Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Oct 11, 2005.
Remember those bumper stickers that popped up around election time: "Bush is my man, Kerry is bin Laden's".
as a (somewhat) rhetorical aside:
While I certainly don't agree with their methodology and/or their goals, I have to admit that I wish OUR leaders had the organizational and tactical competence of Al Qaeda.
It may be comforting to think that good will triumph over evil, but it's not going to happen if the former is indecisive and incompetent and the latter is motivated and logistically, tactically and strategically superior.
This, of course, pointedly applies to Bush, who has laid bare for all to see our weaknesses in this kind of comparison - but imo, it also would apply to almost any potential leader in our current political climate.
I wonder if a democracy, healthy or not, has the stomach, the wherewithall and the capacity for such a fight with an enemy with none of our systemic liabilities.
This is exactly what bin Laden wanted to achieve with 9/11 - to start a war between the arabs and the west. He thought afghanistan would hold out longer though and that other countries would join the fight. When we defeated the taliban that could have been it - unfortunately we gave him another chance in Iraq. Big big mistake. If we hadn't started the war in Iraq, they would have retreated to a few "safe havens" like the Pakistan mountains and a few remote spots in the Philippines, Indonesia, Yemen, and Somalia, and would have been relatively easy to contain and perhaps eventually eliminate.
There HAVE been successful counter-insurgency wars before. There are strategies that can be employed that we are not using to fight an asymmetrical war. IOW, it can be done. We're just going about it wrong.
Only once, as far as I know: the British in Malaya. Lots of special forces, little else. It's the exception that proves the rule, I fear.
Precisely what I thought after reading the article.
Off the top of my head, I recall another in the Phillipines...
I don't remember us ever having been in the Philippines...
Well, they seem to be doing a better job at recruitment than we are....
Juan Cole also thinks this letter is a forgery.
The very fact that the WH is so ready to use this "letter" should be an indication.
That was my first thought too: If the WH truly believes this is genuine why in the hell are we talking about it publicly? Shouldn't this be a highly classified document? Maybe whispered about, but not publicly confirmed and put out in it's entirety. It makes no sense.
"Publicity" stunt gone wrong? Blew up in their faces I guess. No pun intended.