Sunday, May 29, 2005
Bush Administration Creates a New Generation of Trained, Battle-Hardened Terrorists and Jihadists
From The Washington Post:
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.
Why the sudden policy shift in the War on Terror?:
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."
Much of the discussion has focused on how to deal with the rise of a new generation of terrorists, schooled in Iraq over the past couple years. Top government officials are increasingly turning their attention to anticipate what one called "the bleed out" of hundreds or thousands of Iraq-trained jihadists back to their home countries throughout the Middle East and Western Europe. "It's a new piece of a new equation," a former senior Bush administration official said. "If you don't know who they are in Iraq, how are you going to locate them in Istanbul or London?"
Another key aspect is likely to be the addition of public diplomacy efforts aimed at winning over Arab public sentiment, and State Department official Paul Simons said at a congressional hearing earlier this month that the "internal deliberative process" was broadly conceived to encompass everything from further crackdowns on terrorist financing networks to policies aimed at curbing the teaching of holy war against the West and other "tools with respect to the global war on terrorism."
Oh my, the Bushies have discovered they have other tools in their War on Terror toolbox than a hammer, an anvil, and Operation Iraqi Freedom! Now they say they want to win over Arab public sentiment!
Hey, I bet holding thousands of Muslim men as "terror suspects" in Guantanamo Bay prison for years and years without any criminal charges being filed is one way to win over Arab public sentiment! I bet holding these thousands of Muslim men as "terror suspects" for years and years even though many are believed to be innocent of any criminal wrongdoing even by military interrogators is another fantastic way to win over Arab public sentiment! I bet allowing Muslim "terror suspects," to be abused, tortured, and murdered in prisons in Afghanistan, Iraq and Gitmo is another great way to win over Arab public sentiment! And I bet blaming Newsweek for publishing an incorrect story on "Koran abuse" instead of openly investigating all of the credible allegations of Koran abuse made by freed terror suspects and documented by the International Red Cross, Amnesty International and the FBI is another great way to win over Arab public sentiment!
Yes, the Bush Administration is doing a terrific job of winning over Arab public sentiment as anti-American demonstrations by Muslims sparked by allegations of Koran abuse pop up all over the world over. Demonstrators in London last week chanted "Kill kill USA, kill kill George Bush" and "Bomb New York" in Grosvenor Square, joining anti-American protestors in Somalia, 2,500 demonstrators in Palestine chanting "Death to America" and thousands more in Calcutta, where protestors burned, spat and unrinated on an American flag.
Sure seems like our campaign to win over Arab public support is working. And we know Arabs are highly impressed with our "catastrophic success" in the Iraq War, which is quickly devolving into rampant Sunni/Shia sectarian violence. Which brings up another part of the Washinton Post article that seems quite interesting. Administration officials are afraid that the Iraq War has created "a new generation of terrorists" and "Iraq-trained jihadists" who will "bleed out" to their home countries in the Middle East and Western Europe. These battle-hardened terrorists returning from the Iraq conflict are a big problem because, as the former senior Bush administration official quoted in the article says, "If you don't know who they are in Iraq, how can you locate them in Istanbul or London?"
So basically in Bush's War on Terror, he attacked Iraq to make the nation and world safer but instead created a civil war and generated a whole slew of Iraq-trained jihadists who will be bringing their terror skills back to their home countries as soon as the U.S. military pulls out of Iraq and gives the country over to complete Sunni/Shia sectarian discord.
Sounds like victory, doesn't it! Boy, I'm glad Americans re-elected George W. to keep us safer in the War on Terror. God knows, John Kerry would have really screwed up the War on Terror, you know?
God bless our Great Leader! I feel safer even with the orange alert.
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.
Why the sudden policy shift in the War on Terror?:
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."
Much of the discussion has focused on how to deal with the rise of a new generation of terrorists, schooled in Iraq over the past couple years. Top government officials are increasingly turning their attention to anticipate what one called "the bleed out" of hundreds or thousands of Iraq-trained jihadists back to their home countries throughout the Middle East and Western Europe. "It's a new piece of a new equation," a former senior Bush administration official said. "If you don't know who they are in Iraq, how are you going to locate them in Istanbul or London?"
Another key aspect is likely to be the addition of public diplomacy efforts aimed at winning over Arab public sentiment, and State Department official Paul Simons said at a congressional hearing earlier this month that the "internal deliberative process" was broadly conceived to encompass everything from further crackdowns on terrorist financing networks to policies aimed at curbing the teaching of holy war against the West and other "tools with respect to the global war on terrorism."
Oh my, the Bushies have discovered they have other tools in their War on Terror toolbox than a hammer, an anvil, and Operation Iraqi Freedom! Now they say they want to win over Arab public sentiment!
Hey, I bet holding thousands of Muslim men as "terror suspects" in Guantanamo Bay prison for years and years without any criminal charges being filed is one way to win over Arab public sentiment! I bet holding these thousands of Muslim men as "terror suspects" for years and years even though many are believed to be innocent of any criminal wrongdoing even by military interrogators is another fantastic way to win over Arab public sentiment! I bet allowing Muslim "terror suspects," to be abused, tortured, and murdered in prisons in Afghanistan, Iraq and Gitmo is another great way to win over Arab public sentiment! And I bet blaming Newsweek for publishing an incorrect story on "Koran abuse" instead of openly investigating all of the credible allegations of Koran abuse made by freed terror suspects and documented by the International Red Cross, Amnesty International and the FBI is another great way to win over Arab public sentiment!
Yes, the Bush Administration is doing a terrific job of winning over Arab public sentiment as anti-American demonstrations by Muslims sparked by allegations of Koran abuse pop up all over the world over. Demonstrators in London last week chanted "Kill kill USA, kill kill George Bush" and "Bomb New York" in Grosvenor Square, joining anti-American protestors in Somalia, 2,500 demonstrators in Palestine chanting "Death to America" and thousands more in Calcutta, where protestors burned, spat and unrinated on an American flag.
Sure seems like our campaign to win over Arab public support is working. And we know Arabs are highly impressed with our "catastrophic success" in the Iraq War, which is quickly devolving into rampant Sunni/Shia sectarian violence. Which brings up another part of the Washinton Post article that seems quite interesting. Administration officials are afraid that the Iraq War has created "a new generation of terrorists" and "Iraq-trained jihadists" who will "bleed out" to their home countries in the Middle East and Western Europe. These battle-hardened terrorists returning from the Iraq conflict are a big problem because, as the former senior Bush administration official quoted in the article says, "If you don't know who they are in Iraq, how can you locate them in Istanbul or London?"
So basically in Bush's War on Terror, he attacked Iraq to make the nation and world safer but instead created a civil war and generated a whole slew of Iraq-trained jihadists who will be bringing their terror skills back to their home countries as soon as the U.S. military pulls out of Iraq and gives the country over to complete Sunni/Shia sectarian discord.
Sounds like victory, doesn't it! Boy, I'm glad Americans re-elected George W. to keep us safer in the War on Terror. God knows, John Kerry would have really screwed up the War on Terror, you know?
God bless our Great Leader! I feel safer even with the orange alert.
