Secret Order Lets U.S. Raid Al Qaeda in Many Countries

#1
No comment...

New York Times said:
Secret Order Lets U.S. Raid Al Qaeda in Many Countries

WASHINGTON — The United States military since 2004 has used broad, secret authority to carry out nearly a dozen previously undisclosed attacks against Al Qaeda and other militants in Syria, Pakistan and elsewhere, according to senior American officials.

These military raids, typically carried out by Special Operations forces, were authorized by a classified order that Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld signed in the spring of 2004 with the approval of President Bush, the officials said. The secret order gave the military new authority to attack the Qaeda terrorist network anywhere in the world, and a more sweeping mandate to conduct operations in countries not at war with the United States.

In 2006, for example, a Navy Seal team raided a suspected militants’ compound in the Bajaur region of Pakistan, according to a former top official of the Central Intelligence Agency. Officials watched the entire mission — captured by the video camera of a remotely piloted Predator aircraft — in real time in the C.I.A.’s Counterterrorist Center at the agency’s headquarters in Virginia 7,000 miles away.

Cont/...
 
#3
This is news?
 
#4
If they are taking the war to Pakistan then they are obviously not taking enough of it there. A nice fat juicy one on one of these indoctrination centres on the border would be a help. :x :x
 
#5
Bears, woods and toilet habits spring to mind over this

Have journos missed the news lately about the raid into Syria and missile attacks on Pakistani madrassas?
 
#7
It may come as a surprise to some, but my thoughts on reading the piece were simply that somebody (probably military or CIA) has decided to directly implicate the political leadership (Rumsfeld and Bush) in this now - rather than take the rap once Obama arrives with a different set of spectacles.

As regards to comparison to Russian actions, well, when Russia raids Ukraine or Czech Rep for arming Georgia, or Iraq or Turkey for facilitating Islamic extremists in the Caucuses, I guess we could discuss equivalences. :)
 
#8
whitecity said:
It may come as a surprise to some, but my thoughts on reading the piece were simply that somebody (probably military or CIA) has decided to directly implicate the political leadership (Rumsfeld and Bush) in this now - rather than take the rap once Obama arrives with a different set of spectacles.

As regards to comparison to Russian actions, well, when Russia raids Ukraine or Czech Rep for arming Georgia, or Iraq or Turkey for facilitating Islamic extremists in the Caucuses, I guess we could discuss equivalences. :)
So you a really comparing peacetime arms sale to the harboring and support of terrorists? :roll:
 
#9
whitecity said:
It may come as a surprise to some, but my thoughts on reading the piece were simply that somebody (probably military or CIA) has decided to directly implicate the political leadership (Rumsfeld and Bush) in this now - rather than take the rap once Obama arrives with a different set of spectacles.
As regards to comparison to Russian actions, well, when Russia raids Ukraine or Czech Rep for arming Georgia, or Iraq or Turkey for facilitating Islamic extremists in the Caucuses, I guess we could discuss equivalences. :)
Obama's already stated he will bomb AQ centres in Pakistan if the Pakis don't take any action themselves.
 
#10
Does that mean we will soon be seeing Apache gunships flying over East London and Bradford then? :wink:
 
#12
WalterWarry said:
TheSpecialOne said:
Does that mean we will soon be seeing Apache gunships flying over East London and Bradford then? :wink:
Er No - East London is mostly Bangladeshi's now Manchester.........
And therin lies the potential problem; the Septics don't have a large Pakistani community(IIRC). We do. Any large-scale attack on Pakistan will leave thousands of p1ssed off Pakis in the UK. While the vast majority will restrict themselves to protest marches etc, there could a significant minority determined to take the Magic Carpet Ride to Paradise...

I'm not saying hitting AQ inside Pakistan is a bad idea. Just pointing out that the Septics will have less of a problem to deal with at home than we do.

All conjecture at this point anyway; Obama, like all politician's, talks a good game. For example, he also promised a new "Civilian Security Force as powerful as the Military." And I don't see that happening any time soon. :roll:
 
#13
parapauk said:
If it emerged Russia had been doing the same thing with reguard to its militant problem, I've no doubt W.C. would be churping on about Russia's 'right to self defence'.

This incident springs to mind:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/jul/01/chechnya.russia
In this case CIA won and Russian secret services lost. It appeared that American agents monitored the operation from begin to the end. Well done.

However, Russian agents who got life terms in the jail were released soon. Relation between Russia and Qatar are very good and we are creating (along with Iran) something like 'gas OPEC'. Chechen separatist Yandarbiyev got his 72 virgins...

Happy end.

Edited to add. Another Chechen separatist (mr.Zakayev) is living in London. If our American friends think that they have right for special operations in foreign countries then it is not forbidden for other contries as well.
 
#15
parapauk said:
So you a really comparing peacetime arms sale to the harboring and support of terrorists?
Nope. And to get to that, you're jumping at least 2 hypotheticals that are unlikely to occur and ignoring my second example. How convenient.

As somebody has pointed out already, UK is harbouring a number of known terrorists - or those suspected of being, or supporting, terrorists. If it's OK for the US to drop ordnance on wedding parties in Pakistan, then it's OK to drop ordnance on wedding parties in parts of the UK. That is, the natural extension of your position, isn't it?
 
#16
We are never going to come anywhere close to a peaceful and successful conclusion to our activities in the Middle East whilst the terrorists can simply hide from us over a border invisible on the ground in largely uninhabited mountainous areas. Like it or not, if we do not want all those who have died to have given their lives in vain, we have to deal with this threat, and if the Pakis won't do it then tough shit; they can moan, but what can they do to stop America?

As long as there are Taliban coherently organised in the region and with safe havens and resources Afghanistan will not be stable and nor will Iraq; left alone both will swiftly gain a very high entropy and pose a threat for years at a time when we may have other threats emerging. These wars have been presented poorly and so tare unpopular; if we or the US leave now then soldiers will have died for nothing and fundamentalist Islam will sweep down over both states like a black burkha...
 
#17
Bravo_Zulu said:
We are never going to come anywhere close to a peaceful and successful conclusion to our activities in the Middle East whilst the terrorists can simply hide from us over a border invisible on the ground in largely uninhabited mountainous areas. Like it or not, if we do not want all those who have died to have given their lives in vain, we have to deal with this threat, and if the Pakis won't do it then tough shit; they can moan, but what can they do to stop America?

As long as there are Taliban coherently organised in the region and with safe havens and resources Afghanistan will not be stable and nor will Iraq; left alone both will swiftly gain a very high entropy and pose a threat for years at a time when we may have other threats emerging. These wars have been presented poorly and so tare unpopular; if we or the US leave now then soldiers will have died for nothing and fundamentalist Islam will sweep down over both states like a black burkha...
Taking the 'war' across the border into Cambodia and Laos really helped the US defeat the enemy and win the Vietnam war, didn't it?

How many more lives have to be sacrificed in an attempt to give more meaning to those that have already paid the ultimate price?
 
#18
whitecity said:
Bravo_Zulu said:
We are never going to come anywhere close to a peaceful and successful conclusion to our activities in the Middle East whilst the terrorists can simply hide from us over a border invisible on the ground in largely uninhabited mountainous areas. Like it or not, if we do not want all those who have died to have given their lives in vain, we have to deal with this threat, and if the Pakis won't do it then tough shit; they can moan, but what can they do to stop America?

As long as there are Taliban coherently organised in the region and with safe havens and resources Afghanistan will not be stable and nor will Iraq; left alone both will swiftly gain a very high entropy and pose a threat for years at a time when we may have other threats emerging. These wars have been presented poorly and so tare unpopular; if we or the US leave now then soldiers will have died for nothing and fundamentalist Islam will sweep down over both states like a black burkha...
Taking the 'war' across the border into Cambodia and Laos really helped the US defeat the enemy and win the Vietnam war, didn't it?

How many more lives have to be sacrificed in an attempt to give more meaning to those that have already paid the ultimate price?
So what do you suggest? We pack up and leave the region to whoever is strongest? We erect a huge wall along the border (thousands of km long as it is)? What?
 
#20
Bravo_Zulu said:
So what do you suggest? We pack up and leave the region to whoever is strongest?
That would probably be more desireable to 'true' UK national interest than helping the US prop up one of the also-rans!

Look at it this way. Why are we propping up one side (in both Iraq and Afghanistan) in vicious civil wars, trying to maintain unitary states where the locals would probably opt for fragmentation, and trying to impose our values and way of life upon them?

You question how to make a failing policy work. I question the policy itself.
 

Latest Threads

Top