web analytics

OBAMA’S FIRST REAL TEST?

By ATWadmin On November 15th, 2008

It is reported that Barack Obama is being given ominous advice from leaders on both sides of the Atlantic to brace himself for an early assault from terrorists.

General Michael Hayden, director of the CIA, this week acknowledged that there were dangers during a presidential transition when new officials were coming in and getting accustomed to the challenges. Hayden said that al-Qaeda remained a “determined, adaptive enemy” operating “from its safe haven in Pakistan”. He added: “If there is a major attack on this country it will bear the fingerprints of al-Qaeda.” He said that the border region remained the base of al-Qaeda’s leadership, which had developed a more durable structure and a deep reserve of skilled operatives. “Al Qaeda, operating from its safe haven in Pakistan’s tribal areas, remains the most clear and present danger to the safety of the United States,” General Hayden said.

If the threat entirely comess from these Pakistani tribal areas, isn’t it high time we blitzed the hell out of them? If we can secure global safety by crushing AL Queda in this zone, why the delay? In a war, you take it to the enemy. The enemy is, according to received military wisdom, in the Pakistani tribal areas, so it’s time that we ensured the enemy was decimated.

9 Responses to “OBAMA’S FIRST REAL TEST?”

  1. David –

    I don’t believe there’s any substance to the warning.

    ‘al-Qaeda’ has only been an ideology adopted in time by many disparate islamist groups in many places who rarely, if ever, have any contact with each other. Yet it’s talked of by those who should know better as if ‘al-Qaeda’ is a distinctive group of allies and chums sitting around a camp fire.

    The only use for the term ‘al-Quaeda’ is as a bogeyman, to raise the spectre of islamic terror in order justify the destruction of our liberties. I can only believe that because that’s what the evidence suggests.

    However, if this threat exists and it emanates from the Paki-Afghan border area then let’s keep them busy. Pakistan’s president is the former Mr Benazir Bhutto and seems to be on side, understandably. We can dimiss faux outrage at crossing any border since no tribes in the area recognise any border. They come and go as they please in what are their tribal homelands and therefore cannot be ‘outraged’ at any violation of sovereignty.

    And our governments can finally put up or shut up on immigration. They cannot credibly claim that the threat from the region is so great that attacks will be attempted and that our liberties must be curtailed, while allowing immigration from that same region.

    Afghan and Pakistani migration to our nations must be declared verboten, even for spouses and all other relatives of those here already, while our governments claim that the risk of terror is so severe.

    Unless and until they do that I cannot believe the stated threats.

  2. I too don’t believe there is a credible major threat. 9/11 was a one off . It had an eleemnt of surprise unlikely to be repeated. Al Queda and all other Islamic terrorist groups are only irritants not a threat to our existence.

  3. Pete and Colm

    You guys seem to have forgotten the 2006 Al Queda attacks in the UK (Haymarket and Glasgow Airport) which are currently before the courts. There is no doubt that there will be further attacks in the west by AQ muslim fanatics. The only question is when they will occur.

    But the Pakistan tribal area is over 10,000 square miles of mountainous terrain with a population of over 3 million. That is twice the size of Northern Ireland and it would be impossible to bomb it all without killing thousands of innocent civilians. What would be good would be better intelligence on the whereabouts of the AQ main men, and the recent drone attacks by the USA suggest that they are starting to get that information. That’s gotta be the way to go.

  4. PETER

    I didn’t claim that terrorism no longer happens . Of course it does but it is easily a mangeable evil not a threat to civilisation as we know it.

  5. …of course the other alternative would be to revoke the passports and visas of every asian muslim that came to these shores in the past 30 years, and give them a one-way ticket back to their country of origin.

  6. I say blitz the hell out of the tribal regions in Afghanistan.

    I have no clue if another major terrorist attack can be accomplished in the U.S. That’s almost beside the point, Al Queda and the Taliban have been consolidating and attacking from this region, so hit them hard.

  7. Peter –

    I haven’t forgotten at all the magnificently absurd Haymarket and Glasgow Airport attacks. If that’s the best that ‘al-Qaeda’ can manage, what have we to fear?

    This fearsome beast managed to build a bomb that failed to go off and launch a car bomb attack on an airport with a car that was too wide to get through the concrete barrier.

    Plainly, the threat offered by ‘al-Qaeda’ is infintessimal compared to that of the IRA, yet for 30 years our freedoms were hardly curtailed and Irish men and women came and went almost without hinder in the UK.

    Yet as the terrorist threat has receded, the inpulse of the political establishment to destroy our liberties has grown in inverse proportion.

    Yes, of course vigilence is required, but it’s always required of the Secret Intelligence Service. If the threat is so severe let the State here and in the US respond accordingly and declare Pakistani and Afghan immigration history.

  8. Pete Moore

    Both of those attacks came close to killing hundreds of people. They would have far outdone the carnage of 7/7.

  9. Peter –

    They were rubbish. If I filled the boot of my motor with papier mache (sp?) dowsed it in parafin and rammed it into a bollard near Heathrow, I’d be more of a danger than those buerks in Glasgow.

    And by the way, the idea that that those attacks had any connection in any way with a cave in Tora Bora is absurd.

    (Incompetent) muslims carried out those attacks, ‘al-Qaeda’ did not.