PoliticsIdea Of The Day

Previous 10 Next 10 
To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (41147)10/21/2001 5:25:22 PM
From: Condor
   of 50167 still my beating heart. Wouldn't that be wonderful. With interest rates in the hole, it would restore enthusiasm to pensioners who rely on investments for their income.
More importantly, as you suggest, the resurrection of the markets would signal perceived success against the terrorists and presumably a degree of global stability.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Paul Moerman who wrote (41144)10/21/2001 6:26:12 PM
   of 50167
<I'd like to know your opinion of whether or not the U.S. should lighten up the attack, or cease bombing altogether, during the month of Ramadan?>

US in my opinion will be well advanced until 17th of November and I don’t think that attacks would be required by then. If unfortunately things are bogged down and Taleban are still around I have a feeling that ground actions will continue irrespective. The present hit and run strategy is something Russians or English could not even think. The bases in hinterland of Baluchistan are a very big plus. Kandhar as a crow would fly is within striking distance of US forces. Kandhar is the Mecca of Taleban. Once Kandhar falls and US is able to establish an advance in Afghanistan near Kandhar the march to Kabul is just a formality. Kabul can fall today its not a big deal but in my opinion the whole strategy is to flush the rot to North with South solidly closed for them to escape. I think present attacks going in are very deadly, they are hitting them hard and these bunch of rag tag army much as they are feared will not be able to withstand this kind of consistent resolve.

The US resolve and its partnership with the most pivotal state in the region right now is the anchor of a swift removal of cancerous Taleban. Pakistanis in my opinion have really gone out of their way to accommodate United States and that does not surprise me. What would surprise me and worry me if Pakistan ISI and US Intelligence are unable to flush them out in first two weeks of November. I expect them to fall much earlier. In my opinion the media has played a very negative role in this campaign and present efforts to block the campaign from glaring eyes of media is the best thing that can happen to this campaign. I don’t think Islam is an issue in this campaign, it’s about elimination of people who want to take this world 1400 years backward. Presently US is depending on Pakistan’s ability to break the Taleban, they have some time on their hand but if they are unable to get this thing going Kabul will have to fall within next few weeks.

I have an opinion that Taleban are on the verge of break. It is easy to say that they can retreat into mountains and launch a campaign against the fallen cities of Kandhar, Kabul and Mazar Sharif but the difference here is that unlike the Russians who were propping the government in Kabul in 80’s here in 2000’s the cities under a new broad based coalition will not be an easy take. The satellites will now be able to record their hiding places so the chances that any meaningful war can go on far too long is nil. Who will give them the weapons or the supplies? In the war against Russia these guys became heroes because of US weapons, it was the stinger missiles that changed the balance of terror. Without ammo supplies and food, Taleban have not much of a chance.

<it would give Osama and Omar the opportunity to relax and regroup, perhaps thinking up new and even more vile ways of terrorizing others. >

For Osama and Omar, can only relax and regroup if Government in Pakistan falls.

<affect Pakistan government stability.>

Pakistan government stability is only threatened by a coordinated effort of some of the regional players who are interested in ‘Balkanisation of Pakistan.’

People who think this new posture of Pakistan with US will make it very strong and the Balkanisation of Pakistan may have to eventually be delayed may clean Pakistan present leadership. If this ‘fanatical ideology’ has some ground then very serious threat to our present leadership does exist. I believe that the present leadership in my country is conscious of this threat and as you must have seen despite of all the propaganda against my country that is a beggar state, a failing state, it had strategic and intelligent infrastructure smart enough and competent enough to provide within 15 days the possibilities of US ground attacks, remember it took 6 months before attacks on ground could commence in Iraq Kuwait conflict.

Irresponsible states do not make the kind of decisions that Pakistan made on 11th sept and could not provide things on such a short notice of 48 hours. With a single stroke of genius our government avoided the ‘talibanisation and Saddamisation’ curse. These are curses that are extensively found in high quantity in every nation of Islam. I for one worked hard so did every one of us to write thousands of emails to our president to help him make the right choices, lot of people and pundits never expected that to happen. Saudis in the name of Islam could not still make a choice threatened at first by its indigenous unrest potential and second as custodian of Islam the extremist strains are somewhat overlooked, Mubarek is quite so are others in the entire Islamic world, for us to take on Afghanistan who provided us with their strategic depth is high risk game but worth every bit of it.

Taleban harbour some of these worst terrorist who has blood of 6000 people on his hand his name is ‘Riaz Basra’ he is funded by the same Wahabist lobby that funds some other extremists, Pakistan had asked Taliban to hand him over to Pakistan but he was guest of Omar, for Pakistan to get rid of this expensive baggage is a dream come true. Nations have strategies, a friendly government in our backyard provided us with some anchor in face of our eastern lovely greatest nation on earth neighbour. Over period of time that became a baggage, this dependence of strategic depth become a tool of blackmail for Taliban who would always remind Pakistani that ‘if you press us too much and you loose us you get your arch rivals Northern Alliance in Kabul.’ For Pakistan things could not be better, the basis cause of differences with the world are now over as Taliban will be showed the road and instead of an client state in our backyard a broad based government will be formed.

Almost everything in this war is going through Pakistan, like South Vietnam America has received total support but the comparison ends here as Pakistan has got a good infrastructure, a disciplined army that listens to its CEO and has the ability to take on major jobs with extreme efficiency. The one we are seeing in progress in my opinion will be delivered. And Talebans have no China or Russian to support them like North Vietnam had. No Ho-chi-min trail here, Taliban are dead in water which ever way you look at it, Iran is deadly against them for that 1380 years old Shia-Sunni schism, Pakistan it is now personal between Omar-Osama and Musharraf, it is their head or his, crude but true to its last content. It will be the two who will roll.

On the internal domestic front the disturbances are quietly subsiding and President is quite stable. I think this war will be over soon and I see a possibility of real peace in our region as major players in the world have realised that neither my country is fanatically preoccupied with inspirations of Islam nor have any great ambivalence in siding with US when it matters the most. The propaganda that one day Pakistan will be Talebanised could not have failed more miserably. Today most of us believe that end is in sight and our expectations are very high. It is our necks on line our very existence is at stake on this war outcome, continued talibanisation is sound of death for us. I don’t think it is only your war now, after Dalbandin, Jacobabad, Pasni it is now our war too.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (3)

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (41149)10/21/2001 6:47:34 PM
From: Paul Moerman
   of 50167
thanks, Ike - your perspective is greatly appreciated. I'll need to devote some quality time to all that you wrote, and am humbled by your depth of response. Paul

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (41147)10/21/2001 7:09:42 PM
From: BubbaFred
   of 50167
What will be subsequent to the euphoria? Will the equity market rally, by itself, be enough to fuel the economic recovery? At that time, say in the first or second quarter of 2002, worldwide economy will still be in down cycle, at very sluggish growth rate, waiting for American and European consumers to go on spending spree. But there is a limit on how much American consumers will be able to spend without getting deeper into debt. Will there be enough job creations to offset the job layoffs?

OPEC's decision to reduce output and maintain price level may not help fuel economic recovery. However, if the US decides to construct additional nuclear power plants to become less dependent on foreign supply, then OPEC crude oil will likely drop like a rock.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (41149)10/21/2001 8:16:27 PM
From: ThirdEye
   of 50167
Ike: first, thanks from another lurker who has not properly acknowledged how much I appreciate your perspective and energy.

To follow on your recent remarks, there is increasing talk of a broad-based government in Afghanistan. Given that the Northern Alliance has been financed to a large degree by India and that Musharraf has threatened to pull his support if the NA take Kabul, what does a "broad-based coalition" really look like?

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (41149)10/21/2001 8:46:38 PM
From: Night Trader
   of 50167
Iqbal, I would be interested in your opinion on this article:

Sunday October 21, 2001
The Observer

Kandahar, the spiritual and administrative heart of the Taliban, was quiet. I sat in a small office down a narrow lane not far from Mullah Omar's house with the young assistant of a senior Taliban official and talked - of Islam, of the West, of Afghanistan and of the blasts that, 10 days earlier, had demolished two American embassies in East Africa killing 224 people and injuring 4,500. The young Talib asked me if I thought the Americans would attack Afghanistan. After all, he said, Osama bin Laden, the prime suspect, was known to be hiding there. 'No,' I said, 'they wouldn't be so stupid.'
Six hours later, 75 Tomahawk missiles had turned four empty terrorist camps in the east of Afghanistan into piles of rubble. Within two days, outrage had exploded throughout the Middle East and bin Laden had been made a folk hero. My confidence in the good sense of Washington's decision-makers looked slightly ridiculous.

Yesterday morning, 200 US Army Rangers, who shout: 'Rangers lead the way, sir, yes sir' when they salute superiors, engaged Taliban soldiers about 20 miles from where I had sat chatting to the young Talib.

My overwhelming sense is of bewilderment. Like anyone who knows Afghanistan, who has driven the long, rocky roads under that impossibly clear blue sky, who has dropped a few notes to the urchins who shovel dirt into the potholes to earn their dinner, who has seen the double amputee landmine victim cheering his friends playing football, or heard the Kabul dogs howling in the night after a rocket strike on the north of the city, I simple cannot understand how it came to this.

Nobody can argue with the aim of the war. Justice for the 6,000 dead in New York must be done and seen to be done and destroying bin Laden and al-Qaeda is an integral part of that. And, if civilians have to die, then too bad, civilians always die in war. But this war, as it is being fought, will not make the world a better, safer place. It will make it far more dangerous.

The Islamic militia's leaders may be bad but they are not mad. They have a coherent ideology fusing modern, resurgent Islam, the centuries-old customs of the Pashtoon tribes, from which they are largely drawn, and a bizarre nostalgia for the simple, predictable village life that they imagine existed before the Soviets forced them into a life of refugee camps and war.

Mullah Omar, the reclusive, one-eyed cleric who leads the movement, and his top commanders believe, with some justification, that they rescued their country from the violent anarchy of the post-Soviet years. You cannot bomb these men into submission. Nor will the Taliban footsoldiers be particularly worried by the forces ranged against them. Whoever advised the Americans to mock the Taliban's antiquated weaponry in the ludicrous, boasting broadcasts to Afghanistan last week had not done their research. Many of the first mujahideen fought the Soviets with muzzle-loading muskets or First World War-vintage Lee Enfields.

Nor is threatened destruction much of a disincentive. After a revolt in the western city of Herat in March 1979, the Soviets carpet-bombed the city, killing between 5,000 and 25,000 people. It did nothing to deter insurrection. This time, Taliban casualties have been almost farcically light and the damage done has been minimal. We are told that the Americans have knocked out the Taliban 'command and control centres'. I have seen many of these. They largely consist of a man sitting on a rug with a radio, an ancient, unconnected telephone and the mother of all teapots.

There are signs that the Americans - and the British Government - are beginning to comprehend this and the near impossibility of tracking down bin Laden. Even if the Taliban are rolled back to a rump of territory in the southern strongholds, bin Laden would still have plenty of boltholes.

The Afghans are now falling in behind the Taliban. The strikes are swiftly radicalising what was an essentially moderate country. That is not only tragic but dangerous. A few days before the 1998 strikes, I asked a guard outside the foreign ministry in Kabul about bin Laden. He did not know who I was talking about. Nor did the men in Guldara. Two years ago, few Afghan fighters I spoke to could point to their own country on a globe, let alone discuss the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Now, of course, they all can talk about the 'Amriki' and its zulm or 'tyranny' against Muslims.

So no defections, no coups against Mullah Omar, no handing over of bin Laden are likely - just a steady rallying to the Taliban flag, mounting civilian casualties, growing extremism and an unfolding humanitarian disaster.

Yesterday, we got a taste of what is to come. Domestic opinion in the US and the UK, the approach of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan and the growing fragility of the coalition mean that 'a result' is needed within a month. The Americans are likely to commit hundreds more ground troops, probably with the SAS hanging on to their camouflaged coat-tails, in an increasingly desperate bid to get their man. It is difficult to exaggerate quite what a disaster for everybody that will be. The Northern Alliance would be permanently tarred as Western stooges, the rest of the country would take their guns and go to fight the invaders. So, as they have told me repeatedly in recent weeks, would all the commanders currently watching developments from Pakistan.

Zarameen is an old friend from Jalalabad. He fought the Soviets, fought the puppet regime that Moscow left behind and fought against the Taliban until forced into exile. Three weeks ago, he asked me if I could arrange for him to get weapons to fight them again. Yesterday, he told me he was getting ready to defend 'his country'.

Western troops in Afghanistan just wouldn't win. They would be forced, like the Soviets, into isolated, fortified firebases. The idea of 150 US or Royal Marines dug in on some hilltop in Nangahar facing 1,000 Zarameens doesn't bear thinking about.

There has to be a pause in the war. Some carefully bought defections could strengthen the Northern Alliance. That would shock the Taliban. Funds and weapons could be channelled to those within Afghanistan, or based currently in Pakistan, who would be happy to see the end of Taliban rule. More pragmatic elements within the Taliban, who are concerned about the damage Mullah Omar is doing to their country, can be wooed. The instinctively moderate, flexible nature of the vast majority of Afghans can be used to our advantage if we stop forcing them to take sides. We should tell the Taliban that the bombing will stop for a set period so that a conference, that will include them, can meet to discuss the future of the country and of bin Laden. If they do not agree, the attacks can start again, preferably after Ramadan. In the meantime, flood the country with aid and talk about addressing the real causes of terrorism and Islamic extremism: poverty, repression and skewed policies in the Middle East.

When I think about the huddled masses of the refugees, about the small, stone-covered graves that are appearing outside every village, about Mohammed Ghaffar, the white-bearded waiter at Kabul's battered Intercontinental hotel who grimly counted off the regimes that have successively run and ruined his country on his fingers, I know we have to halt the escalation before it is too late. But when I listen to Rumsfeld and Bush and Blair and Straw and their macho, ignorant and fatally flawed rhetoric it is hard to be optimistic.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (41130)10/21/2001 9:04:49 PM
From: Dealer
   of 50167
I have a track record of no –non-sense and I feel in my heart that those who read me believe me.

Darn right! I'll take your word over and above CNN, MSNBC, etc.

Thanks again for all you do to keep us informed.....I shall consider you the source..........That'll work. :-)


Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: ThirdEye who wrote (41152)10/21/2001 11:16:15 PM
From: sandeep
   of 50167
Thirdeye, the northern alliance has not been financed by India to my knowledge. It has enough problems of its own to try to fund these guys. Russia on the other hand has funded these guys, I think.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (3)

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (41135)10/21/2001 11:52:22 PM
From: stockman_scott
   of 50167
CIA Told to Do 'Whatever Necessary' to Kill Bin Laden

Agency and Military Collaborating at 'Unprecedented' Level; Cheney Says War Against Terror 'May Never End'

By Bob Woodward
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, October 21, 2001; Page A01

President Bush last month signed an intelligence order directing the CIA to undertake its most sweeping and lethal covert action since the founding of the agency in 1947, explicitly calling for the destruction of Osama bin Laden and his worldwide al Qaeda network, according to senior government officials.

The president also added more than $1 billion to the agency's war on terrorism, most of it for the new covert action. The operation will include what officials said is "unprecedented" coordination between the CIA and commando and other military units. Officials said that the president, operating through his "war cabinet," has pledged to dispatch military units to take advantage of the CIA's latest and best intelligence.

Bush's order, called an intelligence "finding," instructs the agency to attack bin Laden's communications, security apparatus and infrastructure, senior government officials said. U.S. intelligence has identified new and important specific weaknesses in the bin Laden organization that are not publicly known, and these vulnerabilities will be the focus of the lethal covert action, sources said.

"The gloves are off," one senior official said. "The president has given the agency the green light to do whatever is necessary. Lethal operations that were unthinkable pre-September 11 are now underway."

The CIA's covert action is a key part of the president's offensive against terrorism, but the agency is also playing a critical role in the defense against future terrorist attacks.

For example, each day a CIA document called the "Threat Matrix," which has the highest security classification ("Top Secret/Codeword"), lands on the desks of the top national security and intelligence officials in the Bush administration. It presents the freshest and most sensitive raw intelligence on dozens of threatened bombings, hijackings or poisonings. Only threats deemed to have some credibility are included in the document.

One day last week, the Threat Matrix contained 100 threats to U.S. facilities in the United States and around the world -- shopping complexes, specific cities, places where thousands gather, embassies. Though nearly all the listed threats have passed without incident and 99 percent turned out to be groundless, dozens more take their place in the matrix each day.

It was the matrix that generated the national alert of impending terrorist action issued by the FBI on Oct. 11. The goal of the matrix is simple: Look for patterns and specific details that might prevent another Sept. 11.

"I don't think there has been such risk to the country since the Cuban missile crisis," a senior official said.

During an interview in his West Wing office Friday morning, Vice President Cheney spoke of the new war on terrorism as much more problematic and protracted than the Persian Gulf War of 1991, when Cheney served as secretary of defense to Bush's father.

The vice president bluntly said: "It is different than the Gulf War was, in the sense that it may never end. At least, not in our lifetime."

Pushing the Envelope

In issuing the finding that targets bin Laden, the president has said he wants the CIA to undertake high-risk operations. He has stated to his advisers that he is willing to risk failure in the pursuit of ultimate victory, even if the results are some embarrassing public setbacks in individual operations. The overall military and covert plan is intended to be massive and decisive, officials said.

"If you are going to push the envelope some things will go wrong, and [President Bush] sees that and understands risk-taking," one senior official said.

In the interview, Cheney said, "I think it's fair to say you can't predict a straight line to victory. You know, there'll be good days and bad days along the way."

The new determination among Bush officials to go after bin Laden and his network is informed by their pained knowledge that U.S. intelligence last spring obtained high quality video of bin Laden himself but were unable to act on it.

The video showed bin Laden with his distinctive beard and white robes surrounded by a large entourage at one of his known locations in Afghanistan. But neither the CIA nor the U.S. military had the means to shoot a missile or another weapon at him while he was being photographed.

Since then, the CIA-operated Predator unmanned drone with high-resolution cameras has been equipped with Hellfire antitank missiles that can be fired at targets of opportunity. The technology was not operational at the time bin Laden was caught on video. The weapons capability, which was revealed last week in the New Yorker magazine, was developed specifically to attack bin Laden, the officials said.

In addition, with the U.S. military heavily deployed in some nations around Afghanistan, commando and other units are now available to move quickly on bin Laden or his key associates as intelligence becomes available.

U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies recently received an important break in the effort to track down terrorist leaders overseas, according to officials.

The FBI and CIA have been given limited access in the last several weeks to a top bin Laden lieutenant who was arrested after Sept. 11 and is being held in a foreign country. The person, whose various aliases include "Abu Ahmed," is "a significant player," in the words of one senior Bush official. Ahmed was arrested with five other members of al Qaeda. He is believed by several senior officials to be the highest-ranking member of al Qaeda ever held for systematic interrogation.

Though Ahmed has not given information about future terrorist operations, he has provided some details about the October 2000 attack on the USS Cole in a Yemeni port, when 17 sailors were killed. One source said he also has information about the planned terrorist attacks in the United States that were disrupted before the millennium celebrations in December 1999.

The New Normalcy

When specific facilities or locations are threatened, as they have been repeatedly in the last month, the FBI informs local law enforcement authorities or foreign intelligence services that are supposed to increase security and take protective measures.

The Threat Matrix lists where the intelligence comes from -- intercepted communications, walk-in sources, e-mails, friendly foreign intelligence services, telephone threats, and FBI or CIA human sources.

The public is not informed except when the threat is considered highly credible or specific, as it was on Oct. 11 when the FBI issued its nationwide alert.

In the interview, Cheney said that deciding when to go public and when to withhold threat information is one of the most difficult tasks the administration faces.

"You have to avoid falling into the trap of letting it be a cover-your-ass exercise," Cheney said. "If you scare the hell out of people too often, and nothing happens, that can also create problems. Then when you do finally get a valid threat and warn people and they don't pay attention, that's equally damaging."

He also noted, "If you create panic, the terrorist wins without ever doing anything. So these are tough calls."

Making details from the Threat Matrix public could result in chaos, several officials said. Literally hundreds of places, institutions and cities from across the country have been on the list.

"It could destroy the livelihood of all those organizations and places without a bomb being thrown or a spore of anthrax being released," another senior Bush official said. The official was asked what would happen if there was a major terrorist incident and many were killed at one of the facilities or places on the Threat Matrix and no public warning had been issued.

"Then they would have our heads," the official said.

Intelligence and law enforcement agencies attempt to run every threat to ground to see if it is genuine, officials said. The results at times have been unexpected. In early October, a woman called authorities to say it was her patriotic duty to report that her husband, who is from the Middle East, was planning an attack with eight or nine friends on Chicago's Sears Tower.

The woman sounded credible and her allegations were reported in the Threat Matrix. The FBI then detained her husband and friends. On the next Threat Matrix the CIA reported that the FBI might have broken up an al Qaeda cell.

Upon further investigation, the FBI learned that the woman was furious with her husband, who had a second wife. Her allegations had no merit, but the bureau discovered that some of the people were involved in an arranged-marriage scheme.

"Instead of terrorism," one official said, "we found an angry wife."

Another senior official said, "There can be a problem in a marriage and it results in, you know, an allegation that shows up in the Threat Matrix."

During the interview in his West Wing office, Cheney, with a large map of Afghanistan on an easel near his desk, spoke of life post-Sept. 11.

"The way I think of it is, it's a new normalcy," he said. "We're going to have to take steps, and are taking steps, that'll become a permanent part of the way we live. In terms of security, in terms of the way we deal with travel and airlines, all of those measures that we end up having to adopt in order to sort of harden the target, make it tougher for the terrorists to get at us. And I think those will become permanent features in our kind of way of life."

New War, Old Problems

Though the new intelligence war presents the CIA with an opportunity to excel, several officials noted that the campaign is also fraught with risk.

The agency is being assigned a monumental task for which it is not fully equipped or trained, said one CIA veteran who knows the agency from many perspectives. Human, on-the-ground sources are scarce in the region and in the Muslim world in general. Since the end of the Cold War more than a decade ago, the Directorate of Operations (DO), which runs covert activity, has been out of the business of funding and managing major lethal covert action.

The CIA has a history of bungling such operations going back to the 1950s and 1960s, most notably when the agency unsuccessfully plotted to assassinate Fidel Castro.

In one of the celebrated anti-Castro plots, a CIA agent code-named AM/LASH planned to use Blackleaf-40, a high-grade poison, with a ballpoint-hypodermic needle on the Cuban leader. The device was delivered on Nov. 22, 1963, and a later CIA inspector general's report noted it was likely "at the very moment President Kennedy was shot."

Though no connections were ever established between the Castro plots and the Kennedy assassination, the CIA's reputation was severely tarnished.

The covert war in Nicaragua in the 1980s was another source of negative publicity, as the CIA mined harbors without adequate notification to Congress and published a 90-page guerrilla-warfare manual on the "selective use of violence" against targets such as judges, police and state security officials. It became known as the "assassination manual."

William J. Casey, President Ronald Reagan's CIA director from 1981 to early 1987, was mired in the disastrous outcome of the "off-the-books" operations of the Iran-contra scandal. That scandal involved secret arms sales to Iran and the illegal diversion of profits from those sales to the contra rebels supported by the CIA in Nicaragua.

Reagan and Casey had trouble when they sought to punish covertly the terrorists responsible for the 1983 truck bombing of the U.S. Marine compound in Lebanon, which killed 241 American servicemen in the deadliest terrorist attack on Americans before Sept. 11. Casey worked personally and secretly with Saudi Arabia to plan the assassination of Muslim leader Sheikh Fadlallah, the head of the Party of God or Hezbollah, who was connected to the Marine bombing. The method of retaliation was a massive car bomb that was exploded 50 yards from Fadlallah's residence in Beirut, killing 80 people and wounding 200 in 1985. But Fadlallah escaped without injury.

Since the Ford administration, all presidents have signed an executive order banning the CIA or any other U.S. government agency from involvement in political assassination. Generally speaking, lawyers for the White House and the CIA have said that the ban does not apply to wartime when the military is striking the enemy's command and control or leadership targets.

The United States can also legally invoke the right of self-defense as justification for striking terrorists or their leaders planning attacks on the United States.

Bush's new presidential finding differs from past findings against the terrorists in a number of significant ways. First, it puts more military muscle behind the clandestine effort to crush al Qaeda. Second, it is far better funded. Third, senior officials said, it has the highest possible priority and will involve better coordination within the entire national security structure: the White House, the president's national security adviser, the CIA, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the departments of State, Defense and Justice.

On Friday, Cheney said the country had a sense of confidence in Bush's team, which includes an experienced trio of advisers -- Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and Cheney himself. CIA Director George J. Tenet has developed an unusually close relationship with the new president, becoming a regular during Camp David weekends and briefing the chief executive most days.

"There's a lot of tough decisions that are involved here, and some of them very close calls," Cheney said. "But if I had to go out and design a team of people . . . this is it."

The vice president added that the war on bin Laden and terrorists in general is going to be particularly difficult.

"They have nothing to defend," he said. "You know, for 50 years we deterred the Soviets by threatening the utter destruction of the Soviet Union. What does bin Laden value?

"There's no piece of real estate. It's not like a state or a country. The notion of deterrence doesn't really apply here. There's no treaty to be negotiated, there's no arms control agreement that's going to guarantee our safety and security. The only way you can deal with them is to destroy them."

'Smoke Them Out'

Six days after the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush publicly declared the intentions of his administration with the statement that bin Laden was "Wanted: Dead or Alive."

In those remarks at the Pentagon, he said that the new enemy, bin Laden and other terrorists, liked "to hide and burrow in" and conceal themselves in caves. He first mentioned "a different type of war" that would "require a new thought process."

Two days later, Sept. 19, Bush made his first public mention of "covert activities," noting that some foreign governments would be "comfortable" supporting such action.

He added a broad outline of the goal: "Clearly, one of our focuses is to get people out of their caves, smoke them out and get them moving and get them. That's about as plainly as I can put it."

Bush sounded this theme again during his nationally televised address to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, when he spoke of "covert activities, secret even in success." In public remarks to CIA employees at the agency's headquarters in Langley a week later, the president dropped more hints: "You see, the enemy is sometimes hard to find; they like to hide. They think they can hide, but we know better."

Officials said that the covert activities approved by the president include a wide range of traditional CIA operations, such as close cooperation with friendly foreign intelligence services and covert and overt assistance to the Afghan rebels fighting to overthrow the Taliban leadership that harbors bin Laden.

The CIA has studied bin Laden and his al Qaeda network for years. A special unit or "Bin Laden station," created in 1996, works round the clock at headquarters.

When Cheney gave a speech Thursday night in New York City, he noticed a sea change. As his motorcade went through Manhattan, people stopped their cars, got out and applauded.

During his short speech before the 56th Annual Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation Dinner, he was interrupted by applause 15 times.

On Friday morning, while sitting in his comfortable, well-lit West Wing office, he said with a smile, "There wasn't a dove in the room."

Researcher Jeff Himmelman contributed to this report.

© 2001 The Washington Post Company

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: sandeep who wrote (41155)10/22/2001 3:16:27 AM
   of 50167
On that 'burqa thing'..

I hope you will appreciate that Pakistan is going to get some pretty pictures to the networks, since beards and burqas are still stealing the media show.

Pakistan’s silent majority is traumatised by the beard-and-burqa image of Pakistan being projected by the media networks. They feel that the silent majority is quite hip, it is designer-clad, parties till the stars go out and goes to English medium schools not the madaris, the networks keep harping on.

The ‘civil society’ has therefore decided to flex its muscle and get ready for camera. A premier women’s club in Lahore had two journalists over, explaining the US stand point to a sea of women, wrapt in tea and sympathy.

Another, gathered on the Lahore Mall, in a show of solidarity with the Afghans people. And none as it happened were supporting a burqa or a beard — the media please note.

It is said that the Karachi ‘civil society’ is also coming out with a bang having booked the Press club for the 25th October, where the trendiest Karachites are expected to put in an appearance — the networks are formally invited.

Grand plans are afoot to get a similar thing going in Lahore courtesy the haveli and its swinging host, so who is complaining about a ‘fundo’ society.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (3)
Previous 10 Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2018 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.