Sunday, June 25, 2006
Questioning The Flypaper Strategy
From the Cunning Realist:
A good question.
Even though these guys were clearly inept (they wanted boots, uniforms and walkie-talkies to fight jihad!!!), I'm glad that they're under arrest. Nonetheless, the fact that homegrown radicals (can't say Muslims because these guys hadn't even converted yet!!!) wanted to destroy parts of American infrastructure and kill their own countrymen is quite troubling for the overall war on terror. In the Madrid bombings, the London bombings, the arrests of a homegrown Canadian terrorist cell in Toronto last month and the arrrests of the Seven Stooges down in Miami, we are seeing an increase in terrorists or terrorist wanna-be's being radicalized by the Iraq war and trying to wage war against the West as a result. It is quite clear, whether the administration wants to admit it or not, that the Flypaper Strategy is now inoperative.
Here's a question on the "flypaper strategy" a competent reporter might ask President Bush at the next opportunity, or Tony Snow at Monday's press gaggle: "This administration often claims that we're fighting in Iraq so we won't have to fight terrorists here. In light of the arrests of seven men in Miami for allegedly planning domestic terrorism and seeking ties to al-Qaeda, why has the war in Iraq failed to make us safer here despite your promise that it would do so?"
Take it away, Carl Cameron....
A good question.
Even though these guys were clearly inept (they wanted boots, uniforms and walkie-talkies to fight jihad!!!), I'm glad that they're under arrest. Nonetheless, the fact that homegrown radicals (can't say Muslims because these guys hadn't even converted yet!!!) wanted to destroy parts of American infrastructure and kill their own countrymen is quite troubling for the overall war on terror. In the Madrid bombings, the London bombings, the arrests of a homegrown Canadian terrorist cell in Toronto last month and the arrrests of the Seven Stooges down in Miami, we are seeing an increase in terrorists or terrorist wanna-be's being radicalized by the Iraq war and trying to wage war against the West as a result. It is quite clear, whether the administration wants to admit it or not, that the Flypaper Strategy is now inoperative.
Comments:
<< Home
The U.S. also harbors people who call themselves Nazis the KKK and the ACLU who would all like to do damage to the U.S. In spite of this I think it is clear that these groups have been held in ebb. (Well, maybe not the ACLU yet)
We should also not forget Timothy McVeigh and his murderous act.
We should also not forget Timothy McVeigh and his murderous act.
# posted by 
: 3:49 PM
: 3:49 PM
arch, I couldn't agree more. There will always be the psychos who need to lash out at society.
My concern is the illdefined nature of this conflicts gives many more opportunities to adopt a thinly veiled social justfication for what is really an unrelated personal anomoly.
The good ones can even gather a pack - like Manson et al.
It really is a twist on 'live by the sword...'
My concern is the illdefined nature of this conflicts gives many more opportunities to adopt a thinly veiled social justfication for what is really an unrelated personal anomoly.
The good ones can even gather a pack - like Manson et al.
It really is a twist on 'live by the sword...'
This "fight them over there..." nonsense never made sense. Does anyone really believe we can't be hit again as long as we're in Iraq?
It's just more simplistic rhetoric from this administration, like the "they hate us for our freedoms" pablum you posted on yesterday.
It's just more simplistic rhetoric from this administration, like the "they hate us for our freedoms" pablum you posted on yesterday.
# posted by : 10:19 PM
: 10:19 PM
abi
With as much candor as possible: If on 9/12 I had asked you "will the terrorists hit the U.S. again in 5 years?" what would have been your answer?
With as much candor as possible: If on 9/12 I had asked you "will the terrorists hit the U.S. again in 5 years?" what would have been your answer?
# posted by : 11:30 PM
: 11:30 PM
This administration changes its public prnouncements whenever convenient to suit its convenience.
The liar-in-chief was saying gay marriage ought to be decided by the states in 2000.
Until he flip-flopped, finding it convenient to divert the public from his abysmal anti-middle-class record. Demagogues are lost without scapegoats.
The liar-in-chief was saying gay marriage ought to be decided by the states in 2000.
Until he flip-flopped, finding it convenient to divert the public from his abysmal anti-middle-class record. Demagogues are lost without scapegoats.
as, do other countries not matter to you? Off the top of my head - London, Madrid, Bali, Egypt. Not to mention plots that have been foiled. Are US lives all that matter?
as, here on 6/26/06, I'll ask you - with as much candor as possible, do you believe there will be no more terrorist attacks outside of Iraq as long as we are fighting them "over there"?
as, here on 6/26/06, I'll ask you - with as much candor as possible, do you believe there will be no more terrorist attacks outside of Iraq as long as we are fighting them "over there"?
# posted by : 3:25 PM
: 3:25 PM
abi
With the assumption that you are an American (perhaps this is where I went wrong) you’re question-
"This "fight them over there..." nonsense never made sense. Does anyone really believe we can't be hit again as long as we're in Iraq?”
-acknowledges that the terrorists are trying to strike U.S. soil.
Now, assuming your not American one must admit that the sentiment you quote: “fight them over there” is by and large on of conservative American sentiment. So again the question pertains to America.
Now if indeed you are American, the statement “Does anyone really believe WE can’t be hit again” implies that you are talking solely about America.
So I implore you to answer the question I asked, or to re-ask the question you really wanted to ask. OK?
With the assumption that you are an American (perhaps this is where I went wrong) you’re question-
"This "fight them over there..." nonsense never made sense. Does anyone really believe we can't be hit again as long as we're in Iraq?”
-acknowledges that the terrorists are trying to strike U.S. soil.
Now, assuming your not American one must admit that the sentiment you quote: “fight them over there” is by and large on of conservative American sentiment. So again the question pertains to America.
Now if indeed you are American, the statement “Does anyone really believe WE can’t be hit again” implies that you are talking solely about America.
So I implore you to answer the question I asked, or to re-ask the question you really wanted to ask. OK?
# posted by : 12:00 AM
: 12:00 AM
as, your painstaking explication is faulty.
We are not fighting the war on terror alone. And I'm told there is a coalition of the willing occupying Iraq.
I'm sorry you don't approve of my answer. Winning an argument is easy if you get to supply both the question and the answer. But you don't.
To repeat my question: as, here on 6/26/06, I'll ask you - with as much candor as possible, do you believe there will be no more terrorist attacks outside of Iraq as long as we are fighting them "over there"?
That's the question I asked three days ago.
OK?
We are not fighting the war on terror alone. And I'm told there is a coalition of the willing occupying Iraq.
I'm sorry you don't approve of my answer. Winning an argument is easy if you get to supply both the question and the answer. But you don't.
To repeat my question: as, here on 6/26/06, I'll ask you - with as much candor as possible, do you believe there will be no more terrorist attacks outside of Iraq as long as we are fighting them "over there"?
That's the question I asked three days ago.
OK?
# posted by : 2:52 PM
: 2:52 PM
abi
Sorry, but for whatever reason I clearly don’t have the ability to communicate with you on this issue. Perhaps on a future topic we will be able to learn from one another, but I think on this topic we have clearly reached an impasse.
Sorry, but for whatever reason I clearly don’t have the ability to communicate with you on this issue. Perhaps on a future topic we will be able to learn from one another, but I think on this topic we have clearly reached an impasse.
# posted by : 7:01 PM
: 7:01 PM
as, it's hardly an impasse, since I haven't yet heard your side of the discussion. You ask questions, you answer none, and when you don't like my answers, you call it an impasse.
Pretty disappointing.
Pretty disappointing.
# posted by : 4:10 PM
: 4:10 PM
Abi
Sorry you are disappointed I promise that I will try to communicate better on our next encounter. We are both here often and I'm sure there will be another topic we are both interested in.
Post a Comment
Sorry you are disappointed I promise that I will try to communicate better on our next encounter. We are both here often and I'm sure there will be another topic we are both interested in.
# posted by : 11:42 PM
: 11:42 PM << Home
