Escalation in Pakistan

The war in Afghanistan is seven years old and for the past several weeks we have read reports of our drones attacking Taliban and al Qaeda targets with missiles inside Pakistan.  Why now seven years into the war and not before?  What is behind these recent attacks?  We always knew the Taliban/al Qaeda were there in that region.

 

The answer lies in the type of person we have as President.  Mr. Bush's performance and reckless behavior in fighting the war on terror is dismal.  He faces the prospect of leaving office in a few months with the lowest approval rating of any President in recent memory.  The reason for the recent attacks in Pakistan is a political decision by Bush to finally try to get bin Laden before he leaves office to improve his rating and salvage his Presidency.  One will remember it was Mr. Bush himself shortly after 9-11 who said bin Laden was wanted dead or alive but then failed to pursue him. 

 

Seven years of war in Afghanistan and almost six years of war in Iraq have already been recorded in history.  Those years can not be rewritten and history will not be kind to Mr. Bush.  The American people gave Mr. Bush two chances to serve and uplift America a its people, but he lacked the wisdom, character and humility to serve as President.

Bush And Musharraf: A Losing Foreign Policy

Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf announced his resignation on Monday, August 18 after facing the thought of impeachment proceedings.  Musharraf came to power in a military coup and President Bush embraced his leadership after the tragic events of 9-11, pouring billions of tax payers' dollars into that country in the fight against terrorism.  Mr. Bush told the American people Musharraf and Pakistan would be an ally in the fight against al Qaeda in the tribal areas where they are hiding and training along with the Taliban.

 

Our latest intelligence reports, however, not only have said that al Qaeda's operations have become stronger in the tribal areas, but Pakistan has become an unreliable ally.  Bush and Republican leaders have a history of doing business with dictators and giving them billions of dollars and over looking the sad results of that kind of relationship.

 

President Bush's reckless behavior and incompetence in fighting the real war on the terrorists who struck us on 9-11 is still being played out 7 years later.  This administration is still fighting the wrong war with the surge in Iraq over WMD that did not exist.  We are still paying the price with American lives and there is still no time table for withdrawal. 

 

Mr. Bush as President and Commander in Chief has failed every reasonable test as what it takes to protect our country and our men and women in uniform.  If the resources that were committed to Iraq were committed to Pakistan at the start, almost 7 years ago, al Qaeda as we know it would be nothing but a pain today instead of the threat our intelligence people tell us they are.  Mr. Bush's War on Terror has been not only a failure, but a myth.

2001-2008 --- A Return To A Time Of Darkness

We were taught in school that there was a time in our history's past when learning seemed to stop.  It was called "The Dark Ages."  Who ever thought history would repeat itself in the 21st century?  The past seven and half years has been a repeat for our leaders who have failed to learn and then stopped learning from their mistakes altogether.

 

The present Dark Age covers a broad spectrum and I will discuss two of them in this post that came to light just in the last few days.  Nothing needs to be said about Iraq because the problem is so obvious.  Now it is Afghanistan and Iran.

 

Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, visited Afghanistan and said more foreign fighters including al Qaeda militants are operating in Pakistan's tribal areas then in the past and they are flowing into Afghanistan more freely this year compared to last.  Attacks in Eastern Afghanistan where American forces operate along the border with Pakistan are up 40% this year.  June was the deadliest month for U.S. and NATO soldiers since 2001.

 

This Dark Age of leadership goes back to our invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 when we failed to seal the borders.  It was known before our invasion that the border region between Pakistan and Afghanistan was a haven for training al Qaeda and the Taliban.  After the tragic events of 9-11, Mr. Bush said his administration would make no distinction between the terrorists and those who harbor them.  Not only did our leadership fail to carry out that policy with Pakistan, but seven years into the war in Afghanistan, our Chairman says the problem is still there and worse.

 

Now we have Secretary of State Condi Rice who just warned Iran that its latest launching of rockets was a provocative act and that the U.S. has the ability to counter them --- another example of this Dark Age of leadership failure where our leaders have learned nothing.  Our leadership has a policy of provocations and going along with the threats of Israel's leaders to other countries.  When leaders fail to learn, innocent people pay the price for their mistakes. 

 

Mr. Bush failed to learn that two can play the same game he tries to play.  That failure is darker than dark.  He played the game in Iraq over WMD that did not exist and went on to destabilize Iraq and the middle east.  Iran does not have a history of  invading other countries nor of launching a war against other countries.  Our own intelligence people said they stopped working to produce a nuclear weapon several years ago.  If they are in fact working to acquire such weapons, the U.S. can contain them like we did the Soviet Union for over 40 years.  We don't need a failure in leadership that will push the U.S. into yet another unnecessary war. 

 

This Dark Age of leadership and learning has put our country and its people in peril.  We see the economic repercussions for this failed leadership that touches the people's lives in almost every situation.  Russia was bogged down in Afghanistan for 10 years and then withdrew.  Our leadership furnished the Taliban weapons to fight Russia and they are now using those weapons we supplied them against our own troops.  We also supported Saddam during his invasion of Iran and ten year war.  We even gave Saddam U.S. intelligence gathered on Iran's military movements.  What has our country learned from those Dark Ages? ---Apparently, nothing.  

 

Can our nation escape this present Dark Age where our leaders have stopped learning.  Have we run out of leaders who understand what America is all about and how to use our military power wisely?  Hopefully the next President will answer those questions, in the way that they need to be answered.  

The United States And Its Future Foreign Policy

Over the past seven plus years, the American people found out the hard way how George Bush's foreign policy has been a disaster for our country.  Not only have we snubbed our long term allies, but the President has used our military power with impunity to try and force democracy on another nation.  Mr. Bush violated our past commitments of working with our allies on so many fronts and therefore the next President will have to work extra hard to turn things around.

 

The next President will have to restore America's moral mantle of world leadership.  That does not mean America needs to be the world's policeman.  It means we have to lead and show the way for our allies and foes alike.  America needs to be strong economically and militarily and reverse those policies that have not only been non-productive but that have simply failed.  Remember Bush's so called "tough talk" did not prevent the worst foreign terror attack on U.S. soil on 9-11.  We can not keep arming other nations and expect other nations not to send arms to other countries.  There is no creditability in our actions when we do that. 

 

The next President should openly work to bring Israel, India, and Pakistan to be a party to the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty as the U.S. and other nuclear powers are.  America loses its leverage when it tries to pick and choose what countries can or can not have WMD without checks and balances. 

 

Our next President should speak softly and carry a big stick.  Not to push our weight around, but to show our determination to make a difference in the would for peace.  No other nation will attack America if our foreign policy carries the message that it would never be of benefit to those who harbor such thoughts.  We have no adversaries that carry the destructive power that Russia possessed during the cold war, yet they knew it would not be to their advantage to launch a Nuclear War.

 

The main threat from  WMD comes from Israel, Pakistan, and India because those countries have unstable leaders and because the U.S. has a present foreign policy that is silent on those countries' responsibilities and the threat they pose.  It is almost as if our President does not want to talk about it.  We make matters worse by threats to other countries who belong to the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty.

 

The next President will have an opportunity to work to reverse the madness of a foreign policy run by the President and individuals who think they have the power to bully people around while not having a sound foreign policy based on American principals, values, and respect.  I'm not sure how much time the new President will have, but I know our country will have to pull together and do what ever it takes.  In the mean time, let's hope Mr. Bush does not try anything cute to make matters worse for the new administration.  

A Regenerated al Qaeda

I and many others have written about how Mr. Bush mismanaged the War on Terror with the unnecessary invasion and occupation of Iraq.  And now we have a report, via the Washington Post, by The Government Accountability Office that  (1) The Bush administration has no comprehensive plan for dealing with the threat posed by Pakistan's lawless tribal areas where bin Laden is believed to be hiding.  (2)  The U.S. has not met its national security goals to destroy terrorist threats and close the safe haven despite having spent more than $10 billion for Pakistani military operations in the border region.  (3)   That al Qaeda had regenerated its ability to attack the United States.  (4)   The report also supports an argument by congressional Democrats that the war in Iraq and administration bungling have helped create new danger in an area largely out of the control of any sovereign state. 

 

The Bottom line: The failure to seal the borders after invading Afghanistan allowed bin Laden, al Qaeda and the Taliban to escape to the tribal areas of Pakistan.  After that failure came the most reckless failure of all: the invasion and occupation of Iraq over WMD that did not exist.  The fight on the real war against terror was dead.  The people will do well to remember Bush's failure as President and Commander-in-Chief and the fact that Senator McCain will continue the same policy if elected President.  The latest poll shows Bush's approval rating at 28%.  That is a tragic statement about an American President, but the worst part is that he has truly earned it---that says it all.

A Reckless Foreign Policy

George Bush's attempt to play God in Iraq and the Middle East is a prime example of a leader trying to use its military power with impunity to enforce its own warped ideology on other countries.

 

We now learn, (what people with common sense found out long ago) through a report by the Associated Press, that the Arab nations worry about Iran's increasing influence around the Region particularly in Iraq and Lebanon.  Sunni countries like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the gulf states fear Iran will dominate Iraq in coming years because of its influence on Iraq's Shiite politicians. 

 

The war and occupation in Iraq, over WMD that did not exist, will be entering its fifth year in March.  Prior to this war, the Arab nations knew that Saddam and Iraq held Iran in check.  This war did not only destabilized Iraq, but also the entire Middle East region.  And as I mentioned before, when this war is done, because of Bush's reckless behavior, Iran and Iraq will be close allies.

 

None of this speaks well for America, our security or the security of the Middle East.  With the balance of power shifting, Israel with its WMD, Bush's incompetence and the problems in Pakistan, another country with WMD, the whole Muslim world could blow up any minute now.  Bush's bully-mentality towards other countries has caused a great backlash against the United States and has and continues to endanger our security.  

 

Democracy was not forced on the United States; our founding fathers were responsible for that.  Democracy can not be forced on other countries like Bush thinks he has a right to do.  The terrorists who were responsible for attacking the U.S. on 9-11 still flourish and their influence is growing.  The action of Mr. Bush to start a war and occupation in Iraq, instead of action against those who attacked us on 9-11, has set the Middle East on fire.  Democracy forced on others is simply not true Democracy.  

 

The shame of all this is that our men and women in uniform are still paying the ultimate price.  And we are still being told the surge is working, despite the fact that the reason given for the surge has never taken place.  2007 was the most deadly year in Iraq for our troops and for the Iraqi's.  In case any one has not noticed, 13 americans have already been killed in Iraq this month and from the same causes.  Our troops and our country were safer on the previous administration's watch.  That says it all. 

Trouble Ahead: Pakistan, India, and Israel

All three countries have stockpiles of nuclear weapons and other WMD according to the experts.  None of them participate in the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty.  The United States, Britain, France, Russia, China are all involved in the treaty, and yes, so is Iran.  The administration talks almost daily about the dangers of the proliferation of these WMD to other countries and parties, yet we have no foreign policy to put pressure on these 3 countries to join the treaty and open up their nuclear plants to inspection.  Has any one heard Mr. Bush, or for that matter any Republican, talk about this issue?

 

Now we have Pakistan  being declared in a state of emergency by President Pervez Musharraf.  He is still chief of staff of the Army and the Army is in charge of maintaining the order.  Finally after 6 years and $10 billion for Pakistan the administration is asking Mr. Musharraf to give up his Army role.  The country is in turmoil and the  Pakistani Army and Pakistani intelligence are in charge of protecting and preserving their nuclear stockpile.  Members of this administration and others say they believe the weapons are safe.  But suppose the Army splits and tries to overthrow their President, then how safe would those stockpiles be?  Remember, Mr. Musharraf himself came into power with a coup.

 

Adding to the mixture is former prime minister Benazir Bhutto back in Pakistan from exile.  The administration seems to favor her sharing power with Musharraf.  He does not seem to take to kind to that approach and just recently had her under house arrest.  The Shah of Iran was put in power by the United States and everyone knows what happened to that country down the road.   

 

It is past time for the U.S. and other governments to put pressure on Israel, Pakistan, and India to join the non-proliferation treaty and open up their facilities for inspection.  Is that too much to ask for in this dangerous world? I think not.  All three countries are in a part of the world that is unstable and is prone to radical ideas.  That's reason enough in my estimation.  

Pakistan: Friend or Foe?

President Pervez Musharraf came to power in 1999 in a military coup.  As of this writing he is not only President but Chief of Staff of the Army.

On Sunday, Musharraf seized emergency power in Pakistan and abandoned the constitution.  This is the kind of unstable government the U.S. is dealing with in the fight against terror.  Senator Joe Biden said Sunday on Face the Nation that the problem is that Bush has a policy for Musharraf but not for Pakistan, a country who has WMD but is not signatory to the non-proliferation treaty.  In other words they don't have to yield to inspection of their nuclear facilities.

 

Why does the most powerful military and economic country in the world get mixed up with these kinds of people in the name of fighting terror?  Bush took our country to war in Iraq over WMD that did not exist and then made a pack with the likes of Musharraf who does has WMD.  Radicals could overthrow the government and take over their weapons at any time.  The Army itself could even turn on Musharraf and do the same thing.

 

Senator Biden also pointed out that we need a foreign policy for that whole region because the problems are all related.  Sadly, this administration has not dealt with the Middle East situation properly.  The tragic events of 9-11 happened over 6 years ago, the war in Iraq is deep into its fourth year, the Israeli and Palestinian conflict has not been addressed, and this administration still has no foreign policy for the region.  So called "tough talk" is not a policy and has yet to solve the problems.  The envelope is being pushed to the next President.  What a sad situation for our country to be in.

Obama: inexperience or change(or both)?

The question has to be asked: Is Obama really the candidate of change? or is he just an ambitious, inexperienced, rookie? Or is him being new to politics, the fact that he is a rookie, mean that he is the candidate of change? You can think for yourself but this if what I think:

Obama is not the candidate of change. He says that, but what sets him apart from Hillary, or Edwards, or Biden, other than the fact that he is younger, and is not a long time Washington insider? He likes to bring up the fact that he didn't vote for the war, while the others did. Well he didn't have to vote. He wasn't in the Senate. Its easy to say you wouldn't have voted for the war, yet I feel confident, that he would have. And if he is so opposed to the war and truly wants to get our brave men and women home, why was it Clinton, not him, who asked the Pentagon for withdrawal plans? Thats leadership, and Obama has not shown any leadership yet, in any circumstance. And his inexperience is overly obvious. To talk to enemy leaders without some pre-conditions is a disastrous foreign policy. Its not that we shouldn't be willing to talk to our enemies, because I believe we should, but the president cannot put him/herself and/or the country in danger. Hillary, Dodd, Biden are all right on this issue as is Senator Barbara Boxer and FMR. Secretary Albright who all have put their input on this situation. And just last week Obama talks about invading Pakistan with or without Musharraf's permission to fight al-qaeda. I accept that position as we should find and kill bin-Laden, but saying it as Obama did further de-stabilizes the Pakistani government. I just don't see what is so great about Obama. I don't think he's the guy to be president. I just don't.