66 online
 
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 7 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds   

GWOT is only a sick scam which weakened us!

By       (Page 2 of 2 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page.   No comments
Message winston smith
Gates is W's man, but he makes the same point that Kerry made in 2004. Kerry said "The war on terror is far less of a military operation and far more of an intelligence-gathering law enforcement operation."

Why aren't the GOP now attacking Gates as they did Kerry?

Not only has Gates been speaking out against the GWOT stategy. The current article "Strategy Against Al-Qaeda Faulted -- Report Says Effort Is Not a 'War'" states "The Bush administration's terrorism-fighting strategy has not
significantly undermined al-Qaeda's capabilities, according to a major new study that argues the struggle against terrorism is better waged by law enforcement agencies than by armies. The study by the nonpartisan Rand Corp. also contends that the administration committed a fundamental error in portraying the conflict with al-Qaeda as a "war on terrorism." The phrase falsely suggests that there can be a battlefield solution to terrorism, and symbolically conveys warrior status on terrorists, it said. "Terrorists should be perceived and described as criminals, not holy warriors," authors Seth Jones and Martin Libicki write in "How Terrorist Groups End: Lessons for Countering al-Qaeda," a 200-page volume released yesterday. But the authors contend that al-Qaeda has sabotaged itself by creating ever greater numbers of enemies while not broadening its base of support. "Al-Qaeda's probability of success in actually overthrowing any government is close to zero."

"In most cases, military force isn't the best instrument," said Jones, a terrorism expert and the report's lead author.
Addressing the U.S. campaign against al-Qaeda, the study noted successes in disrupting terrorist financing, but said the group remains a formidable foe. Al-Qaeda is "strong and competent," and has succeeded in carrying out more violent attacks since Sept. 11, 2001, than in all of its previous history. Moreover, its organizational structure has adapted and evolved over time, "making it a more dangerous enemy," Jones and Libicki wrote. The authors call for a strategy that includes a greater reliance on law enforcement and intelligence agencies in disrupting the group's networks and in
arresting its leaders. They say that when military forces are needed, the emphasis should be on local troops, which understand the terrain and culture, and tend to have greater legitimacy.

In Muslim countries in particular, there should be a "light U.S. military footprint or none at all," the report contends.
"The U.S. military can play a critical role in building indigenous capacity," it said, "but should generally resist being drawn into combat operations in Muslim societies, since its presence is likely to increase terrorist recruitment."


Congress, Gates, and the Rand Corporation aren't alone in wondering how big bro 43's GWOT could be won. Remember Rumsfeld's October 22, 2003 "slog memo" which said "U.S. forces are having "mixed results" in the battle against al Qaeda and that U.S. forces "lack metrics to know if we are winning or losing the global war on terror."

Big bro 43 is always railing against how Clinton never did anything about al Qaeda. Think about this -- in the world's history no super-power has won against a foe utilizing a 4th generation mode of warfare.

Big bro 43 defied an earlier US understanding, Presidential Decision Directive 62, issued in 1998-Clinton's watch, when they tried to use "Shock and Awe" in the asymmetrical warfare situations in both Afghanistan and Iraq. After the first Gulf War, and particularly after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, US military analysts concerned themselves extensively with the question of terrorism. An early conclusion was that it is precisely the extreme dominance of
the US military that makes potential opponents turn to what is sometimes called "asymmetric warfare"-i.e., attacks in which the other side also has a chance of inflicting damage.

Presidential Decision Directive 62 says, "America's unrivaled military superiority means that potential enemies (whether nations or terrorist groups) that choose to attack us will be more likely to resort to terror instead of conventional military assault."

With both the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, Washington is trying to turn a Fourth Generation war, a war with non-state entities, into a Second Generation war, a war against another state that can be conquered by the simple application
of firepower to targets.

When Russia attacked Afghanistan the Soviets dealt with the Herat guerrillas by bombing 75% of the city into rubble. That still failed to stop the urban guerrilla tactics.

Rumsfeld's "slog memo" understood this. In it he wrote, "Today, we lack metrics to know if we are winning or losing the global war on terror. Are we capturing, killing or deterring and dissuading more terrorists every day than the madrassas
and the radical clerics are recruiting, training and deploying against us? Does the US need to fashion a broad, integrated plan to stop the next generation of terrorists? The US is putting relatively little effort into a long-range plan, but we are putting a great deal of effort into trying to stop terrorists. The cost-benefit ratio is against us! Our cost is billions against the terrorists' costs of millions."

So Rummy knew we'd piss away money. That doesn't prevent the GOP from accusing Democrats of being weak on security. Big bro 43 attacks Clinton even though his Presidential Decision Directive 62 would have placed us in a better
position than we are after W's reign of error.

They are playing politics with our lives hanging in the balance. We hear the claims that Ron Suskind's book contains and no one even notices that the media printed the stories and let them die. "The Way of the World" claims that, after the Iraq war began, the White House ordered the CIA to forge a "backdated, handwritten letter" from the head of Iraqi intelligence, Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti, to Saddam Hussein, in an attempt to tie Hussein to the 9/11 attacks.
Habbush also told U.S. and British officials there was no WMD in Iraq at a time when the war could have been averted. In the fall of 2003, the White House ordered CIA Director George Tenet to forge a "fake letter from Habbush to
Saddam, backdated to July 1, 2001," stating that 9/11 ringleader Mohammad Atta had actually trained for his mission in Iraq" and that Iraq bought yellowcake uranium from Niger with the help of al Qaeda.

Suskind claims his information should cause W's impeachment. These accusations fall on deaf ears because we all know that GWOT is only a sick scam! Once you realize that then no one has to pay attention to anything from this sick GOP
party.

GWOT is only a sick scam which weakened us! Our former international allies hate us for attacking Iraq, the world is sick of our propaganda regarding GWOT, and we have no resources available for other emergencies such as Georgia. Putin knew this and had no fear of us when he attacked Georgia. Putin snickered when he heard Gates talking about the "Long War" knowing we would let him do whatever he wanted in Georgia. We alone can't do anything to stop him and have no allies to disrupt the former KGB man's plan. Secretary of State Rice's experience is in the "Cold War", but what good does that do us when we are a paper tiger with no allies. We have no credibility.

W must be impeached to restore it. Suskind's work only being the latest effort to describe this.

Next Page  1  |  2

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Rate It | View Ratings

Winston Smith Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Winston Smith is an ex-Social Worker. I worked in child welfare, and in medical settings and in homeless settings. In the later our facility was geared as a permanent address for people to apply for welfare. Once they received that we could send (more...)
 
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines

 
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Bush planned the economic crisis for partisan GOP gain.

Why is Obama protecting 43?

Why did we all hate Palin?

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

What happens to US credibility if Spain finds them guilty and we don't?

Bush, with criminal intent, planned the economic crisis for partisan GOP gain.

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend