and his crew.
I also think it’s a mistake (or just plain nonsensical) when “they” say “we haven’t been hit since…”, because AQ at least has shown that they are patient with their plots. Unlike a certain traitorous executive branch.
“shrubco says Hezbollah wants to hit us here, AQ is big in Iraq, blah blah blah.”
Yep you said it … blah blah blah…. Thats all it is. There is no evidence what so ever that Hezbollah has any wants or desires to attack the US. Besides they get there money from supporters here.
Its fuuny how many here in the States view Hezbollah and even Hamas. While many from the Middle East have a different view point on both organizations. Both organizations have political arms that have gotten out of ccntrol and can be a regional destabilization powers, but that is part of our fault and very much Israel’s fault. Again our foreign policy has been out of whack for a very long time in the ME Region.
As far as attacking us here in America? More Bush-aid obedience performance drink babble…..
I haven’t been able to access your website all morning. The articles show up on the feed, but this is the first time I’ve been able to get here. I STILL can’t get to the Justice, Come to Order! post, which is what I was most interested in reading this morning. Problems?
Lindy, I have had a hell of a time too. Yahoo has had serious server issues. And someone told me that there was a big outage in San Francisco yesterday. I called Yahoo and was told it might continue for a while.
Somehow, I managed to post two stories this morning, but it took forever, and I kept getting “bad server response.” Glad it’s working better for the moment. Let’s hope this continues!
These guys will do anything they can to strengthen al-Qaida. Running against them is the only way they can justify their actions so if al-Qaida actually went away, what would they do?
Will Cheney guide Bush into expanding the war to Pakistan rather than Iran? It’s doubtful - Pakistan has no oil.
Saber rattling and threats are to be expected, however.
Besides considering bombing willy nilly in Pakistan’s tribal areas, the Bushies are sending about $750 million in aid to the tribal areas with little or no oversight. Yes, you heard right.
The Bushies may be spending millions to help al Qaeda and the Taliban. Don’t forget, Pakistan has nukes and Musharraf just survived his what is it 7th assassination attempt by these guys.
Long term plans folks. This also weakens Pakistan for the day when the Iran attack occurs.
http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899
What Afghanistan would lose to Persia in the west, it would gain in the east, as Pakistan’s Northwest Frontier tribes would be reunited with their Afghan brethren (the point of this exercise is not to draw maps as we would like them but as local populations would prefer them). Pakistan, another unnatural state, would also lose its Baluch territory to Free Baluchistan. The remaining “natural” Pakistan would lie entirely east of the Indus, except for a westward spur near Karachi.
Trying again to post. I wish people would stop calling this crowd incompetant, inept or saying they are making mistakes. They have plans folks!!
Read the plans about Pakistan.
http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899
That is an interesting article, Cee, but let’s keep in mind it’s by Ralph Peters — and Peters is damn near certifiable, not to mention that his screwy plans for ‘democratizng’ the Middle East have been wrong so far.
RS Janes,
Some of the commenters under the article would delete the “damn near” from “certifiable.” Peters and his ilk don’t understand the power of Nationalism. The Turks commenting were spitting bullets! Sure, a Greater Kurdistan would be nice in principle, except that the one thing that Turks, Iranians, Syrians and Iraqi Arabs agree on is that it must never be put into PRACTICE. Peters condemns the arbitrary borders drawn by the Great Powers, but his solution is more of the same. Anytime someone insists blithly that “ethnic cleansing works,” I smile politely and leave the room–being careful never to turn my back while I’m doing so. That article is great propaganda for Al Qaeda because it alienates pretty much everyone. He reminds me of Napoleon redrawing the map of Europe to his taste, only to find that reality made the new borders impermanent.
I stand corrected, Montag. Cut “damn near.”
This reminds me of that scene in “The Magnificent Seven” movie. Yul Brynner plays a gunfighter who agrees to help some Mexican villagers find gunmen to defend their village from bandits. They’re sitting in a saloon when one of the simple villagers says, “Hey, look at the scars on that guy’s face, he’s the kind of man we’re looking for!” Another villager says, “Idiot! The kind of man we’re looking for is the man who GAVE him those scars.” Yul Brynner looks at him sternly and says, “Hey! You’re learning.”
The Bushies always outsource to the jackass with the scars.
On the equipment, I read a memoir by a Colonel Herbert about his service in Vietnam. At one point he protested when he was ordered to turn over some sophisticated military equipment to the corrupt South Vietnamese Army. He warned his superiors that within a month–at most–the equipment would be in the hands of the enemy, but the order stood. Sure enough, they found an enemy weapons cache soon afterwards and THERE was the fancy equipment that their “little brothers” had sold as soon as they got it!
Reminds me of that scene from the movie “The Magnificent Seven.” Yul Brynner is a gunfighter who agrees to help some Mexican villagers hire gunmen to defend their village from bandits. So they’re sitting in a saloon when one simple villager says, “Hey, there’s the kind of man we need, look at the scars on his face!” But another villager says, “Idiot! The kind of man we need is the man who GAVE him those scars.” Yul Brynner gives him a stern look and says, “Hey! You’re learning.”
The Bushies always fall for the jackass with the scars, or the “civilized native” like Musharraf, or the scoundrel who tells them what they want to hear, like Achmed Chalabi–”plausible rogues” like this Tribal Frontier Force or the Afghan proxies who let us down at Tora Bora.
Yul Brynner picked damn good professional gunmen to go with him down to that village because he would have to bear the consequences with the villagers if they weren’t up to snuff. Our Confederacy of Dunces in power in Washington can afford to screw up time and again because there are never any consequences for them to bear. That needs to change.
Brilliant analogy, Montag.
No Quarter:
IMO, “Al Qaeda Prime”(1) is not to be underestimated even
though operational capability has been reduced as
alluded to in this Stratfor report. However, once
again, I invoke the simple hypothesis of Dr. Boaz
Ganor i.e. terrorist groups require both operational
capacity and motivation before they act.
IMO, countermotivation has been a nonfactor in the
reduction of the global spread of Al Qaeda ideology.
Al Qaeda has achieved longevity. Al Qaeda can
selectively recruit and train which is a luxury
afforded to such crime organizations as the Mafia.
There has also been much talk recently of the effort
of “moderate” Muslim NGOs to convert and subsequently
“radicalize” youth toward a future of violent Jihad.
This, IMO, is essentially the battlefield, if you
will, for hearts and minds.
Michael Chertoff’s “gut feeling” suggested to me a
putative “Al Qaeda Prime” attack of a magnitude
exceeding 9/11. The hypothesis that Al Qaeda wants to
exceed the casualities of 9/11 with the next attack
and that they will not attack unless they can do so
rendered Chertoff’s comments, IMO, disjointed.
Was the “gut feeling” based on al Qaeda operational
capacity or motivation or both?
Recently, Daveed Gartenstein Ross has commented on
Musharaff’s succession: “Prominent Pakistani military
and intelligence figures–individuals like retired
Gen. Hamid Gul and Gen. Mirza Aslam Beg–are
ideologically sympathetic to the Taliban and al Qaeda.
It is not inconceivable that they could seize power.
Few have thought through the tremendous geopolitical
implications of such a succession. Given Pakistan’s
nuclear arsenal, the changes to the global war on
terror would be instantaneous and dramatic.”
We know that Al Qaeda is motivated - ‘primed’, if you
will. It just may be that Al Qaeda Prime’s operational
capacity could return swiftly.
(1) TERRORISM INTELLIGENCE REPORT
07.25.2007
Al Qaeda and the Strategic Threat to the U.S. Homeland
By Fred Burton and Scott Stewart
You can smell the blowback here reeking like a mountain of burning tires: Bush invades Pakistan to nab Osama (and fails, of course), outraged Pakistanis overthrow Musharraf (who wasn’t that popular to begin with), Islamic fundamentalists take over Pakistan and — voila! — a Muslim state that hates the West has nuclear weapons. (Oh, and let’s not forget our nuclear-armed friends in India next door who hate the Pakistani Muslims.) Thank you, Mr. Boosh! Heckuva a job, Junior — you may get a nuclear confrontation yet — between Pakistan and India.
RS,
I realize that those people are crazy. They still seem to be in control. The fact that people are evening talking about attacking Pakistan is proof of it.
Lord help us.
Oh it’s blowback all right. Nearly 100 years of Bush Family Blowback.
Why has it taken the msm sooooo long to get hip to Pakistan? Maybe Saudi Arabia is next?
It must be nice to have the international clout of China in Pakistan. How awesome was it for China to get their sex workers out of the Red Mosque. Maybe we could have China ask them to get Osama for us.
“…Musharraf (who wasn’t that popular to begin with)…”
Extreme understatement. Last year I spent nearly three weeks in the family home of a friend in Pakistan, every moment of the time in close contact with “ordinary” Pakistanis, and could not elicit a single positive syllable about Musharraf from a single person. Widely disliked and disrespected would be a nice way to put the popular sentiment I found there.
Thanks for the enlightenment, Shirin. It’s similar to the way some Saudis I’ve met feel about the spoiled Saudi royal family.
Jerome
Why would China wish to get OBL for the US? What’s in it for them?
Why not ask Wen and Ho to buy up all the sub-prime mortgage paper that is bankrupting the USA … oh wait the USA did that and China politely REFUSED.
As to the sex worker thing, who you going to believe a bunch of islamofascist kidnappers or the victim of their misguided moral jihad?
“It’s similar to the way some Saudis I’ve met feel about the spoiled Saudi royal family.”
Yes, no doubt, although one difference is that I did not hear about the kind of terrible human rights violations we know go on in Saudi Arabia, and women do OK there. I was in a smallish, quite conservative city, and all of the women I met were well educated, and most had jobs, and careers, and full freedom of movement.