The USA's illogical stance on terrorism since 9/11 has reached its logical conclusion. Osama bin Laden and his top henchmen remain on the loose. The Al Quada organization has morphed into a far more widespread and dangerous network, while sympathy for their agenda has increased across the Muslim world. If there is a better yardstick for registering the failure of Bush's policies, let me know.
Last Friday saw co-ordinated anti-US demonstrations in Pakistan, Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, Indonesia, Malaysia and elswhere.
Such growing "anti-Americanism" (which in this context really means "anti-Bushism") has spread even further than the Middle East, with anti-US sentiment now markedly stronger than it was four years ago even in countries like Australia, which are supposedly US allies.
Today comes news from Washington that the Bush administration is moving away from their existing anti-terror policy 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...What is that supposed to mean? The vaccum is in Bush's head, for Chist's sake. Townsend's comment suggests that terrorism can never be stopped because there will always be new recruits willing to step into the place of bin Laden & Co. If that's her mindset, she should resign.
President Bush's top adviser on terrorism, Frances Fragos Townsend, said in an interview that the review is needed to take into account the "ripple effect" from years of operations targeting al Qaeda leaders such as Khalid Sheik Mohammed, arrested for planning the Sept. 11 attacks, and his recently detained deputy. "Naturally, the enemy has adapted," she said. "As you capture a Khalid Sheik Mohammed, an Abu Faraj al-Libbi raises up. Nature abhors a vacuum."
The "change in policy" is in fact an admission of failure.
Here's a timely example of just how wrong things have gone. Following the recent massacre of innocent civilians in Uzbequistan, and despite the US media and warbloggers' deathly silence on the matter, a US delegation headed by GOP Senator John McCain has visited President Islam Karimov to demand a proper enquiry. The Uzbek President's response? He totally ingored them:
It is a sign of the times that President Karimov and all his officials refuse to meet the senators and their news conference took place in the US embassy basement. Before Andijan, US visits were generally grand affairs, attended by top officials and given great play on state television.After all, Karimov has a US airbase sitting on his soil. He also knows all about the secret CIA renditions of US prisoners to his country. Most importanly, Karimov knows that despite all the media bluster (or lack of it) his real mates in the USA - Bush, Cheney and the gang - are well and truly on his side. Dictators R US!!!
So what's all this crap about "Democracy on the march"? The Iraq war wasn't about WMDs, it wasn't about terrorists and now we know well and truly that it wasn't really about spreading Democracy either.
2 comments:
Hi again. Great post.
A few markup problems still to be corrected, though. ;-( ... at your convenience! ;-)
I believe you have hit it right on the head, again. Over and over and over. And I especially agree with you that:
The "change in policy" is in fact an admission of failure.
But I think they want to fail. I think they want an endless war. They are not even trying to win anymore, they're just trying to make it last as long as possible.
Sorry about the links - Google and/or Blogger has been doing some stress testing or something. Fixed now.
As you may know, I suggested that the US wanted to maintain a state of instability in Iraq way back in May 2003.
Events on the ground make it look like that was the plan all along. And if that has not been the plan, everyone involved from Bush down should resign in disgrace.
Post a Comment