TSJ,
> Somalia was of no consequence to the American public. In fact, Boustros Ghali (remember him?) demanded an American presence there if we were to take action in Bosnia. According to him, if we were going to care about white muslims we were going to care about black muslims as well("wogs" was what he said, direct quote). That little shenannigan cost Boutros his job. Unfortunately it also cost Rwanda a lot too because it made Clinton gun shy.
The discussion between me and Narayanan was on why the US left Somalia - not - on why it went there in the first place. It is quite clear that the US went into Somalia against a general backdrop of international approval, ostensibly to demonstrate American capability for leadership in a post Cold War world. However it is worth noting that it left Somalia after having made a complete dog's breakfast of things there. That was the topic of discussion - i.e. what internal factors made President Clinton change his mind about having American soldiers be in Somalia?
Now Osama Bin Laden has a simple one point answer to this - i.e. Americans are cowards. I don't agree with that sort of thinking. I feel that it is more the case that internal public debate about troop deployments by the USG has evolved considerably since the 50s. As a result there is greater monitoring of the USG as far as physical troop deployments go.
The same regime of public monitoring does not extend to intelligence activity and strategic planning. I feel that after Sept 11, because of the intelligence failure aspects of it, there will be greater monitoring of the intelligence and strategic planning activity in the USG.
I am trying to get beyond this dynamics of personalities which we see routinely used in analysis. I want to really look beyond all this `Colin in Pro-Pak', `Clinton was too busy getting some in the Oval', `Bush is a texan cowboy', `Vajpayee is weak kneed' stuff. Its all fine as a joke - but after a point I find it limiting.
Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Narayanan,
There are many unanswered questions about Sept 11. Johann in one of his posts had indicated that there is no higher level strategic thought in the Al Qaida, I think he used the phrase `duex et machina' to describe their line of thinking. I am inclined to accept his view as being accurate, the people who flew those airplanes in the WTC and the Pentagon had no idea what the fullest implications of their actions would be. I would go so far as to say that perhaps Bin Laden and Zawahiri himself only barely comprehended the entire picture. I would not be surprised if both men believed that the Taliban Government would merge with the Pakistani Government and resist a US attack on Al Qaida bases there. Osama and Ayman also probably saw Pakistan's bomb as an Islamic bomb.
It is as if the Al Qaida merely strives for a tactical position. Perhaps they feel that strategic stuff will simply fall out a superior `tactical' position.
Given that I am more of the view that the Al Qaida were convinced that all the necessary pieces were in place. Given the emphasis on `tactical brillance' the scope of who the `Mastermind' of Sept 11 is- narrows considerably.
We must all bear in mind that someone went to great extents to ensure that the Taliban Government of Mullah Omar was assured of support in its struggle against the US and that very `someone' worked overtime to ensure that the Taliban remained defiant of US authority, while going out of his way to accomodate the US.
I certainly find all this odd, and even though it can be reasonably assumed that the US NSC has better things to do than make idle conspiracy theories.. surely these thoughts must have crossed their minds.
So many questions, so few answers...
There are many unanswered questions about Sept 11. Johann in one of his posts had indicated that there is no higher level strategic thought in the Al Qaida, I think he used the phrase `duex et machina' to describe their line of thinking. I am inclined to accept his view as being accurate, the people who flew those airplanes in the WTC and the Pentagon had no idea what the fullest implications of their actions would be. I would go so far as to say that perhaps Bin Laden and Zawahiri himself only barely comprehended the entire picture. I would not be surprised if both men believed that the Taliban Government would merge with the Pakistani Government and resist a US attack on Al Qaida bases there. Osama and Ayman also probably saw Pakistan's bomb as an Islamic bomb.
It is as if the Al Qaida merely strives for a tactical position. Perhaps they feel that strategic stuff will simply fall out a superior `tactical' position.
Given that I am more of the view that the Al Qaida were convinced that all the necessary pieces were in place. Given the emphasis on `tactical brillance' the scope of who the `Mastermind' of Sept 11 is- narrows considerably.
We must all bear in mind that someone went to great extents to ensure that the Taliban Government of Mullah Omar was assured of support in its struggle against the US and that very `someone' worked overtime to ensure that the Taliban remained defiant of US authority, while going out of his way to accomodate the US.
I certainly find all this odd, and even though it can be reasonably assumed that the US NSC has better things to do than make idle conspiracy theories.. surely these thoughts must have crossed their minds.
So many questions, so few answers...
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
from the perspective of Alqaeda and Osama the attack on twin towers was symbolic jesture of taking on the 62 lb gorrilla by the Islamic ummah.
It was more of a point to prove to the flock that the Arabs can enact a 'David and Goliath' of their won.
It was more of a point to prove to the flock that the Arabs can enact a 'David and Goliath' of their won.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Well, I really hadn't finished the message yet as I was on to other recreational pursuits.
The point is about Somalia is that nobody in America cared about the troops staying and in fact, they wished them to be pulled out of such a miserable place. We really saw no purpose to the fighting in Somalia and there certainly was no honor to be had in staying there. I will grant you that this made people miscalculate America's fighting capability and persistence.
In an odd way there is a link to Pakistan here. It was the Paki troops getting their sh$t shot up and losing 29 troops when they got too close to Adide's radio station. This is the episode that started the US's "capture Adide" raid. Was al qaida responsible for that ambush too?
In my view it is somehat unfair for the world that America's foreign policy can whipsaw every 8 years with a change in administration. It can lead to the wrong conclusions on the part of some people as to what America is going to do. If Clinton was still in office I don't think we would have the situation in Iraq that we do now with Bush. I still think Afghanistan would've been crushed as Clinton would have had no choice. His hands would be tied by public opinion. And, I'm not sure that Clinton would have struck as many deals with Pakistan either. Please note the famous fly by a$$ chewing at the airport. It all just depends on which alternate universe we happen to be living in at the time.
Therefore it leads me to the conclusion that the rest of the world does not understand presidential politics and change of leadership in America. Certainly not in the application of American military might, that is for sure.
Pakistan is playing a fine game here. They are banking on personal military realtionships between the US and Pakistan that we have had in the past (Somalia, for one). They are banking on their willingness to let the US roam around their country looking for terrorists that quite frankly cause the Paki elite a lot of headaches (French submarine technicians killed in a bus, American oil company auditors machine guned in the street, constant aggravation with India). And they are banking that their nuclear program can be kept under control and still be a deterrant to India. That is one hell of a lot banking. And you know how I feel about bankers don't you?
The point is about Somalia is that nobody in America cared about the troops staying and in fact, they wished them to be pulled out of such a miserable place. We really saw no purpose to the fighting in Somalia and there certainly was no honor to be had in staying there. I will grant you that this made people miscalculate America's fighting capability and persistence.
In an odd way there is a link to Pakistan here. It was the Paki troops getting their sh$t shot up and losing 29 troops when they got too close to Adide's radio station. This is the episode that started the US's "capture Adide" raid. Was al qaida responsible for that ambush too?
In my view it is somehat unfair for the world that America's foreign policy can whipsaw every 8 years with a change in administration. It can lead to the wrong conclusions on the part of some people as to what America is going to do. If Clinton was still in office I don't think we would have the situation in Iraq that we do now with Bush. I still think Afghanistan would've been crushed as Clinton would have had no choice. His hands would be tied by public opinion. And, I'm not sure that Clinton would have struck as many deals with Pakistan either. Please note the famous fly by a$$ chewing at the airport. It all just depends on which alternate universe we happen to be living in at the time.
Therefore it leads me to the conclusion that the rest of the world does not understand presidential politics and change of leadership in America. Certainly not in the application of American military might, that is for sure.
Pakistan is playing a fine game here. They are banking on personal military realtionships between the US and Pakistan that we have had in the past (Somalia, for one). They are banking on their willingness to let the US roam around their country looking for terrorists that quite frankly cause the Paki elite a lot of headaches (French submarine technicians killed in a bus, American oil company auditors machine guned in the street, constant aggravation with India). And they are banking that their nuclear program can be kept under control and still be a deterrant to India. That is one hell of a lot banking. And you know how I feel about bankers don't you?
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Cross-posted
Attention N^3 and others. Looks like Abu Zubeidah has exposed some unpleasant truths...
Confessions of a Terrorist
Attention N^3 and others. Looks like Abu Zubeidah has exposed some unpleasant truths...
Confessions of a Terrorist
Zubaydah's capture and interrogation, told in a gripping narrative that reads like a techno-thriller, did not just take down one of al-Qaeda's most wanted operatives but also unexpectedly provided what one U.S. investigator told Posner was "the Rosetta stone of 9/11 ... the details of what (Zubaydah) claimed was his 'work' for senior Saudi and Pakistani officials." The tale begins at 2 a.m. on March 28, 2002, when U.S. surveillance pinpointed Zubaydah in a two-story safe house in Pakistan. Commandos rousted out 62 suspects, one of whom was seriously wounded while trying to flee. A Pakistani intelligence officer and hastily made voiceprints quickly identified the injured man as Zubaydah.
Posner elaborates in startling detail how U.S. interrogators used drugs—an unnamed "quick-on, quick-off" painkiller and Sodium Pentothal, the old movie truth serum—in a chemical version of reward and punishment to make Zubaydah talk. When questioning stalled, according to Posner, cia men flew Zubaydah to an Afghan complex fitted out as a fake Saudi jail chamber, where "two Arab-Americans, now with Special Forces," pretending to be Saudi inquisitors, used drugs and threats to scare him into more confessions.
Yet when Zubaydah was confronted by the false Saudis, writes Posner, "his reaction was not fear, but utter relief." Happy to see them, he reeled off telephone numbers for a senior member of the royal family who would, said Zubaydah, "tell you what to do." The man at the other end would be Prince Ahmed bin Salman bin Abdul Aziz, a Westernized nephew of King Fahd's and a publisher better known as a racehorse owner. His horse War Emblem won the Kentucky Derby in 2002. To the amazement of the U.S., the numbers proved valid. When the fake inquisitors accused Zubaydah of lying, he responded with a 10-minute monologue laying out the Saudi-Pakistani-bin Laden triangle. </font>
Zubaydah, writes Posner, said the Saudi connection ran through Prince Turki al-Faisal bin Abdul Aziz, the kingdom's longtime intelligence chief. Zubaydah said bin Laden "personally" told him of a 1991 meeting at which Turki agreed to let bin Laden leave Saudi Arabia and to provide him with secret funds as long as al-Qaeda refrained from promoting jihad in the kingdom. The Pakistani contact, high-ranking air force officer Mushaf Ali Mir,</font> entered the equation, Zubaydah said, at a 1996 meeting in Pakistan also attended by Zubaydah. Bin Laden struck a deal with Mir, then in the military but tied closely to Islamists in Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (isi), to get protection, arms and supplies for al-Qaeda. Zubaydah told interrogators bin Laden said the arrangement was "blessed by the Saudis."
Zubaydah said he attended a third meeting in Kandahar in 1998 with Turki, senior ISI agents and Taliban officials. There Turki promised, writes Posner, that "more Saudi aid would flow to the Taliban, and the Saudis would never ask for bin Laden's extradition, so long as al-Qaeda kept its long-standing promise to direct fundamentalism away from the kingdom." In Posner's stark judgment, the Saudis "effectively had (bin Laden) on their payroll since the start of the decade." Zubaydah told the interrogators that the Saudis regularly sent the funds through three royal-prince intermediaries he named.
The last eight paragraphs of the book set up a final startling development. Those three Saudi princes all perished within days of one another. On July 22, 2002, Prince Ahmed was felled by a heart attack at age 43. One day later Prince Sultan bin Faisal bin Turki al-Saud, 41, was killed in what was called a high-speed car accident. The last member of the trio, Prince Fahd bin Turki bin Saud al-Kabir, officially "died of thirst" while traveling east of Riyadh one week later. And seven months after that, Mushaf Ali Mir, by then Pakistan's Air Marshal, perished in a plane crash in clear weather over the unruly North-West Frontier province, along with his wife and closest confidants. </font>
Without charging any skulduggery (Posner told TIME they "may in fact be coincidences"), the author notes that these deaths occurred after cia officials passed along Zubaydah's accusations to Riyadh and Islamabad. Washington, reports Posner, was shocked when Zubaydah claimed that "9/11 changed nothing" about the clandestine marriage of terrorism and Saudi and Pakistani interests, "because both Prince Ahmed and Mir knew that an attack was scheduled for American soil on that day." They couldn't stop it or warn the U.S. in advance, Zubaydah said, because they didn't know what or where the attack would be. And they couldn't turn on bin Laden afterward because he could expose their prior knowledge. Both capitals swiftly assured Washington that "they had thoroughly investigated the claims and they were false and malicious." The Bush Administration, writes Posner, decided that "creating an international incident and straining relations with those regional allies when they were critical to the war in Afghanistan and the buildup for possible war with Iraq, was out of the question."
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Man, if this war ever dies down down, Hollywood is gonna make some terrific movies.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
So TSJ,
You think these latest revelations are BS?
You think these latest revelations are BS?
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
> The last eight paragraphs of the book set up a final startling development. Those three Saudi princes all perished within days of one another. On July 22, 2002, Prince Ahmed was felled by a heart attack at age 43. One day later Prince Sultan bin Faisal bin Turki al-Saud, 41, was killed in what was called a high-speed car accident. The last member of the trio, Prince Fahd bin Turki bin Saud al-Kabir, officially "died of thirst" while traveling east of Riyadh one week later. And seven months after that, Mushaf Ali Mir, by then Pakistan's Air Marshal, perished in a plane crash in clear weather over the unruly North-West Frontier province, along with his wife and closest confidants.
LOL.. jeez that is a kick in the nuts if I ever saw one.. Btw.. this ties in with Sheikh Saeed's statement to the Karachi police that he had infomed Lt. Gen. Ehsanul Haq (then CC XI Corps at Peshwar now DG ISI) that there would be a catastrophic terrorist attack on the US on Sept 11. Looks like the Pakistanis kept the information to themselves.
LOL.. jeez that is a kick in the nuts if I ever saw one.. Btw.. this ties in with Sheikh Saeed's statement to the Karachi police that he had infomed Lt. Gen. Ehsanul Haq (then CC XI Corps at Peshwar now DG ISI) that there would be a catastrophic terrorist attack on the US on Sept 11. Looks like the Pakistanis kept the information to themselves.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
N^3,
Remember the PAF officer in Germany ?The roommate of one of the Sept 11 AlQaeda fellows?
Now Mushaf Ali Mir,PAF ACM no less.A fellow iirc handpicked by Musharraf over the others.
Fun,fun,fun.
All roads lead to rome -all roads lead to Mushy.But the perpetually blind cannot see.
Remember the PAF officer in Germany ?The roommate of one of the Sept 11 AlQaeda fellows?
Now Mushaf Ali Mir,PAF ACM no less.A fellow iirc handpicked by Musharraf over the others.
Fun,fun,fun.
All roads lead to rome -all roads lead to Mushy.But the perpetually blind cannot see.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Well, it is certainly a terrific read, I'll say that. But I'm not sure that the CIA has the wherewithall to have Saudi princes killed or to have one of the royal family do it. I'm not sure Bandar is up to that kind of task. This is no mere car bombing for Bandar to arrange.
The Paki Air Marshall is quite another matter however.
The Paki Air Marshall is quite another matter however.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
R, thanks for the link:
So the Pak, Saudia, al-Qaeda link is not only known, to the US but the US has chosen to ignore it.
Interesting to note that Mush promoted Mir to "untouchable" status, meaning that the only way to deal with the SOB was to "Zia" him.
Couple of points:
1. Does anybody think the US believes that Mush was ignorant of Mir's role before his appointment? i.e. Clearly the US knows what Mush has done and is upto. But they have their own reasons for their play.
2. Given US power, the possibility that the US would let all this slide doesn't seem to be tenable. Unfortunately, that doesn't give us a good discriminator to choose N's version over Sunil's.
(N: I have my bomb proof helmet and underwear on - Just thought you should know before you begin with the heavy artillery
)
So the Pak, Saudia, al-Qaeda link is not only known, to the US but the US has chosen to ignore it.
Interesting to note that Mush promoted Mir to "untouchable" status, meaning that the only way to deal with the SOB was to "Zia" him.
Couple of points:
1. Does anybody think the US believes that Mush was ignorant of Mir's role before his appointment? i.e. Clearly the US knows what Mush has done and is upto. But they have their own reasons for their play.
2. Given US power, the possibility that the US would let all this slide doesn't seem to be tenable. Unfortunately, that doesn't give us a good discriminator to choose N's version over Sunil's.
(N: I have my bomb proof helmet and underwear on - Just thought you should know before you begin with the heavy artillery
)Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Anaath Das,Originally posted by TSJones:
Well, it is certainly a terrific read, I'll say that. But I'm not sure that the CIA has the wherewithall to have Saudi princes killed or to have one of the royal family do it. I'm not sure Bandar is up to that kind of task. This is no mere car bombing for Bandar to arrange.
The Paki Air Marshall is quite another matter however.
Maine bataya naah aapko.. aam kacche nahi they.. (For tsj.. A.D.. I told the mangoes were not raw..)
Kgoan,
> Did Musharraf not know that Mushaf Mir was involved in all this.
The question should be does the PAF ACM take a s*it without asking Musharraf.. but who is going to ask such a question.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Hey, no fair! If yer gonna quote me you need to translate it. I claim right to self defense.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Did Mushy know about French submarine technicians and and American oil company auditors? And whut were his motives in killing them?
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
.Originally posted by TSJones:
Hey, no fair! If yer gonna quote me you need to translate it. I claim right to self defense.
TSJ, different issue . . . not against you at all . . . Mir was "Zia-ed".
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Man. . .this cross-posting is getting annoying, anyway:
>>but who is going to ask such a question.
Sunil, I'm kinda thinking that the question was already asked and answered. The worry is the answer that the US came up with. . .that's the real issue here, innit?
TSJ: The bombing of the French sub folk: It doesn't strike you that the one thing that did was clear up the the possibility of Mush dreaming of turning to other powers for "help"? That the EU/Frenchies were not going to be a "counterweight" to the US, at least not in Pak, anytime soon?
>>but who is going to ask such a question.
Sunil, I'm kinda thinking that the question was already asked and answered. The worry is the answer that the US came up with. . .that's the real issue here, innit?
TSJ: The bombing of the French sub folk: It doesn't strike you that the one thing that did was clear up the the possibility of Mush dreaming of turning to other powers for "help"? That the EU/Frenchies were not going to be a "counterweight" to the US, at least not in Pak, anytime soon?
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Now one blank page of sept 11 report is out, Slowly we will get rest of report.
TSJ don't underestimate Mushy or Bandhar, his wife gave money to hijackers according to 9/11 report.
TSJ don't underestimate Mushy or Bandhar, his wife gave money to hijackers according to 9/11 report.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
TSJ: The bombing of the French sub folk: It doesn't strike you that the one thing that did was clear up the the possibility of Mush dreaming of turning to other powers for "help"? That the EU/Frenchies were not going to be a "counterweight" to the US, at least not in Pak, anytime soon?
OK. But how does this relate to Mushy being knows-all, sees-all, chief terrorist?
Did you know that Colin Powell described his meetings with Mushy after 9-11? In almost startling detail Powell told of the "daddy, save me" tone of the meetings. Powell repeatedly had to assure Mushy that he understood the circumstances in Pakistan. Mushy reiterated over and over again that Pakistan needed the money in order to operate and do what the US wanted. Powell finally had to tell him to shut up about the money and that Powell would do the best he could. Does this sound like a knows-all, sees all terrorist?
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Could people please stay within the topic. I don't mind the discussion on Musharraf being (or not being) the chief terrorist, but please move it to the pakistan related discussion thread or to the Pakistani involvement in terrorism thread.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
What is the topic anyway? Seriously.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
sunil's hypothesis is that the GOTUS has worked a deal with the TSP junta, similar to what the Saudis are said to have worked with Bin Laden.
Keep terrorism (at least WMD) out of the CONUS and we won't level Pakistan
Come to think of it, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Morocco, Iraq, Thailand, Afghanistan.. Chechnya, Moscow, .... but no attacks inside the US. Maybe its working.
Of course my position is that the US would not be silly enough to make such a deal with terrorists.
Keep terrorism (at least WMD) out of the CONUS and we won't level Pakistan
Come to think of it, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Morocco, Iraq, Thailand, Afghanistan.. Chechnya, Moscow, .... but no attacks inside the US. Maybe its working.
Of course my position is that the US would not be silly enough to make such a deal with terrorists.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
sunil: Al Zubeidah was a mid-level recruiter / travel agent / logistics fixer. It does make some sense that he would know a couple of useful phone numbers to call to get problems with embassies/visas etc. fixed, and money sent to the right places. He was ultimately the link to the recruit pool. Probably got these top-level phone numbers when he encountered some glitch and had to get some high-powered help in a hurry. Probably getting the phone numbers of these high-ups was the zenith of his "career", so he would have memorized and treasured those.
IIRC, from the Findlaw.com trial transcripts of Ahmed Shah Ressam and his buddies, Zubeidah was the one to whom "recruits" reported when they got to Pakistan. He would "process" them, and send them on to Afghanistan or POK for training and indoctrination. He was the "friendly" front face of A Qaeda that the terrorist expendables saw.
Other than that, I would say that there is no case against him. He was probably told that he was hiring for a partnership run by a big Sheikh and a big General - blessed by Our Herrow Sheikh Osama.
As I remember, Zubaydah was arrested in Faisalabad, Pakistan.
TSJ: From the TIME report on Posner's book:
Al Capone's men shoot a police officer. When arrested, they confess to being ordered by Capone's right-hand man. Other gangsters even more closely tied to Capone slit the throat of a reporter who gets too close. Capone's office runs all the protection rackets and prostitution and gambling and drug trade in the city.
And the Police call Al Capone "The Frontline Ally in the War Against Organized Crime..."
Or did they? Has the USA changed THAT much, as sunil claims?
IIRC, from the Findlaw.com trial transcripts of Ahmed Shah Ressam and his buddies, Zubeidah was the one to whom "recruits" reported when they got to Pakistan. He would "process" them, and send them on to Afghanistan or POK for training and indoctrination. He was the "friendly" front face of A Qaeda that the terrorist expendables saw.
Other than that, I would say that there is no case against him. He was probably told that he was hiring for a partnership run by a big Sheikh and a big General - blessed by Our Herrow Sheikh Osama.
As I remember, Zubaydah was arrested in Faisalabad, Pakistan.
TSJ: From the TIME report on Posner's book:
And now we come to the TIME "spin":Posner told TIME he got the details of Zubaydah's interrogation and revelations from a U.S. official outside the cia at a "very senior Executive Branch level" whose name we would probably know if he told it to us. He did not. The second source, Posner said, was from the cia, and he gave what Posner viewed as general confirmation of the story but did not repeat the details. There are top Bush Administration officials who have long taken a hostile view of Saudi behavior regarding terrorism and might want to leak Zubaydah's claims. ...
And having thus nailed the KSA well and good, TIME goes on to do the mandatory Mush-ass-covering ritual:There's another unanswered question. If Turki and Mir were cutting deals with bin Laden, were they acting at the behest of their governments or on their own? .. the book implies that they were doing official, if covert, business. In the past, Turki has admitted—to TIME in November 2001, among others—attending meetings in '96 and '98 but insisted they were efforts to persuade Sudan and Afghanistan to hand over bin Laden.
Which brings us back to sunil's question: Why?The case against Pakistan is cloudier. It is well known that Islamist elements in the isi were assisting the Taliban under the government of Nawaz Sharif. But even if Mir dealt with bin Laden, he could have been operating outside official channels.
Al Capone's men shoot a police officer. When arrested, they confess to being ordered by Capone's right-hand man. Other gangsters even more closely tied to Capone slit the throat of a reporter who gets too close. Capone's office runs all the protection rackets and prostitution and gambling and drug trade in the city.
And the Police call Al Capone "The Frontline Ally in the War Against Organized Crime..."
Or did they? Has the USA changed THAT much, as sunil claims?
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Also, TSJ, no one is saying that the CIA killed any of those 3 Saudis/Pakis. The Crescent of Terror model (copyright n^3) is Saudi funding, Paki military logistics and planning, and Al Qaeda religious cra* to hire gullible suckers to send as jehadis. Easy enough to believe that they killed these guys.
"oh, just keep that tall tower centered in your windshield at 400 knots. Alla* will lift the plane over it - have Faith. We just want to scare the kafirs with the Might of the Ummah!"
"oh, just keep that tall tower centered in your windshield at 400 knots. Alla* will lift the plane over it - have Faith. We just want to scare the kafirs with the Might of the Ummah!"
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Come to think of it, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Morocco, Iraq, Thailand, Afghanistan.. Chechnya, Moscow, .... but no attacks inside the US. Maybe its working.
Uh maybe John Ashcroft, the Ayatolla Baptistola, had something to do with this? People are disappearing off the streets ya know?
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
You are quite right that they don’t call themselves 'Wahhabism', because that would diminish the prophet. They prefer to call themselves Muwahhidun, ie Unitarians. They oppose anything that dissipates the concentration of faith - such as the tombs of notable Muslims.Originally posted by kgoan:
Do you have a comment on the following:
They are part of a broader Islamic movement known as the Salafis, who hold that the only proper example for Muslims were the first three generations.
The Ikhwan were a militant lay society formed in 1912 to promote Wahhabism. Ibn Saud came to rely on them because they were utterly driven - unlike most Arabs they believed in fighting to the death, rather than fighting until your position was at a disadvantage. In some ways he adopted them because he had no real choice as long as he maintained his political relationship with the Wahhabi creed.
There's a close parallel in German history. When Hitler was an obscure backwater rabble rouser attempting to expand his influence from the fringe he brought on board Ernst Rohm and the Brown Shirts of the SA.
Rohm was already a leader with a well defined agenda known to his troops. From his point of view he was not Hitler's subordinate, but an associate with similar goals.
The SA were truly radical, and they intended to turn German society upside down by smashing everything in their paths. There’s was a culture that derived that derived the greatest possible pleasure from destruction and inflicting fear and humiliation on 'the enemy'. They retained an identity and organisation partially independent of the NSDAP.
Eventually, when Hitler achieved his goal of Reichschancellorship he found himself in a position of responsibility. That meant he had to keep the Wehrmacht, the industrialists and the bankers happy, which meant in turn restraining the SA. When Rohm refused to be restrained and accused Hitler of betrayal he had the leadership liquidated and the followers dispersed.
Ibn Saud faced the same challenge after the Ikhwan conquered the Hejaz in 1926 (with the help of the traitor Philby sr.) The Hejaz was the wealthiest but worldliest part of his newly expanded kingdom, and he was not just a tribal chieftain but the head of a state. The Ikhwan still wanted to smash things, carry of loot and kill infidels like Jordanians, Hejazis who smoked, played music or painted or Shias. They made unpopular demands such as banning tobacco on the grounds that it was un-Islamic. Eventually their refusal to buckle down led to war with al-Saud. The Ikhwan defeated were broken up in the early 1930s.
The spirit of the Ikhwan inspired two notable incidents - an attack on the television studios after the first broadcast in the 1970s by one of the King Faysal's nephews, and the seizure of the Grand Mosque in 1979 by a descendant of one of the old Ikhwan's leaders (with logistical assistance from Osama's elder brother).
While the Ikhwan itself may be reviled, I am not aware of any real religious resistance against Wahhabism in the Hejaz and Asr.
However the KSA's demographic centre of gravity is on the west coast, where there is enormous discontent and anger with their (ordinary people's) share of a shrinking economic pie, which they correctly blame on the corruption and nepotism of al-Saud. To them any revolutionary creed sounds good.
In the Nejd and among privileged Saudis, the feelings are somewhat more traditional. They aren’t interested in political or economic reform so much as religious hypocrisy. They feel (like Rohm) that the compact has been broken to an extent that can not be repaired. The straw that broke the camel's back was of course letting US troops in after the invasion of Kuwait.
Salafists elsewhere, but especially in Yemen are sympathetic to both sources of anger. Unlike other places, Yemen is too closely tied by geography, history and blood ties to be as circumspect as the others who receive Saudi bribe money.
These different agendas have come together, in the way that the Iranian middle classes anger mingled with that of the religious extremists.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Gee! Reading kgoan, sunil and Johann gives new meaning to the term "misspent youth".
Can u guys write equally well about Test Cricket, I wonder??? (or, in kgoan's case, sync, swimming)?
TSJ: No comment
Can u guys write equally well about Test Cricket, I wonder??? (or, in kgoan's case, sync, swimming)?
TSJ:
Ayatolla Baptistola
No comment Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Good grief Johann:
Reading between the lines there, it almost seems to imply that 9-11 was merely "collateral damage" from an internal Saudi fight!
Or: Mush and the Paks taking advantage of an internal Saudi schisms to push a 9-11 agenda for . . . ???
Folks:
Is it possible we've been blindsided here? Is the Saudi angle more important to understand post 9-11 Pak-US relations than us or the Chinese? I mean, have we missed the significance of why Mush appointed someone like General Durrani as Ambassador to Saudia?
Reading between the lines there, it almost seems to imply that 9-11 was merely "collateral damage" from an internal Saudi fight!
Or: Mush and the Paks taking advantage of an internal Saudi schisms to push a 9-11 agenda for . . . ???
Folks:
Is it possible we've been blindsided here? Is the Saudi angle more important to understand post 9-11 Pak-US relations than us or the Chinese? I mean, have we missed the significance of why Mush appointed someone like General Durrani as Ambassador to Saudia?
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
>>Can u guys write equally well about Test Cricket, I wonder???
Don't matter does it. Sucking up to the admins works just as well. Cricket after all is banned. :p
Don't matter does it. Sucking up to the admins works just as well. Cricket after all is banned. :p
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Triple N:
It was meant to be funny and not serious.
It was meant to be funny and not serious.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
kgoan: With the Strategic Depth of A'Stan gone, and matters not going well on the Eastern border either, surely the Caliph Mush would wish to shift his winter capital to sunny Riyadh. All plausible there, with the K of KSA on his deathbed (BTW, seems to have been there an inordinately long time..) But to suggest that 9/11 was collateral damage???
The Al Zubeidah confession, which I find quite plausible (whether its disinformation or not) nails the Paki role right up to mid-upper-level. The arrests of those 3.375 Paki officers "below a Lieutenant Colonel" (not going there, sorry) also point to the onion-peeling getting nearer to the core. Now as was pointed out, connect that to the PAF officer, classmate of Mohammed Atta, who was replaced by Marwan Al Shehhi...
The core is still "protected". But the protection looks more and more flimsy. The Caliph may not be entirely nood yet, but the nooks are gone, and his dress has been rolled up to mid-thigh.
Does this account for the desperation attacks in Afghanistan? Is it "use-em or lose-em" stage there?
Three more US soldiers and some 20-odd Afghan soldiers got killed in the past 2 days by obvious Paki-based, Paki-armed, Paki-sheltered attackers.
I look at this, and compare it with what IA faces in J&K, and suddently it looks like the Americans are facing worse than the Indian Army is facing.. If you were an American commander, wouldn't you be demanding to know how the "secured" areas of Paktia suddenly have so many well-armed thugs appeared suddenly?? They've even appointed their own Province Governor who's giving satphone interviews to Reuters. If this is the open news, then the ground realities there must be much worse.
All it takes at this point is ONE US Senator openly calling for a full investigation of the Pakistani top-level role - and Mush's remaining protection gets blown away. Does it still look like there is a red-line deal, sunil and kgoan?
Point is, all the above, except for the interrogation of Al Zubeidah, were INITIATED by the Pakis.
Here is a sure sign of Senatorial blood-scenting:
http://dailynews.att.net
The Al Zubeidah confession, which I find quite plausible (whether its disinformation or not) nails the Paki role right up to mid-upper-level. The arrests of those 3.375 Paki officers "below a Lieutenant Colonel" (not going there, sorry) also point to the onion-peeling getting nearer to the core. Now as was pointed out, connect that to the PAF officer, classmate of Mohammed Atta, who was replaced by Marwan Al Shehhi...
The core is still "protected". But the protection looks more and more flimsy. The Caliph may not be entirely nood yet, but the nooks are gone, and his dress has been rolled up to mid-thigh.
Does this account for the desperation attacks in Afghanistan? Is it "use-em or lose-em" stage there?
Three more US soldiers and some 20-odd Afghan soldiers got killed in the past 2 days by obvious Paki-based, Paki-armed, Paki-sheltered attackers.
I look at this, and compare it with what IA faces in J&K, and suddently it looks like the Americans are facing worse than the Indian Army is facing.. If you were an American commander, wouldn't you be demanding to know how the "secured" areas of Paktia suddenly have so many well-armed thugs appeared suddenly?? They've even appointed their own Province Governor who's giving satphone interviews to Reuters. If this is the open news, then the ground realities there must be much worse.
All it takes at this point is ONE US Senator openly calling for a full investigation of the Pakistani top-level role - and Mush's remaining protection gets blown away. Does it still look like there is a red-line deal, sunil and kgoan?
Point is, all the above, except for the interrogation of Al Zubeidah, were INITIATED by the Pakis.
Here is a sure sign of Senatorial blood-scenting:
http://dailynews.att.net
The cost of sheltering the Mush-behind may become >> budget available for said purpose.Senators Press Bush to Outline Iraq Costs
August 31, 2003
By Lori Santos
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Lawmakers pressed President Bush on Sunday to spell out the cost to Americans of the occupation of Iraq, which a leading Republican said would top $30 billion over five years for operations alone.
Sen. Richard Lugar, an Indiana Republican and chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the $30 billion was in addition to military costs that have been running about $4 billion a month.
..
Sen. John McCain, an Arizona Republican and member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, wrote .. that the administration had to be explicit about what is going to be required.
...
The demands on Bush intensified .. Bush may ask the U.S. Congress to provide $2 billion to $3 billion over the short term for Iraq and some congressional sources are expecting a push for an emergency spending bill of $20 billion or more this year.
Congress passed a $60 billion emergency spending bill in April for U.S. operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
..Paul Bremer, said last week he needed tens of billions of dollars for the next year alone, citing $16 billion to deal with water problems and $13 billion for electrical power.
Lugar said .. require "our going to the international community in a big way."
.. president ought to sketch out the five-year picture." ... Bush faces decisions on how to improve security .. death toll since he declared major combat over ...
Sen. John Kerry, ... rapped Bush for not getting the United Nations on board.
"The fact that there was not sufficient planning for this ought to leave every American angry and exasperated at this administration's arrogance," Kerry told NBC.
Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, another Democratic contender, told CBS: "I am shocked at how unprepared the Bush administration was for what to do afterward."
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
I like it! Consider it formally registered in the BR Copyright Office.Originally posted by TSJones:
John Ashcroft, the Ayatollah Baptistollah
"John Ashcroft, the Ayatollah Baptistollah" (© 2003, TSJones).
Why wait for the war to die down? They're already doing a TV special on that kid from WV (what's her name? Pvt Jenny Jones or something?) who was captured by the EyeRackees and "rescued" by Delta Force.Man, if this war ever dies down down, Hollywood is gonna make some terrific movies.
BTW, your brief recap of the Somali op is right on in this respect -- the US had already withdrawn the bulk of its forces from Som by the time the massacre of the Packees took place. The only reason the US went back in, and heavy, ("capture Aideed and start nation-building!") was in reprisal for the Packee-massacre by the Soms. I recall reading a newspaper account at the time -- when the US troops landed in Som again, they were greeted by a Packee Brigadier who said, "Thank God you are back here. Now we can teach these black b@stards a lesson". This little incident was recounted by Western journalist who recounted the conversation in his column.
Added later: I remember now. Her name is Jessica Lynch, not Jenny Jones.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
>>>All it takes at this point is ONE US Senator openly calling for a full investigation of the Pakistani top-level role
To reach to this level one has to do real good work on grey matter which is stand still somewhere in traffic.
Today "Want to be President" Kerry was asking for more Muslim troops in Iraq. Well he wants more Paki to have real fun time and prolong the feast.
To reach to this level one has to do real good work on grey matter which is stand still somewhere in traffic.
Today "Want to be President" Kerry was asking for more Muslim troops in Iraq. Well he wants more Paki to have real fun time and prolong the feast.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Yes, Mudy. Depend on these wanna-be Prezs to come up with "solutions" 180 deg. out of phase with reality. Sen. Kerry hasn't really impressed in the "grey matter" dept. so far, IMHO. Whenever he comes out to speak for the Dems, the Dem rating goes down another few points.
Not much hope there.
"reprisal for the Packee-massacre by the Soms."
Ah! Yes! The bitter irony of the Somalia deal is that the Aidid crew was specifically trained to kill Americans by Paki Mullah Masood of Jaish-e-Mohammed fame before he came to enjoy vacation in desi jail (and that was before the 1999 IA hijacking by Gen. Aziz's minions to get him released).
The Somalis tried out their new-found skills on the Paki Army.
And then the US went in to "avenge" their "Al-lies" - and the Somalis were waiting.
In all probability, the massacre of Paki soldiers was specifically ordered by Mullah Masood and General Aziz so that the Americans WOULD go charging in to avenge their Al-Lies, so that all the hard work of Mullah Masood & Co. did not get wasted just because the Americans left.
Oh! What an Al-Lie-Antz! It would be uproarious except for all those young men being gunned down or blown up in the prime of their lives just to keep these d*** Paki Generals rolling in terrorist money.
Not much hope there.
"reprisal for the Packee-massacre by the Soms."
Ah! Yes! The bitter irony of the Somalia deal is that the Aidid crew was specifically trained to kill Americans by Paki Mullah Masood of Jaish-e-Mohammed fame before he came to enjoy vacation in desi jail (and that was before the 1999 IA hijacking by Gen. Aziz's minions to get him released).
The Somalis tried out their new-found skills on the Paki Army.
And then the US went in to "avenge" their "Al-lies" - and the Somalis were waiting.
In all probability, the massacre of Paki soldiers was specifically ordered by Mullah Masood and General Aziz so that the Americans WOULD go charging in to avenge their Al-Lies, so that all the hard work of Mullah Masood & Co. did not get wasted just because the Americans left.
Oh! What an Al-Lie-Antz! It would be uproarious except for all those young men being gunned down or blown up in the prime of their lives just to keep these d*** Paki Generals rolling in terrorist money.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
“Deus ex machina” (literally “God comes out of the machine”) is a Latin phrase meaning: “God will solve this difficult problem for us with a miracle”.Originally posted by sunil s:
Johann in one of his posts had indicated that there is no higher level strategic thought in the Al Qaida, I think he used the phrase `duex et machina' to describe their line of thinking.
Example:
Abdul bin Wahhab and the Gang of Wahhablets are planning a dreadful stike against The Great Satan. How to bring about the downfall of American society? America is so strong, wealthy, etc. What to do? Aha! Brainwave! Crash some airplanes into the WTC and a Deus ex Machina from Allah will take care of the rest.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
In addition to what Mohan has stated here is what dictionary.com says:
deus ex machina \DAY-us-eks-MAH-kuh-nuh; -nah; -MAK-uh-nuh\, noun:
1. In ancient Greek and Roman drama, a god introduced by means of a crane to unravel and resolve the plot.
2. Any active agent who appears unexpectedly to solve an apparently insoluble difficulty.
In times of affluence and peace, with technology that always seems to arrive like a deus ex machina to solve any problem, it becomes easy to believe that life is perfectible.
--Stephanie Gutmann, The Kinder, Gentler Military: Can America's Gender-Neutral Fighting Force Still Win Wars?
But we also need the possibility of cataclysm, so that, when situations seem hopeless, and beyond the power of any natural force to amend, we may still anticipate salvation from a messiah, a conquering hero, a deus ex machina, or some other agent with power to fracture the unsupportable and institute the unobtainable.
--Stephen Jay Gould, Questioning the Millennium: A Rationalist's Guide to a Precisely Arbitrary Countdown
-------------------------------------------------
Now in TJ's words:
But in addition for these Islamists to perfect the miracle, first the stewardess's throat must be cut with a box cutter in order to draw the pilots out of cockpit so that these heroes of Allah can take over the plane. Oh yes, these are tough guys! They are in fact so tough that they can whip any stewardess! No woman is big enough to stop them!
Now here is where the US is supposed to stop and think: what have we done to make these people so angry with us? Where have we gone wrong and what can we do to make it right? Maybe we should do what the Japanese wanted us to do after Pearl Harbor: apologize profusely and sue for peace and cede to them California as payment for troubles rendered. Yeah, that's what we are gonna do all right.
deus ex machina \DAY-us-eks-MAH-kuh-nuh; -nah; -MAK-uh-nuh\, noun:
1. In ancient Greek and Roman drama, a god introduced by means of a crane to unravel and resolve the plot.
2. Any active agent who appears unexpectedly to solve an apparently insoluble difficulty.
In times of affluence and peace, with technology that always seems to arrive like a deus ex machina to solve any problem, it becomes easy to believe that life is perfectible.
--Stephanie Gutmann, The Kinder, Gentler Military: Can America's Gender-Neutral Fighting Force Still Win Wars?
But we also need the possibility of cataclysm, so that, when situations seem hopeless, and beyond the power of any natural force to amend, we may still anticipate salvation from a messiah, a conquering hero, a deus ex machina, or some other agent with power to fracture the unsupportable and institute the unobtainable.
--Stephen Jay Gould, Questioning the Millennium: A Rationalist's Guide to a Precisely Arbitrary Countdown
-------------------------------------------------
Now in TJ's words:
But in addition for these Islamists to perfect the miracle, first the stewardess's throat must be cut with a box cutter in order to draw the pilots out of cockpit so that these heroes of Allah can take over the plane. Oh yes, these are tough guys! They are in fact so tough that they can whip any stewardess! No woman is big enough to stop them!
Now here is where the US is supposed to stop and think: what have we done to make these people so angry with us? Where have we gone wrong and what can we do to make it right? Maybe we should do what the Japanese wanted us to do after Pearl Harbor: apologize profusely and sue for peace and cede to them California as payment for troubles rendered. Yeah, that's what we are gonna do all right.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
I dont want people to think that I suggested that al-Qaeda's Majlis Shura is naive enough to believe that Sept. 11 would be enough on its own. Let us attempt to slip in to their sandals for a second -
After all of the failures and disapointments that Al-Qaeda has had to persevere through in these many years even a single success of this magnitude indicates a divine hand. It is a blessing that tells us that we are on the right path.
Part of the miracle is Allah's grace that many more such attacks will succeed (however many years that may take) in punishing them until the Crusader nation's public grow weary and throw off the Jewish yoke that drives them to interfere with the Will of God in the Muslim World.
After all of the failures and disapointments that Al-Qaeda has had to persevere through in these many years even a single success of this magnitude indicates a divine hand. It is a blessing that tells us that we are on the right path.
Part of the miracle is Allah's grace that many more such attacks will succeed (however many years that may take) in punishing them until the Crusader nation's public grow weary and throw off the Jewish yoke that drives them to interfere with the Will of God in the Muslim World.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Then they must be prepared to accept the cost of such divine guidance because we will not only kill them, we will kill their women and their children and their pet parakeets. All will be sacrificed to the B-52s, the TOW missiles and the conex boxes. For if we, the Americans, are to suffer our innocents to be killed by the divine hand then surely a holy multiplier will be used to tally the tab for God's intervention. May the Ghost of Curtis LeMay show us the way.
http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/afp/afp0198.htm
http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/afp/afp0198.htm
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
FWIW, we are getting this same dorkish line of garbage now, after the two bomb attacks in Mumbai and after the train burnings in Godhra: It's all caused by injustice. Indians (i.e. non-Muslim Indians) should stop and ask themselves: where have we gone wrong, and what can we do to make it right?. Because, after all, these swine couldn't be murderous cowards. No, no, no, they are sincere and gentle citizens with a grievance, you see.Originally posted by TSJones:
Now here is where the US is supposed to stop and think: what have we done to make these people so angry with us? Where have we gone wrong and what can we do to make it right?
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
This "Indians (i.e., non-Muslim Indians)" in the above is utter garbage, and unworthy of BRF. I hadn't heard that the Mumbai blasts were religion-selective or specific. And yes, if we leave mutagens around, we get mutations, and some are bound to be dangerous.Originally posted by Mohan Raju:
FWIW, we are getting this same dorkish line of garbage now, after the two bomb attacks in Mumbai and after the train burnings in Godhra: It's all caused by injustice. Indians (i.e. non-Muslim Indians) should stop and ask themselves: where have we gone wrong, and what can we do to make it right?. Because, after all, these swine couldn't be murderous cowards. No, no, no, they are sincere and gentle citizens with a grievance, you see.
Think with a cold and objective mind. J&K is quietening down not because cold and murderous cowards suddenly vanished or turned into normal people; but because a relatively clean political process was started. The same is asked for here - start a relatively clean investigation and prosecution process of rioters.
Re: Pakistani Nuclear Thresholds
Terrorist Apologizer Alert
J&K is quitening because we have the terrorists by the balls and the US is also squeezing Pakistan from the other side. How can one be blind to this fact? So, it is just OK for cold blooded murders as an effect to an unclean political process a cause. Similarly, it is OK for people to get bombed to death as a retaliation for unclean judicial process. BTW, who are you to pass judgment regarding the cleanliness or otherwise of anything. What are your sources and investigations apart from HT, ToI and other such terrorist apologizers.
Mohan Raju: I have learnt one thing. It is just fruitless and pointless to argue with people who acts as terrorist apologizers.
What the above means is very clear. It is no different from the tone and tenor of Sujatha Anandan's article in HT the other day.Think with a cold and objective mind. J&K is quietening down not because cold and murderous cowards suddenly vanished or turned into normal people; but because a relatively clean political process was started. The same is asked for here - start a relatively clean investigation and prosecution process of rioters.
J&K is quitening because we have the terrorists by the balls and the US is also squeezing Pakistan from the other side. How can one be blind to this fact? So, it is just OK for cold blooded murders as an effect to an unclean political process a cause. Similarly, it is OK for people to get bombed to death as a retaliation for unclean judicial process. BTW, who are you to pass judgment regarding the cleanliness or otherwise of anything. What are your sources and investigations apart from HT, ToI and other such terrorist apologizers.
Mohan Raju: I have learnt one thing. It is just fruitless and pointless to argue with people who acts as terrorist apologizers.