A long-overdue reassessment. "U.S. Is Expected to Look Beyond Al Qaeda," from the Washington Post, with thanks to Jeffrey Imm.
The Bush administration has launched a high-level internal review of its efforts to battle international terrorism, aimed at moving away from a policy that has stressed efforts to capture and kill al Qaeda leaders since Sept. 11, 2001, and toward what a senior official called a broader "strategy against violent extremism."The shift is meant to recognize the transformation of al Qaeda over the past three years into a far more amorphous, diffuse and difficult-to-target organization than the group that struck the United States in 2001. But critics say the policy review comes only after months of delay and lost opportunities while the administration left key counterterrorism jobs unfilled and argued internally over how best to confront the rapid spread of the pro-al Qaeda global Islamic jihad....
The review marks the first ambitious effort since the immediate aftermath of the 2001 attacks to take stock of what the administration has called the "global war on terrorism" -- or GWOT -- but is now considering changing to recognize the evolution of its fight. "What we really want now is a strategic approach to defeat violent extremism," said a senior administration official who described the review on the condition of anonymity because it is not finished. "GWOT is catchy, but there may be a better way to describe it, and those are things that ought to be incumbent on us to look at."
In many ways, this is the culmination of a heated debate that has been taking place inside and outside the government about how to target not only the remnants of al Qaeda but also broader support in the Muslim world for radical Islam. Administration officials refused to describe in detail what new policies are under consideration, and several sources familiar with the discussions said some issues remain sticking points, such as how central the ongoing war in Iraq is to the anti-terrorist effort, and how to accommodate State Department desires to normalize a foreign policy that has stressed terrorism to the exclusion of other priorities in recent years.
"There's been a perception, a sense of drift in overall terrorism policy. People have not figured out what we do next, so we just continue to pick 'em off one at a time," said Roger W. Cressey, who served as a counterterrorism official at the National Security Council under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. "We haven't gone to a new level to figure out how things have changed since 9/11."
"No question this is the next stage, the phase two," another senior counterterrorism official said. "We are coming to the point of decisions."...
Good maybe they can start going after those pizza faced file sharing terrorist.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20050526-9999-1b26crackdow.html
" . . .People have not figured out what we do next, so we just continue to pick 'em off one at a time," said Roger W. Cressey, who served as a counterterrorism official at the National Security Council under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. "We haven't gone to a new level to figure out how things have changed since 9/11."
There will continue to be
no rise to the next level
until we the people see, name
and understand the enemy.
I hope they review the hand holding policy too.
It angers me to know what the Saudis are and what they do, then see Bush treat them like long lost childhood friends. Makes my skin crawl.
A start, but it doesn't appear that they are ready to look beyond the search for "terrorists" and "organizations," rather than finally admit that the problem is with the ideology.
STRATEGIC THINKING AKA COMMON SENSE
The key phrase in this reassessment is strategic thinking or in less lofty terms common sense. To win any war, you must know who the enemy is and the ideology that drives it.
This is no Vietnam. This is all about oil but not for the usual suspect reasons. Instead of Bush bashing the MSM should give President Bush credit for his fundamental shift in our strategic foreign policy in the Middle East. This is a shift from a policy that has been pursued by administrations from both sides of the asile for the last fifty years that has led to the current crisis.
For various political and institutional reasons the MSM has failed to educate and inform the American people of this deadly threat. One could make a convincing argument that the MSM is "rooting" for the enemy e.g., insurgents vs. cult like barbaric murderers from the 12th Century on a religious mission. The American people need to know this Country is at war with a very cunning diabolical enemy.
The American people both left and right need to unite to crush this enemy and wipe this ideology of hate and evil from the face of evil. This is no religion of peace but has more in common with the rise and fall of the Third Reich.
Islamofascism is a failed ideology that has no place in our time. We will win this war as good always triumphs over evil and the free will of men will overcome those who seek to repress it.
The sooner the American people come to this realization the less lives will be lost in this war.
There was an interesting discussion over at Roger L. Simon re the consequences of the death of King Fahd and whether it would bring change to Saudi Arabia.
I offered these comments:
Here , Here and Here.
The International Association of Chiefs' of Police (The IACP) has just issued a new policy statement re law enforcement's role in the War on Terror. This is a fundamental shift in thinking and how resources should be allocated. This shift is from a reactionary posture to one of actively engaging the enemy before it can strike:
POLICE CHIEFS: HOMELAND SECURITY STRATEGY FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED
IACP Urges Focus On Prevention
Read More
Why don't these morons in the "intelligence" services hire some apostates from Islam? People who know the inner workings of this global effort to destroy freedom and supplant it with a theocratic gulag?
All of this "rethinking" shows that they aren't thinking seriously in the first place.
How difficult a concept is it to grasp?
A) The Koran preaches a planetary tyranny in the form of an absolute religious
despotism.
B) The most militant believers of this arrogant faith are united, around the globe, in their efforts to undermine advanced Civilization and return the world to a nightmare 7th century hellhole, with themselves ruling the sacrosanct prison camp.
C) These Islamic Imperialists are nihilistic biological kamikazees who will employ every method of destruction (or, when too weak to act on their wishes, will practice tactical deception) to further their fascistic aims.
D) Kill the violent extremists, -since nothing else stops them.
(E.G.: NOT "Reason", "Reform", "basic human decency", "enlightened self-interest", "survival", "compassion", "religious restraint", etc.)
E) Return the non-assimilating so-called moderates living in the West to their own Islamic lands.
Where they would be encouraged to pressure their neighbor-extremists to control their own homicidal urges -and to start changing their faith from a mafia with mosques to a humane creed that respects the right of anyone to believe differently than they do. (No more 'death sentences for apostates', first of all. Any 'religion' that wants to kill you for saying: "I doubt it." deserves nothing but contempt.)
(And I'd didn't even need a PowerPoint presentation or the usual "three years of study" to condense this to a workable one-page plan.)
Anyone who thinks we're fighting a "WoT" with a president who:
1. Rewards genocidal Jew-killing arab terrorists with their own terror state, tens of millions of dollars in cash and a fantasy identity made out of thin air (palestinian)...
2. Allows terrorists to walk across our borders unchecked...
3. Refers to the Satanic Cult of Death as the "Religion of Peace" ...
4. Refers to the arab, muslim, terrorist saudis (anyone remember 9/11? Bueller? Bueller??) as "close personal friends."
5. Says nothing when Americans are killed with IED's, but puts the Sec. of State on the world stage with a strong message beacuse of an ALLEGED koran flushing from an unsourced lie from a fourth rate news magazine...
needs to have their head examined.
Ital - so true. Bush appears to be clueless and naive and soon he will be out office. Surely there must be some that aren't and have the intestinal fortitude to say and do what is necessary to get the job done.
I think Bush's basic problem is that he isn't a Bastard, which is what the job calls for, but rather a nice guy. Unfortunately, politics breeds few such men, for getting along is one of the the key virtues of politics, and Bush is good at that. What we need is a political equivalent of George Patton, not Big Bird. The only way to win this war is to seek the terrorists out where they hide and kill them. If we have to invade Syria or Iran, or whoever, so be it. Find them, kill them, kill those that render them aid and comfort, abroad and at home.
Quothe butterfly:
"I hope they review the hand holding policy too.
It angers me to know what the Saudis are and what they do, then see Bush treat them like long lost childhood friends. Makes my skin crawl."
True, true, but unfortunately, due to the nature of Middle Eastern politics, one must occasionally hold hands with a known enemy. Arabs are nothing if not deceptive, untrue, and treasonous. They are better to have as a declared enemy than as an ally, because even as an ally they are still your enemy, and only wait for an opportunity to stab you in the back.
One must take the carrot-and-stick approach with them, and try to show them the wisdom of not making you kill them. Arabs are as inept at warfare as they are enamoured of it, which is why the most effective Arab weapon is the suicide bomb; it's as close as they can come to a win.
This thing will get sorted out eventually, maybe. Until then, we have to keep treating them like the children they seem to be.
If they are going to look past Al Qaeda.....Hezbollah would be a damn good place to start considering the fact that prior to 9/11 they had killed more Americans than anyone else. I think that Mugniyah is probably more dangerous than Bin Laden. If Iran gets the bomb...Hezbollah gets the bomb.
I think Iran should be invaded as soon as possiblebefore it has an atome bom. Furthermore, I also think that we should overthrow Kim Jong Il's regime in North Korea. The North Korean government will do anything to keep itself in power, even sell nuclear weapons to our enemies.