There is a silly debate taking place in Washington about who deserves credit for Osama bin Laden's assassination - President Obama or President Bush.
John F. Kennedy once said that victory has a thousand fathers, so can we admit that lots of people - thousands beyond those two people - deserve credit?
The outcome is the culmination of years of intelligence and action, but this specific operation was obviously conceived, planned and executed by the Obama administration, which deserves genuine respect for handling it well.
But the real lesson that we should be drawing from it is that counterterrorism works. Counterterrorism is our most important and effective strategy in the war on terror.
There was a debate at the start of the Obama administration over policy toward Afghanistan and Pakistan. Some, like Vice President Biden, wanted a limited counterterrorism operation with fewer troops.
Others wanted a broader counterinsurgency campaign that involved all kinds of things that we would generally call nation building. The counterterrorism advocates lost. General Petraeus won. But the counterterrorism guys were right.
And this is something we can credit Obama with: Despite his choice, he focused much more relentlessly on the counterterrorism part of the strategy in Pakistan. He dramatically increased the number of drone attacks, for example, and that's just one metric.
There also has been a massive expansion of other counterterrorism efforts, including intelligence gathering and live operations. The killing of Osama Bin Laden is the fruit of that much larger investment in special operations and counterterrorism.
President Bush, of course, did support special operations, but the bulk of his time, energy and attention got devoted to a much larger nation-building project in Iraq. Bush believed that a functioning democracy in Iraq would sap the ideological strength of al Qaeda's message.
The theory was right. Look at how the Arab revolutions have put al Qaeda on the defensive, as it has become clear that people in the region want jobs and freedom, not jihad and caliphates. But the trouble is nation building is a much larger, more expensive and inherently more difficult mission for an outside power like America.
America gets seen as wanting to dominate other countries, imposing its will and being imperialistic. It is easy to excite nationalist opposition against the 800-pound superpower.
Counterterrorism, by contrast, is something we can do well. It requires good intelligence, of course, but also superb military work - and that is something the American military shines at.
The killing of Bin Laden shows that there is a very powerful way for the United States to fight terrorist organizations - through vigorous special ops.
We do not need to occupy vast tracts of Afghanistan for decades to keep al Qaeda at bay.
We can keep the terrorists on the run, decapitate their leadership, pursue their planners, track their money and foil their plots. It's hard; but it's not nearly as hard as turning Afghanistan into a functioning, modern, capitalist democracy.
That's my take. What's yours? For more of my views throughout the week, I invite you to check back at CNN.com/GPS and to follow me on Twitter and Facebook.
 |
Post by: |
© 2011 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Contact us | Work for us | Help
The word "jihad" used in this article has a wider meaning than implied by the author. For a spiritual significance of jihad, please refer to Seyyed Hossein Nasr's "A Spiritual Significance of Jihad", at http://www.al-islam.org/al-serat/jihad-nasr.htm
IAll slamic scholars will tell you that jihad implies Holy War.
One of the Jihadists – a courier – had led the U.S. intelligence to Bin Laden. How did the it find out about this courier, by "persuading" one of the detainees in Guantanamo to disclose the contact nets of Bin Laden. In tracking this public enemy America has shown his exceptional perseverance and persistence.
One of the Jihadists – a courier – had led the U.S. intelligence to Bin Laden. How did it find out about this courier, by "persuading" one of the detainees in Guantanamo to disclose the contact nets of Bin Laden. In tracking down this public enemy No. 1 America has shown his exceptional perseverance and persistence.
One of the Jihadists – a courier – had led the U.S. intelligence to Bin Laden. How did it find out about this courier, by "persuading" one of the detainees in Guantanamo to disclose the contact nets of Bin Laden. In tracking down this public wn his exceptional perseverance and persistence.
you don't know how they really found the courier.
You are absolutely right about the meaning of Jihad.
This is just another Zakaria propaganda piece. It's not really hard to tell which side he is on in the war on terror.
Fred, you must be an idiot, or maybe Fareed's brown skin scares you, but he is probably the last guy writing for CNN that could be accused of propagandizing. He is infinitely more educated and nuanced than you can probably ever hope to be, so maybe you should open your eyes and ears and shut your mouth.
It is true that Jihad does have a broader religious meaning. However, within the Islamist circles and other fundamentalist groups, it is taken to mean exactly what most non-Muslims understand it to mean. There was never any implication that this bastardized version of Jihad was ever a real part of Islam. In fact, I think you would find that Fareed Zakaria would be one of the first to make that distinction clear.
However, I do agree that reading Nasr is a good choice for gaining a traditional understanding of Islam. Although, it is worth saying that there are also a lot of more liberal interpretations of Quranic teaching that are worth looking into as well.
How about we don't supply the thugs, dictators, install our choices for their leaders. Our hands are not clean at all. The gas that Saddam had we supplied, Iran had a democracy we overthrew it installed who we wanted, Egypt we supported their military and the list goes on and on all over the middle east and the world. They don't hate us because we are free or perceived as a christian nation, they hate us because we support the people that kill and enslave them. All of this counter terrorism baloney would not be needed if we actually followed the constitution, and what we as Americans are supposed to stand for. We don't follow the Constitution, what the founders said, or apparently the Geneva Convention which we signed.
Well, I wish you were exaggerating, but you are fundamentally correct. If the US were affected by another country as much as many of them have been affected by us, our people would be rioting in the streets in protest as well. Imagine if China came in and overthrew our government and put in someone like the Shaw, the way we did to Iran. It is so easy to forgive ourselves for stuff like that, but people in the world know our history.
So, USA will from time to time strike any place in the world (sorry , only the islamic world) killing those it doesn't like (of course after naming them terrorist). Doesn't that exactly what terrorist do? It sound like this is a state terrorisim. Oh no, remeber this USA , the country who defne who is terrorist , so no one can define USA as a country of terrorism. But be carefull guys, those poor that will be affected by your strikes, will hate you more and remeber they are great sucide, or aren't they??
Good analysis. But it's a little difficult to watch Republicans graciously accept and give themselves credit for Bin Laden's capture (ie Rice's comments on GPS this mornig). If only Republicans would be as gracious about accepting responsibility for their part in the economic disaster they left for Obama. President Obama deserves to take a victory lap for this one, he has been taking the blame for all of the other disasters left behind by the Republicans since the first day of his presidency. Republicans can share the glory when they are ready to take the blame.
If George Bush came on TV and said, "We just killed Bin Laden and dumped his body in the ocean. Here's the video" You would be singing out of the other side of your mouth.
Matty, you have a very twisted view of politics. Liberals would have praised any president who got bin Laden regardless of the President's party.
Some actions are of national significance and transcend partisan politics.
And that right there is a part of the problem. Bush is the type who'd release photos and show videos. Things are tense enough right now with Bin Laden's death and we don't need the situation riled up more by the unveiling of photographs and videos.
I guess Obama's keeping Osama's photos under a Burqa...
But he didn't, so why would you even say that?
But Bush didn't. Case closed. Obama might not be the answer to all our woes but he really isn't the cause of them either.
You are absolutely right. In fact, in 2006 or 2007, USA had come clues to catch Bin Laden. As soon as Palosi learned that , she went to TV and claimed that even if Bin Laden is captured or killed, it wouldn't make any difference to terrorism and US. Because she didn't want to give any mileage to Republicans/Bush for Bin Laden. Democrats have yet to acknowledge that enhanced interrogation have helped our investigation agencies to reach Bin Laden.
You're right – I think there is a propensity to ratchet up tensions by Republican administrations. There's really not much profit or power in peace.
Yvette:
Very good point. Also, please ask if John Foster Dulles responded on Dean Rusk's or Robert Mcnamara's behalf for the "Bay of Pigs." (did they accept any of the Blame) – Just for the Record.
The key item is this is a pivotal time. Therefore, the Administration seems to continue there focus on getting results. They will save the discussion for the Debates...
Sorry Yvette, but the economic disaster was a long time coming, before Pres Bush was in office. Im not saying he didnt hurt it, but Obama CERTAINLY isnt helping.
Clinton.Lots of jobs, higher wages, cheap gas, a balanced budget and a surplus. Yes, that was a living hell.
What history are you trying to make up?
the blame obama campaign didnt start 1 day into Obamas presidency it started the MILLISECOND he was sworn in.
thats how the gop works directly inline with christian talibanism, ALWAYS point the finger at others even though that finger is the one dripping with the blood. bush the moron increased the national debt by 30% worse than any other president with nothing to show for it. oh wait no kid left behind, where schools now teach how to pass a TEST instead of being taught.
They operate from hypocrisy as a starting point, thus they will never accept ANY responsibility for their mistakes while simultaneously expecting credit for other people's success. In their minds, conservatism/Republicanism is the only true way. It's the only way that could have brought success. They can't blame themselves for the same reason they can't give Obama credit. It's all about them and their views, and nothing about anyone else. Ever. Anyone who is not a Republican, in their minds, either exists to serve them or is lesser in some way.
your an idiot obama follower. i'm not for either, but of course with the right intelligence ANY president would've taken the same action. To say we got him just because obama was in office just shows your general ignorance and blind faith in your beloved president.
Your wrong Yvette. Obama has made things way worse.
You started your show on Mother's day saying the "Assasination" of Bin Laden. The implication is that he was taken our viciously and treacherously. I think he was killed as a military combatant in a self proclaimed battlefied. Generals on a battlefield are not assasinated. They are killed. Apparantly you are sympathetic to Bin Laden and the terroist cause.
I agree assassination is not the correct word, but was it a killing or an execution?
I don't think his residence was a 'combat zone'. If this was the US I suspect they would need a warrant.
Who's to say that we wouldn't have been worse without the things Obama did to fix the recession. It's not like you can go back and do it over different to prove your point. So accept the fact that the great recession didn't become the Great Depression. The credit for that belongs to this current government. We certainly can be sure that the Conservative ideology of trickle down doesn't work. We have 30 years of evidence to prove that. The only time during the last 30 years that we have seen a surplus was during a democrat's presidency who did away with trickle dow. Going back to it under W resulted in the recession. It could have been worse. ButOf course there will be people who will believe the worst with no evidence to show for it.
Yeah when u start blaming a president for the problems in the world milliseconds into his presidency that definately proves it was his fault. grats palin stupid is no way to live life
How worse? He kept TARP going which did its job of saving the credit system and more importantly has been doing a fine job recovering the cash. He chose not to follow standard GOP procedure of organizing a witchhunt and jailing bankers...Some might wish a few were hanging from lampposts but I think he made the right call until Warren gets settled and begins issuing reports. He saved 2 of the Big 3 auto makers, mainly to save the jobs. He fought for extension of unemployment benefits. If we had kept his stimulus going another year as he wished, the states would not be in the holes they're in and our recovery would be faster...Naturally with high unemployment and the housing market collapse the deficit worsened...Get people working and revenues will improve. I think he should have let the tax credits lapse but he may be right to let them stay a short time longer and thanks to the GOP's arrogance and clear siding with the wealthy few, it will be much easier to get the credits for high income people dropped next time round. He fought with courage and persistence for ACA and if it wasn't perfect he got most of what he wanted. FDA is vastly improved, FEMA got plaudits for much improved performance during the tornadoes, and if the GOP can be held off, EPA will get to do its job properly...All his effort. And he got credit reform and the consumer credit protection agency which will do much good. He privatized low orbit space which should please free marketeers no end and we'll see if it was the right time. And he handled the minor problem of a viciously murderous criminal escaping justice and plotting mayhem. Gitmo's still a problem but he's made an effort and we'll see how things go now that bin Laden sleeps with the fishes. If he can get a clear run, we could see his infrastructure bank and the Smart Grid project that shape though the GOP Nosayers will do everything to block him.
Sorry he didn't develop cold fusion or teleportation yet but with this guy, who knows...?
This why China owns us...because Obama sold us out.
You're wrong. It's not "your wrong", but "you're wrong".
Because you say so? Obamas policies are turning around the disaster left by the Bush administration. Facts you cannot ignore: The economic downturn began in the Bush administration, Bush started two multi billion (trillion) dollar wars, Bush was ineffective in getting Bin laden for 7 years, Bush has no accomplishments to hius name, Bush left the White House with a 26% approval rating (that means all of the left wing and half of the right wing hated him).
At least under Bush, China didn't own us.
Chappy. Your either not paying attention, have a short memory or just plain misinformed. I hope you think twice before casting that vote for Trump.
How exactly has he made things worse? What should he have done that he has not done since taking over an economy on the edge of the 2nd great depression? Do you think he should've avoided trying to save American business and financial institutions(let them all fail)?! Do you think he should've avoided trying to stimulate economic growth? Do you think he should've continued Bush's economic policies, e.g. tax cuts for the wealthy and deregulation?
Why should anyone have expected that we could've avoided the depression much less seen an improvement, if he had done those things?!
shaysite – Simply stated. And so true
To big to fail = To big to exist....
You are asking direct questions. These naysayers don't have any answers to direct questions. They have no solutions. They criticize from an entirely partisan standpoint. Maybe they are rich and want to protect their wealth and maybe they are poor and uneducated and learned ignorance from their parents, but these right wing lunatics are the least solution oriented people on the planet. They seem to live for partisan bickering and hate to acknowledge any progress or wisdom from the other side.
If it was Bush, the U.N. would be investigating him for crimes against humanity, and don't get started on what would happen if Bush had killed those Granchildren in Lybia.
Libya presently has no bearing with regards to Obama specifically. The entire operation is presently under NATO's jurisdiction.
By contrast if this were all under Bush's watch, he wouldn't have gone through the UN Security Council or NATO with this. He'd have leaped right into Iraq 2.0
To say nothing about the photo op with his boot on Bin Laden's body and holding an M-16...
George Bush senior killed one of Gaddafis daughter during his presidency and nothing happened to him. How does it feel to fail?
The problem with our system is that people think and vote only short term. No matter who is in office, what they are doing, how long they've been doing it or what they started with, they will usually be voted out of office if the economy is not doing well at the time of the election.
The problem with our system is that they publicize whatever they want the masses to blindly believe.
But the economy doesn't work only in the short term.
Some things take more than one election cycle to resolve.
We should bring our large troop concentrations in Afghanistan and Iraq home. The money spent keeping a huge land army in the field is better spent on armed drones and intelligence work, both technical and living, as was used to find and kill Osama bin Laden. We are not going to win the hearts and minds of Muslims, especially those who live in poverty, uneducated, and vulnerable to the lies of local imams, the likes of which we cannot stop. Also, the United Nations needs to set as its primary goal on this Earth the elimination of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons.
Why do people keep wanting our troops to come home for...do thet just want them siting idly at their home stations twiddling their thumbs.
Because it's costing us hundreds of billions of dollars and bankrupting our country?
From the perspective of America, eliminate weapons of mass destruction, end Muslim immigration to the United States, and secure our borders.
bin-laden kills more Muslim than Americans, 9/11 we loss 3000 people, [including all religious and Muslim too] in Pakistan about 30.000 Muslim die in terrorist attacks and 6000.00 army died. who suffer more Muslim. only Muslim. Pakistan captured 11th high al-quida commander including K. Shaikh M. we can can kill Bin-laden because of K. Shaikh M. gave information about courier. Thanks god bin-laden gone. God Bless America
Zakaria is the only analyst who makes sense. I am glad there still are people like him in this great country. In fact, CNN only has four valuable collaborators, namely Piers Morgan, Elliot Spitzer, Anderson Cooper, and of course Fareed Zakaria. Why I say that? Because, they do not just seek to forge a controversy. Beside, since they see problems where the common journalists see none, we could call them News Philosophers. Toumi Mondésir
How in the world can you compare that visual Tweeting Tom to the other 3 creditable journalists.?
My perspective is a non-partisan one, a notion that most
Americans do not grasp. Probably ignorance.
I'd add David Gergen to your list.
I agree.
Fareed, Now 2 weeks in a row, you have wasted your time.Last week with Malcolm whatever.
This week with Con-dop.She maintains her rather uncharming disposition in her futle attempt to leave us with the impression that she and the Bush-op had been following the courier. I wish you had simply said ..yes, we know ..how many years did you know the information...how many years diid you NOT know what to do.?
Norma Lee
Fareed totally has it right! Forget about nation building. We should out of 3 wars and focus on intelligence. That's what is keeping us safe.
Counterterrorism does work, but it is only a part of our foreign policy. The U.S. can rightly be seen as imperialistic in nations such as Libya and Iraq, Bush should have been hauled into court for what went on with his rendition policy and both Bush and Obama are guilty of torture and unjustified incarceration in the case of Guantanamo. A large plank of Obama's platform when he ran for president was the restoration of rights taken away under the Patriot Act and the closing of Guantanamo. In both of those instances his administration has been a huge disappointment. Now that they have hunted down and killed Osama bin Laden in what can best be described as a hugely illegal operation the course of American foreign policy is certainly seen by the rest of the world as self-serving and imperialistic. Most of the world's nations were ready to assist us following the events of 9/11. After ten years of questionable wars employing cruise missile attacks, UAV warfare and the use of white phosphorus in Falluja (everyone has forgotten about that, haven't they?) I fear that the U.S. is setting itself up for terrorist attacks that will make 9/11 look like child's play.
To quote the shrub, not something I do often, "Bring it on"
As far as what happened to candidate Obama's promises once he became President, reality BITES, and if he is only going to keep ONE campaign promise, this was the one...
On Gitmo, talk to the Republicans in congress, they are the ones that tied his hands...
Regardless of who's in office, who ordered the operation or whose presidency may have contributed to the success–what does it matter here? I didn't vote for Obama, but I think he displayed leadership. To think anyone would commit troops for political wins makes me sick, and I think our President acted in a way that a true leader should, I wish I had voted for him.
I didn't vote for him either, but I darn well might next time. Especially if Ron Paul isn't the Rep or Lib candidate again....
The military's job is to kill people and break things... If you want to "Nation build" send social workers...
jklapper, The Militarys job is NOT to Kill people and Break things. As a retired United States Army Infantryman I can tell from first hand experience that our job is to Protect the United States of America against ALL Enemies, yes sometimes that means taking lives, and that is an unfortunate thing, but that is also what happens in War. Next time you are talking about the Military being killers, remember that if it wasn't for our Military you would not have the freedoms that you enjoy in the United states.
11Bravo: Thank you for your service. The military, however, exists to either perpetrate war or to present the ability to perpetrate war. War kills people. I'm glad you all are around when we need you. THe point, however, is that in a military solution, people die. War should be seen as the absolute last resort, I. E. when Japan attacks us or Saddam invades kuwait. Had we done a targeted intelligence operation to get bin laden in 2001, maybe the taliban would still be trying to solve Afghanistan's problems rather than us.
The problem people in the Islamic world are continually referred to as a minority, a fringe element, a small number of, and so on. Please, look at the masses of angry faces in countless numbers of news videos from around the Muslim world, where thousands are chanting death to someone or some country that isn't Islamic. We cannot stay in that region long enough to kill all those people. Leave them to their own horrors and pull our troops out. End Muslim immigration to the U.S.
Are you talking about the women leading the marches in Iran?, the young revolutaonaries i n Egypt? The people getting destroyed in Libya? It is prejudiced people like yourself who cause fllags to be burned.
Yeah the system worked. Counter-terrorism works. The shoe bomber? Disarmed by passengers. The underwear bomber? Disarmed by passengers. Uh huh, yeah, all those government dollars are paying off.
"There is a silly debate taking place in Washington about who deserves credit for Osama bin Laden's assassination/" Islamic/Muslim commentator CNN's Fareed Zakaria wrote.
Mr. Zakaria should know Osama Bin Laden (OBL) was not assassinated. OBL considered himself to be a holy warrior; when an alleged warrior dies in battle, his death is not considered to an assassination. OBL had assault weapons pointed at him and he did not obey orders from the Navy SEALs so he was shot.
It is common knowledge that in civilian life, if a police officer orders a suspect to remain still and not make any sudden movements otherwise the suspect will be shot. If the suspect makes a sudden move, the officers do not know whether the suspect is going to grab a hand gun or a grenade so they have no choice but to pull the trigger. OBL went through the same process, therefore, his riddance is justified and not an assassination.
An assassination takes place when an innocent person is caught completely by surprise as in an ambush and such person is killed without being given a chance to surrender or to drop his weapons.
The 3000 people OBL killed on 9/11, including many of his Muslim brothers, can be considered to be an assassination because they were innocent civilians who were caught by surprise and were not given a chance to surrender.
Fareed Zakaria tries to sound as if he supported American justice and Democracy but in reality he is badmouthing America buy calling OBL‘s death an “assassination.” Therefore he is still an Islamist/ Muslim who deep inside supports Al Qaeda and all other Islamic terrorism. CNN should get rid of all Islamic biased reporters and commentators because they are using the network to defend and to spread the deadly ideology of Islam.
Correction on my previous entry: It should be America "by" calling
There is a silly debate taking place in Washington about who deserves credit for Osama bin Laden's assassination/" Islamic/Muslim commentator CNN's Fareed Zakaria wrote.
So anything that zakaria finds fault with is "silly" like it is the little children who are debating while this "worldly and wise" reporter observes thinking " how silly are these children...why don't they understand that whatever I say is right"
Because I am licking the boots of the current admin.
Maybe I will become the 59th Czar of B.S.
Please, oh wise and thoughtful one, explain to me the facts which support your claim that Mr. Zakaria supports the terrorists. Mr. Zakaria is the wisest, most intelligent, and most thoughtful commentator on any news network. Pull your racist head out of your ass.
This is not an either-or question. Counter-terrorism can certainly be effective when specific leaders or groups operating in known locations exist. The broader problems, such as why a particular area seems to breed more and more people willing to engage in horrific acts of terror, cannot be addressed by sending in the SEALs. Why have we come to assume that nation-building is beyond the scope of our ingenuity and resources? We did it quite well after WWII, in Europe (including our then arch-enemy, Germany) and in Japan. We helped South Korea after the Korean War. In all of these cases, stable and democratic governments and healthy nations resulted. We could learn a lot from those policies of the "greatest generation."
Fareed is an idiot. I have sat here and continue to read his obvious fawning over Obama day in and day out. Now this assertion that "counterterrorism works" as if Obama is the Father of Counterrorism. Get a grip Fareed, do your due diligence as a journalist and at least try to be honest.
Obama execuited the Bush Doctrine to perfection Fareed. Core to the Bush Doctrine is the effort to track down terrosists and kill them where they live Fareed. The elimination of Bin Laden has everything to do with Counterrorism, yes, but nothing whatsoever to do with a comparison to "nation building".
So Fareed, your intellectually dishonest comparison and effort to make Obama look like the only President to pursue counterrorism is quite frankly a joke. Your article is bush league journalism and i have achild with a better understanding of the world than you have.
Where does CNN drag up these mindless "experts" who are really Obamabots without a brain of their own.
This is the same Fareed who bemoaned aggressive interrogation, wiretaps and the mechanisms put in place to prosecute the War on Terror. the same Fareed who probably went along with the Obama administration and would not even mention the words Islamic Fundamentalist Terrorism and refused to even call this a war on terror.
The tools that allowed Obama to "make thw call" were put in place by Bush, Fareed.
Your attempt to portray Obama as a "go get them" hawk on counterterrorism is a joke. Let's see what we do now – if the Obama administration will stop giving away details of our intelligence operations to the world and get busy aggressively going after the rest of the thugs – wherever they live.
Goodness
Iim in Florida
I am pleased you see through the likes of zakaria who shamelessly keep pushing their agenda of sucking up to the current administration.
He had visions of becoming the secretary of state and actually among the journalist community he is regarded as no more than a weasel with his bony a$$ bending over backwards.
What is really disgusting is that he knows that his views are wrong but he deliberately projects them so that he can be viewed as the wise guy by this admin.
Jim in FL, Mr. Zacharia(sp) did not imply Obama to be the father of counter terrorism. He said he decided to pursue the operations and planning already in place, vigorously. He also gave credit to Pres. Bush for his nation building having an influence towards the Arab Spring uprisings. It may not have been the most glowing compliment, but recognition was given.
If you had seen or paid attention to the video piece, you would have heard the recognition given to the people working under Mr. Bush's administration for the operation starting more than 4 years ago and his statement that the argument as to who "got 'em" is pointless. There were thousands of people, past & present, who made it happen.
This is not a partisan issue. Mr. Zacharia has a level headed, clear eyed take on these events. Even Mr. Bush's CIA chief, who was interviewed, towed the same line.
Neal, I beg to differ – Zakaria is wrong:
"Others wanted a broader counterinsurgency campaign that involved all kinds of things that we would generally call nation building. The counterterrorism advocates lost. General Petraeus won. But the counterterrorism guys were right.
And this is something we can credit Obama with: Despite his choice, he focused much more relentlessly on the counterterrorism part of the strategy in Pakistan. He dramatically increased the number of drone attacks, for example, and that's just one metric."
In the War on Terror – the approach is multifaceted. Zarkaria's analysis is "its either nation building or counterrorism", no, it's both. This isn't about one man – the Obama administration did handle the elimination of the scumbag bin Laden very well, the aftermath has been messy but that is to be expected from a leftist government when it decides to pull the trigger. Best thing they can do in Washington is cool it with leaking details of the operation. Bin Laden is history, move on to the next threat.
Assist nations in developing a more free society thaty values the worth of all it's people (women included). This is a long term goal – achieve it and scum like Bin Laden and his ilk won't be welcome.
Cut off funding. This is one area we really need to pursue with more zeal. Until we stem the flow of $$ to Hamas (lots of it raised here in the good ol USA) and other terrorist organizations we will continue to face the threat.
Hunt down the leadership and kill them where THEY live, not where WE live. Need continued powers provided by the Patriot Act. Bravo to Obama for executing this part of the War when it came to Bin Laden. Keep harsh interrogation in play. Play hardball with these thugs – this they will understand.
Hold countries accountable if they harbor, train, fund or formally support terrorists. You listening Pakistan? Clean house.
Obama needs to grab his Attorney General by the short hairs and end the prosecution of CIA agents who were doing their job prtecting the homeland. Goodness, how does this sound? Can't waterboard someone but can fly in and gun him down? Doesn't sound consistent does it. I didn't think so. Drive bamboo under their fingernails (ask the Chinese how that works) and we'll have all the intel we need to keep counterterrorism in play and effective.
Keep invoking the Bush Doctrine, Obama, its; our best chance in this War.
Zakaria, get to work writing about the beginning of the slaughter of Christians by Muslims in Egypt. You pinheads ran to Cairo as soon as a couple of "Facebook Democracy" protesters were gunned down – wher's the outrage in the media when Christians are being murdered and churches burnt by Muslims in Egypt?
By the way Fareed – media types luike y0urself are strangely silent now on Egypt. remember Egypt Fareed? That's your "Facebook Revolution"? Do y7ou now like what you media bozos help create? For thsoe of you reading this in Cairo this weekend 2 Christian churches were firebombed and 12 killed by Muslims. You may not know about this since I don't see CNN reporting on the story. Maybe that is because Christians are dying in Egypt and Christian churches are being firebombed. Guess if it was the reverse Fareed would be wailing high and hard here.
If the revolution in Egypt turns into a Fundamentalist Muslim power grab the Middle East will explode in the near term. A government in Egypt controlled by Fundamentalist Muslims will make the government of Mubbarak look like a Sunday School class. You think Mubbarak made Egyptians miserable? Think again.
Let's see some CNN reporting on the plight of the monority Christians in Egypt.
zakaria is an opportunist. If a republican was currently the president zakaria would have spoken from the other side of his mouth which is his a$$ by the way.
Zakaria is the typical bent at the waist sychophant who was desperately looking for the Colonel today on his program to say that the "tough" interrrogation techniques did not help in result of capture and killing of Obama. He has that goggle eyed expectant stare that goes flat when a guest on his program finally does not agree to his coaxing.
Zakaria is no more than a paid stooge.
Fareed is taking very simplistic view of the situation. This is not a problem that can be solved by special operations. Surely the special operations/killings are useful tool for its shock value but they can not be sole means. This is a clash of civilizations and their philosophies of life. On one hand there is Islamic extremism and its philosophy and on the other hand is rest of the world.
You need to understand that there were very powerful forces protecting Osama bin laden otherwise he could not have remained free for ten years as world's most wanted terrorist. These forces are still out there and they won't stop for long. They may be shaken a bit but they will regroup sooner than you think. Unfortunately, you have to defeat these forces ideologically, politically and militarily.
If you read history of India and Indian subcontinent you will realize that there have always been significant number of fundamentalist muslims who never stop fighting unless they get strictest version of Islam imposed as rule of law.
Unfortunately everyone underestimates them by thinking that such people are minority but their numbers are significantly larger than anyone can imagine.
When you have entire nation like Pakistan formed on the basis of militant Islam and a very rich country like Saudi Arabia as financier for spreading extremist Islam, one can not think for even one second that special operations will solve this problem.
If anyone wants to solve this problem, they need to convert majority of people from these countries to some other religion or make them less religious by teaching them value of human life. Otherwise there will always be a new Osama no matter how many Osama's you kill.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/05/flashback-2008-mccain-clinton-slam-obama-for-saying-hed-go-get-bin-laden-in-pakistan-video.php
The above link is a short trip down memory lane for all those with short memories. Back in 2008 during a Presidential debate the candidates were asked specifically if they would go into Pakistan and get Bin Laden if they knew he was there. McCain said no and without hesitation Obama said yes he would. He was then criticized by McCain and Clinton who both said he was naive and inexperienced. The point is McCain wussed out even while the situation was hypothetical, on the othe hand Obama told the world he would do it before he was President. He became President and took out Bin Laden the first chance he got without hesitation. Now the GOP wants some of the credit...interesting. I wonder if this lead that the GOP wants credit for would"ve turned out to be a bust and the mission turned out to be a failure how much of the credit they'd want. I'm no political expert but my guess is the GOP would be more than happy to let the naive and inexperienced PRESIDENT Obama have all the credit for a failed mission to kill Bin Laden. Fortunately it worked out for the best. At least we have a President that's not afraid to show a little intestinal fortitude. Who's naive now?
Fareed, you wasted another opportunity to focus on real problem- It is the Haqqani network which is making us spend 110 billion dollars and wrecking havoc in Afaghanistan. You should have confronted Mr. Haqqani about Haqqani Taliban, Kayani's nonsense policy of Strategic Depth what it has done to Afaghanistan.
Americans will learn more about Haqqani and Mullah Omar once military draft is reinstated. Now somebody else's kids are fighting in Afghanistan. Pakistan's true duplicity will be everyday news in America.
Why am I wasting my time? Does Zakaria read this?
Fareed, you wasted another opportunity to focus on real problem- It is the Haqqani network which is making us spend 110 billion dollars and wrecking havoc in Afghanistan. You should have confronted Mr. Haqqani about Haqqani Taliban, Kayani's nonsense policy of Strategic Depth what it has done to Afghanistan.
Americans will learn more about Haqqani and Mullah Omar once military draft is reinstated. Now somebody else's kids are fighting in Afghanistan. Pakistan's true duplicity will be everyday news in America.
Why am I wasting my time? Does Zakaria read this?
This harpy woman called Condolezza Rice does not wish to fade away from the spotlight; she enjoys making a fool out of herself via her baseless opinions. President Obama made the decision by himself on what to do to capture or kill Osama bin Laden. Former president Gump...I mean Bush had nothing to do with president Obama's decision. Once a president is gone from such office, he has no more say or influence on the decision of the sitting president. President Obama took a decision Bush wouldn't: To really go after OBL. "Obama killed Osama, something Bush wouldn't push."
If that harpy woman had any decency, she would just shut up and fade away into oblivion, instead of constantly trying to humiliate president Obama and all other Democrats.
To safeguard USA interest and safely is the job of Chief of Commander, whether it is Bush or Obama. Who deserves better credit is creating psychological value on Repulican party "me" compare to Democratic party "me". This "me" is not important compare to seeing and serving national interest first. When dirty poitics will be purged from this "me" than only we will have clarity on real progress of our cuontry.
This article is somewhat offbase. Counterterrorism works fine in a country like Pakistan, where you have at least some assistance from the government. It would not work well in a Taliban-controlled Afghanistan or Hussein-controlled Iraq. Unfortunately, counterterrorism alone would not have succeeded in those countries back in 2001. You need to eliminate the government first, then carry on with intelligence operations. Remember, the intelligence that led to bin Laden's capture clearly began with military action, not just intelligence gathering and covert activities.
Well unfortunately when you "eliminate the government" in a place like Afghanistan people kind of expect that you will replace it, and thats when you become stuck trying to build a nation
Never ask why the whole world hates our guts. God help us.
It's so simple to live when you hide behind absolutes, especially ones that are wrong. Saying that the "whole world hates our guts" is no different than saying that "the whole world loves us". Are you actually simpleton enough to believe this? Upon what other gross generalizations do you base your worldview?
educated?
you must hate America if you believe "the whole world hates us" – that is an awfully leftist statement. If you have travekled the world you would also know that it just is not true. Oh goodness, you must have bought into the Obama Apology Tour. Maybe the next Leftist President will have to go around apologizing for Obama huh?
Obama used information obtained from using Bush's enhanced torture program. Then refuses to release the photos of Bin Laden fearing that it would upset muslims, though he had no problems releasing the abuse photos from Gitmo.
It's nice our commander-in-chief keeps changing his mind...
This is actually a good point. Obama really waffled about on the photo thing. But to me it is no big deal.
Just check out the photos of the other 2 or 3 pimps that got in the way when the special ops team was making its way to bin Laden. Look at the mess they are in, then just imagine the left side of the skull and head missing, voila, then you have bin Laden.
Don’t blame Pakistan. If our President and his staff were able to watch the killing of Osama Bin Laden unfold via satellite in real time, if our military know where to send drones to kill enemy combatants with pin-point accuracy, if our high-tech intelligence capability is the best in the world, then it’s obvious that the CIA must have had precise information on Bin Laden’s hideout all along. Furthermore, the CIA must have known that Bin Laden’s main role in Al-Qaeda was not as a religious ideologue or field commander but as a fund-raiser and financier (a genius according to some), and that he was in poor health. So the CIA could not possibly have taken seriously the propaganda portrayal of him as a rugged warrior scaling mountains and hiding out in caves. His hideout had to be a facility with a minimum of material comforts, access to medical assistance, and in an unsuspected location. And being the wily man that he was, the unsuspected location he chose was next door to Pakistan’s top military academy and within a short driving distance from the capital. (Recall Poe’s detective story “The Purloined Letter.”) Surely our highly-competent CIA agents could have figured that out.
There is reporting out of Saudia Arabia that the Al Queda number 2 sold out Bin Laden over a dispute between the 2. Not too far fetched and if true would support Calos' argument that the Obama administration had precise knowledge and acted. That's good. But then don't water down the intel you are feeding the public about a 50-50 chance thing. Actually my immediate einitial reaction was that someone gave bin Laden up big time.
Here's what I think regarding the bickering going on regarding who gets credit for killing Bin Laden. Anytime something takes ten years, costs trillions of dollars, and results in thousands of lost lives, it shouldn't be CREDIT that the responsible parties should be arguing about. Killing a sickly, middle-aged man living as a recluse in the homeland of our supposed ally isn't cause for bragging, it just means we don't have very good friends. All very humbling, it seems to me.
Oh a nice one Fareed, on the Pakistan problem!
Thanks for showing less than 300 Pakistani radicals (instead of your pathetic lies about 5,000) burning the US flag to flame anti-Pakistan sentiment in the hearts and minds of innocent Americans. Why don't you show the Terry Jones video burning the holy Quran? Oh thats right you dare not disobey your master as the network will certainly throw you out on the street!
As one of my Indian friends once put it "No matter how hard coconuts like you try, with your expensive suits, ties and tequila parties and your flattery, to become westernized you will never be one of them. And you are certainly not one of us!"
The responsible majority of Pakistani's, like myself, will demandi answers, from our security establishment and corrupt western installed democrats governments, on the intelligence failures.
Not a single Pakistani was involved in the 9/11 attack. I do sometimes wonder what we have gained from this partnership with your master? Here is the outcome for doing your master's dirty work.
- Post the drone attacks, which certainly killed innocent pashtuns, we saw revenge via suicide attacks killing 30,000 Pakistanis. Al-Qaeda's men fleed through the porous border after your master's failure to eliminate them at Tora Bora.
- Loosing over 3,000 of our soldiers and police officer while capturing and illegally handing over 300 Al-Qaeda suspects to your master.
- A loss to our economy of more than $50 bn.
In exchange, what we get is
- CIA's Black Water contractors like Raymond Davis, loyal only to a paycheck, killing and running over civilians.
- Being double crossed by CIA on the OBL case despite the fact that the ISI shared phone transcripts with the CIA and details of the last call traced to this so called million dollar OBL compound.
- So called $2bn dollar annual aid, half of which by the way is consumed by US contractors while the remaining ends up in the hands of corrupt slaves like you.
And now, thanks to coconuts like you, Pakistani Americans are being harassed all over the US at their work place and their schools.
I wonder how you sleep at night after spewing out all this lies to please your master. Anyway enjoy your joy ride while you can.
By the way aren't you the same guy who interviewed and praised Gamal Mubarak a few years ago? And now you think you can fool people by switching sides praising the Eygptian revolution?
thanks..
Keep up the good propaganda work! Maybe you master will let you have some more of its leftovers.
I agree that Pakistan has got a raw deal over the entire affair – if not for Bin Laden's crazy idea of killing civilians for revenge – which he agreed is against Islam, Pakistan would be a better place. Actually the world would be a better place if not for these madmen hijacking religion and political causes to justify mass murder. No one has labeled them as 'crazed' I believe someone needs to do so.
I personally have respect for the Pakistan from the persons I have seen on TV – the Prime Minister, the UK Ambassador, the journalists, there are some very educated right thinking people out there, as in every country.
But Pakistan has several intractable problems, with Al Qaeda, The Taliban, India and the Kashmir. Instead of military aid maybe they could ask for advice and expertise from the West on how to solve you problems through counter terrorism on one hand – but not the American brand of counter terrorism that you have seen – and economic and social development.
Rabid anti Indian sentiment should be actively discouraged by the government, and the Indian government should do its part as well to quell anti – Pakistani rhetoric. I have never heard of a common call for Pakistan and India to work together to defeat common enemies – maybe now is the time.
The problem is, even though middle east muslim countries can't get along, they can agree on two things.
1. To destroy Israel
2. To destroy or convert America and any non-Muslim Nation
Sure they will kill off each other here and there, but they unite when it comes to fighting "Infidels". And where do they learn this crap? The Koran and the teachings of the Hadith. If you question that Bin Laden was a good Muslim or not, you really need to read the Hadith, it will remove any doubts.
In most ways, I agree with this article. But I don't think that the choice is either
counterterrorism, or counterinsurgency. Counterinsurgency is like a suffocation
strategy, where we take away what gives them sustenance, which they draw from
contact with the population. If we fail to take it away, then even though we are
degrading their fighters and their leadership, they will never go away, because they
have an essentially inexhaustible supply of manpower, and in the case of AfPak,
a recruiting ground we really can't touch. Anyone who has ever had roaches
in their apartment can relate - you can spray poison around all you want, but
if you leave food out, the roaches will continue to thrive. So some level of counterinsurgency is
unavoidable. However, as long as we leave their fighting organizations intact, then
they will continue to damage our counterinsurgency campaign, by killing and intimidating
those who cooperate with us. And in the case of AfPak, they draw sustenance from other
sources than the population, so we can never starve them out completely by denying them
access to the population. And they will survive in their havens until we leave, and then
resume their control of Afghanistan.
probably unavoidable.
Yes BUT, a "Muscular Foreign Policy" is soooo much fun. That's what Cheney said. Cheney also said Reagen proved that "deficits don't matter".
What the public media won’t tell you is that Bin Laden’s actions are founded in Islam. His belief system is no more than an attempt to bring back the years of early Islam to life again. Let’s face it, Bin Laden is a product of Islam through the educational system of Saudi Arabia. Saudis pride themselves as the bearers of the “Light” (Evil Darkness!!) of Islam. Most of the 9/11 hijackers who destroyed the twin towers were Saudis. They were an immediate product of the Islamic educational system of Saudi Arabia. Killing Bin Laden, while just and worthy, is not the major obstacle to liberty, freedom, and civic equality amongst citizens of the world. The major obstacle is Islam as embodied in educational systems like those of Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, and every other country that called itself Islamic.
Fareed, I can think of no country in the world, Asian, Latin American, Middle Eastern countries, where the government would be able to get away a Presidential order to 'kill or capture' a known terrorist in another sovereign state. It would create an international incident, if not war. Apart from the concept, the way it was done must have shocked many, even those who are strong advocates of counter terrorism: Men armed with automatic rifles and explosives landed in a compound housing at two families including several innocent children, shot two unarmed men in civilian clothes and shot dead Bin Laden in front of one of his daughter – if you read reports of the head wounds they were really horrific. I am all for counter terrorism, after all the terrorists started this and they are really crazy to want to kill innocent people, but if this is the US counter terrorism strategy then I fear what is to come. Maybe there is a better way to do this?
By not using drone- launched missiles the US is also admitting that drone strikes would kill civilians – what right has America to do this? Even president Kharzai has called drone strikes 'unacceptable'. Is this the counter terrorist strategy you want?
Conventional l wisdom has it that law enforcement has to be law abiding as well. Do you agree? Does America have – SWAT team like capability do it ?
Why did they not surround the house and ask Bin Laden to surrender? The Pakistanis would have been able to be involved, and the operation also it would also seize high moral ground.
maybe because they didn't know if bin Laden was actually in the house?
it works until liberal activists and bought and paid for liberal politicians attempt to dismantle it. or at the least claim they were unaware of how things worked (Pelosi). down with liberal hypocrisy.
In all this post-bin laden analysis of the efficacy of counter-terorrism, many seem to miss a very pertinent point-the sifting and analysis of Intelligence reports. When Bush was presented with Intelligence reports (notably on Iraq's alledged WMD), there's now a possibility that he rushed through the report and launched perhaps the greatest foreign miltary misadventure of modern times. We now know what bleeding this caused both in terms of loss of life and treasure. America is forever struggling with resultant waste in treasure. This is one of the problems greying the young president Obama. Now compare Obama when given a body of intelligence reports. In a lawyerly fashion, he sifts through the reports and determine if "it all makes sense". Now, we applaud him because it made sense. He harvested the fruits of arguing with facts methodically and brought and end to America's public enemy #1. For all his weaknesses, we must give Obama credit on this one. The man is clinically surgical when presented with facts/evidence. Non-republican Americans must pat themselves on the back. This is one "Change You Can Believe in"
The weapons used by Hussein against the Kurds were WMDs.
Before making stupid comments...educate yourself!
Typical of Zakaria. This guys does not have an original thought. He will get on the latest bandwagon if it serves his own interest.
We can see in Iraq the results of what "nation building" is.If you see that example as a form of democracy,you live in a fantasy world.Too bad when the Bush/Cheney knucklehead duo looked on a world map they chose Iraq and not Iran."Close enough for us" or "They're spelled almost the same" was probably what was said.The only type of nation building that needs to take place is here in the U.S.It never took place during the 8 year Bush administration.It might take 8 years to straighten out that mess.If all one can do is complain about these articles on CNN,head on over to Fox News and listen to idiots like that rude bastard Sean Hannity and believe all he says!
It was the military that planned and executed the taking out of this man. All the politicians did was say yes or no. It is them that we need to thank for this not Obama or Bush, or any politician.
The invasion of Iraq was a huge wasteful distraction. It cost more in dollars and lives than anything Al Queda ever did. And Al Queda goaded us into it. They WANTED us to do a big invasion because they knew it would be a hugely unpopular move that would greatly increase support for Al Queda, and they were right. There has never been a more effective Al Queda recruitment tool than GWB's invasion of Iraq. GWB might as well have burned a koran on the steps of the white house.
Fareed is again so correct!! Our massive attack on Afghanistan and our nation-building efforts there are completely useless!! Again – that Bush got it wrong and we should all vote Democrats! The fact that Bin Ladin ended up isolated in the hut in Pakistan is total coincidence and has nothing to do with Bush's war on terror. If we just talk to Jihadists nicely and used smart counter-terrorism people like Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden to convince Bin Ladin to move to Pakistan – our president Barry Soetoro could have used his warrior instinct much earlier and lower himself from chopper on the rope and smoke OBL with his golf swing!!
Fareed's message is so clear. He is amazing!
We once supported Iran when they were fighting Iraq. We actually have supported both countries at some point in history! One big major problem the U.S. has is getting involved in other countries problems. It seems we tend to push our way in, not for the sake of helping the country, but for getting them to be on our side or to give us stuff we want. It would be so nice if we could learn to keep our noses out of other business. I have no problems helping a country when it involves people in distress. But, most of the time, it involves power struggles and nothing more! I'm also tired of hearing about how obama did this and that with concerns to binL. He signed a piece of paper that gave the CIA op team the right to kill the guy. They didn't want him coming out of there alive. I have no problem with them killing him, but say it how it really is...a KILL and nothing less. Murder in color. I'm sure obama, who seemed to be hiding behind Biden when watching and also Clinton, who seemed to be stunned by what was going on, watched as the CIA op went up to binL and put the gun to his head and pulled the trigger. obama is stupid. Most of us know that, but for him to just be coming out saying he believes Pakistan knew about binL is really dumb! He acts like all of this is news to him. He is such a liar I have a hard time believing anything he says. I'm pretty sure binL is dead, but it would be nice to see proof. Honesty is not one of obama's favorite issues. He should release the photos and then all would be settled. As for him getting the credit for all of this that is fine. He happened to be on watch when it came about. They were lucky with the intel. It could have been in 2013 when obama isn't around and then who ever was president would get the credit. It should be a credit that is for America and the soldiers more than the presidents. Bush is the one that put everything into action. He wasn't afraid to take charge and direct them to get the guy. We need to get all the politics out of actions like this and really give the credit to our intel group and the guys who carried the action out. Not just this one, but all the others. It's not easy work. Give the credit, then shut up and move on. Unfortunately, this is not over. It might be awhile before another attack or it could be tomorrow. We just don't know. Getting these guys and stopping attempts comes from good intel and a lot of LUCK. This is where ALL countries need to collaborate and work as one to nail these cowards. God bless ALL our soldiers for their work and dedication to this country. It would have been nice to have had a little of that when my friends and I came back from a certain place in S.E. Asia. Instead we came back to jeers and spit. I'm glad to see my sons and daughters and others supporting the young people who are trying to protect our country whether they are overseas or here in the states patrolling our borders,water and air.
Arch – this is all nice – but that's why you need some academic, genius, intellectual, and expert like Fareed to explain this situation to you!! It is all about American Imperialism and Expansionism! Just go to any American College or University – they would teach you! Just like in you case – why do you think America went to Vietnam? To get their oil and natural gas!! Come on – it can't be any clearer. All this talk about freedom and democracy and prevention of tyranny and oppression is just mambo-jambo the Repubs use to mask the fact there is oil and big corporations behind everything. As Fareed would teach you – we all need to put windmills on our roofs and start using dry toilet and put pedals into our small plastic cars with AAA batteries – and all this Jihad problem goes away!
TLDR
Arch, I'm sure you will have acomeback, but I don't follow your thinking at all. It is very disjointed. I'm not at all certain why you would single out Obama and Clinton for mishandling the bin Laden affair. Is it purely political? If so, your words have little, if any, meaning. I didn't see GW Bush do much of anything to eliminate bin Laden. In fact, he flat seemed to give up. All administrations tried, but this one succeeded. So, what is your problem with that? Huh?
Fareed, always appreciate your thoughts and this was a great post, but remember that not all special ops can be launched from an aircraft carrier... sometimes bases are essential. That leaves us dependent on others...
There you go. Torture works. Why not make it part of the legal process for everyone? Just kidding of course.
The Pakistanis in government are cowards, traitors, double-dealing conniving weasels who tried to outfox us by harboring, aiding and abetting Osama bin Laden, the most notorious Islamic/Muslim peace-time mass-murdered that ever existed; then again, that's what Islam is all about: Murder, beheadings, explosions hijacking and crashing airplanes onto buildings.
The USA should quit wasting its citizens' tax dollars as foreign aid to such cowardly Pakistani traitors.
Fareed Zakaria is the most astute writer CNN has at this time. I hope CNN understands this. His articles are the only ones I find consistenly interesting.
I can't agree with you more PD!! It takes a lot of years in academia and lot of focus groups to learn how to hide the liberal bias and make the articles look sexy for the pop-culture consuming hip-hop producing pot-smoking NYT-reading sandals-wearing Volvo-driving Obamanites . . .
Yep, he's one of the few I pay attention to.
It's silly to make qualifications on this because part of the counterterroism strategy WAS counterinsurgency, and visa versa. To speak of either as though they exist within a vaccum is sophomoric and amateur. Does Mr. Zakaria honestly propose that the best way to treat illnesses is to just throw medicine at the symptoms without addressing the cause, or on the converse, that we should address only the cause without mitigating the painful symptoms? This pro-Obama fanboy doesn't deserve to be on CNN.com.
The author is dead-on. I remember a loud argument years ago with a co-worker who favored a vast, land-controlling approach by the military because, "You HAVE to fight the enemy on their own land and take the fight to them!" Fair enough, but the approach was so wasteful to me that it was just not a feasible strategy, in my mind. I've always favored an almost overly vigorous special ops and counterterrorism program. Nation-building is OK, but the cost in money and lives is incredible, is it not? You can't fight the next war like you fought the last one.
You and Zakaria are both wrong. Counterterrorism and counterinsurgency are related to some degree within specific theaters of conflict, but also existed in their own right. Point in case: we never needed counterinsurgency until we toppled the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan, but counterterrorism efforts were active pre-9/11 and post-Iraq. Thus they existed as independennt lines of operation and this should not be seen as an either/or situation. I'm glad that you've always favored a "vigorous special ops and counterterrorism program", and all your fellow WalMart employees probably agree with you.
Well, Gordon if I follow you corrrectly, I'm not saying that control of land and nation-building doesn't have its place, but if your only tool is a hammer, you treat every problem as if it's a nail. There have been numerous opportunities to build alliances and make inroads in the middle east that would pay future dividends, but instead we stomped our feet and insisted on a Pax Americana where it was regionally despised. Is this smart diplomacy? No.
Slupdawg – absolutely brilliant! Forget the 70 years of efforts of our military and diplomats across the world! We can fight the terrorism from some brain center of Harvard University and fly the copters in from Yale special ops center! I always knew that only some academics like Obama could get OBL!
bejvalejpepik: Listen,m I don't support a technocratic society, but , we as a nation need to learn to be more flexible than in the past. This not WWII, it's not Vietnam, it is a new challenge, and a better approach is needed, and it can't be the same'ol same 'ol.
This is why I dislike the political state this country is in so much. The night Bin Laden was killed thousands gathered together to celebrate an American victory after years of effort. Now I see a lot of people are already fighting over who deserves credit. The Bush administration should take partial credit as they worked for years on finding Bin Laden. That said the Obama administration gets credit for being the ones who ordered the operation and took him down. Stop fighting over which party gets credit and which party is better. Just be glad we were successful and try to stay united for a change.
Bottom line: Bush administration created the military-intelligence fusion system that was able to track down and eliminate Bin Laden, and Obama made a good call in executing the operation. It was a team effort; Bush got to be the running back, Obama got to be the fullback. Lets stop fighting over who gets credit for the touchdown – we're all on the same team.
I don't disagree. It's amazing how things work out. It takes a variety of measures to reach an objective. Bush very well may have opened some opportunities. Obama capitalized and here we are. Now what? There is a weakness here. Why not exploit any and all of them?
The biggest part this article misses is that Bin Laden's capture is directly tied to the courier. The identity of the courier was gained from prisoners who were taken from both Afghanistan and Iraq and interrogated in Guantanamo. Most of this work was done under Bush's presidency.
Although intelligence was primarily responsible for finding Bin Laden's location, it could not have been done unless we had soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq who could capture prisoners to get this intel. This is the biggest mistake people make when they say we an fight this war just using drones. We still need people on the ground who can get the intel we need to make these operations successful.
"America gets seen as wanting to dominate other countries, imposing its will and being imperialistic."
Well, perhaps that's because we have a long history of doing just that. Remember the "Shaw"? Wasn't he our man in Iran for nearly two decades. We preached democracy and civility while the Shaw ruled with torture, disappearances, and without democratic elections. Whether we like it or not, there is some basis for the distrust of western motives.
Both Myanmar and North Korea are dictatorships at least as evil as Gadhafi's regime in Lybia, yet they are tolerated even as they threaten their neighbors and rule at home with an iron fist. What's the difference? They don't have any oilfields.
In the past we've supported evil dictatorships that were friendly to our aspirations. In point; Egypt, Panama, Cuba (under Batiste') even Pinochet. Need I go on. Initially, Saddam was our man in Iraq. We provided him with his WMD starter kit to use against Iran. He later used it against his own people.
If we are distrusted in the middle east, as in other parts of the world, there's probably good reason for it. Our support of democracy has been wanting at best. When we should have give support to revolutions we propped up dictatorships. Perhaps the best thing we can do for the Libyans and other mid-east revolutionaries is to just leave them alone to work out there own problems.
My bet would be that you are some distinguished revered professor from some university – feeding this garbage to our kids...
Oh lord – I can't wait until the Muslim Brotherhood revolutionaries (as you call them) take over middle east – and show you the respect for America and show you the admiration for how much good America did for the World... Hmm – I think I've heard about Muslim Brotherhood before – aren't these the guys that started the thinking and movement behind al Qaeda?
Slupdawg – Experts like Fareed were arguing for quadrupling forces committed to Iraq and arguing for 10-fold increase of troops for Afghanistan. Bush and gang fought very unconventionally right from the start – AND got crucified by left American media and leftists like Fareed. Lot of bloodshed our boys endured was due to American media and people like Fareed indirectly supporting Jihadists – only to obtain political gain at home. And now – when our Nobel Peace prize president pulled the trigger of the trap set up by a president with true vision – now the experts like Fareed cannot stop their orgasmic slobbering over the community organizer that used to call our boys in uniform fascists . . .
As usual, intelligent and well-thought out Mr Zakaria. And, as usual, a lot of hot air comments with no real solutions.
--------------------------–
Military-Industrial Complex Speech, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961
--------------------------–
Public Papers of the Presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1960, p. 1035- 1040
My fellow Americans:
Three days from now, after half a century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor.
This evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen.
Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.
Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the Nation.
My own relations with the Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and, finally, to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years.
In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the national good rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the Nation should go forward. So, my official relationship with the Congress ends in a feeling, on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together.
II.
We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.
III.
Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.
Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology - global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger is poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle - with liberty the stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.
Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research - these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.
But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs - balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage - balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.
The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.
IV.
A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.
Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.
Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence - economic, political, even spiritual - is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present
and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientifictechnological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system - ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.
V.
Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we - you and I, and our government - must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.
VI.
Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.
Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.
Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war - as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years - I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.
Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road.
VII.
So - in this my last good night to you as your President - I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for public service in war and peace. I trust that in that service you find some things worthy; as for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve performance in the future.
You and I - my fellow citizens - need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nation's great goals.
To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America's prayerful and continuing aspiration:
We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.
Impressive computer savvy on display – but my son knew how to do copy-and-paste in preschool.. Is there something else behind this? I'm sure it must be some favorite piece from American History of some former-hippies-now college-professors of some American university or something – right?
"bejvalejpepik
Impressive computer savvy on display – but my son knew how to do copy-and-paste in preschool.. Is there something else behind this? I'm sure it must be some favorite piece from American History of some former-hippies-now college-professors of some American university or something – right?"
Do you know how ignorant you sound???? Did you even read what was said in Eisenhower's speech? "some favorite piece from American History.." You are so unbelievably stupid. YES. There is something else behind the words, idiot. Read and comprehend and stop trying to bully others with your opinions and misinformation that you happen to believe
@ X Good point, it's been awhile since I read or heard this speech. It stands the test of time. ThanX
Yes, I recall VP Biden supported counter terrorism with small, advanced tactics groups rather than carpet bombing and other large scale ops that DoD recommended. I think both options are needed, but for different scenarios. But the SEALS proved that surgical intervention can save countless innocent lives. Good to remember that AQ is just a band of thugs, not a nation, supported by extremists siphoning petrodollars that we bequeath, day after day, year after year, upon some nations that really should be taken to task for not cleaning up their act.
http://blog.seattlepi.com/jacklewis/2011/05/08/president-orders-missile-strikes-to-punish-pakistan/
It's no longer about countering terror .. it's all about politics and elections. Nobody cares who gets credit for killing OBL. Actually neither Bush NOR Obama did it. The SEALs did it. The fat politicians did nothing. I am at the point where I'd rather take a chance of being killed by a terrorist that submit to being Xrayed and sexually molested by my government if I want to go to another city. Now they want to do it on AMTRAK too. Is Greyhound after that? There is no absolute certainty - you do what you can and then you take your chances (like driving a car). I do not give Obama credit for anything. He screwed up everything he touched so far .. and Napolitano too - especially airline travel.
Fareed is the smartest person on CNN. He isn't a carnival barker, or a shill, he doesn't lobby for foriegn countries. He just speaks the truth after careful study of the issue. I enjoy seeing him break down the ignorant stuff that appears on Cable News. You are the best Fareed!
This is silly and untrue. I'm not for either, but of course with the right intelligence ANY president would've taken the same action. To not give ANY credit to Bush just because "it wasn't him", to say we got him just because obama was in office just shows your ignorance and blind faith in this president.
There is big money to be made in nation building plus work and ribbons for the armed services. So the big money people buy Congress and that's why we are into nation building of countries like Afghanistan. Apparently there is not so much money or glory to be made for our patriots here in the USA!!
There is a silly debate taking place in Washington about who deserves credit for Osama bin Laden's assassination – President Obama or President Bush.
“No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination…”
Part 2.11 of Executive Order #12333, signed by President Ronald Reagan, states the following:
This executive order carries within it a proscription against US intelligence agencies sponsoring or carrying out an assassination. This is meant to cover a person or persons who are enemies of the United States.
The strategy will always be to move disconnected regions where terrorists operate without rule of law into the economic community of nations. Special Operations does work well in the short-term, but we don't need a dozen years of incursions into Pakistan or Afghanistan fighting Ayman al Zawahiri, Mullah Omar, and the Hajjani network. The US needs victory in 2014 leaving Afghanistan in better economic shape with a functioning police force to take them down themselves. What is the alternative if you have 30% unemployment and can't feed yourself? The policy is currently a punative policy not a rehabilitative long-term policy that finally extricates the US out of the Middle East/South Asia/East Aftrica Militarily and connects economically beyone simply energy supplies.
The US should continue to nationbuild to 2014 at a 10% contribution with China/India/Russia contributing the 90% since they are neighbors with Afghanistan/Pakistan. Otherwise, it will be 2021, 2031 with simply the US involved and India/China/Russia free-riding off the system. Bring those three powers into rebuilding both Afghanistan and Pakistan economically. Ask the question of them, what if the US fails in South Asia?
Derek Bergquist
Nation building sure worked in Germany and Japan....
Of course, we first had to completely destroy their economy first
Are Al Qaeda a bunch of manzies? Find out about who's really behind Pakistan Fashion Week @imeanwhat http://bit.ly/kaaQqH
Good article even tho I think the key is to have a little bit of both counterterrorism and counterinsurgency.
I think what really stirred the pot was finding trusted couriers and large scale improvements and deployment of UAVs into Pakistan.
In future wars, we might not be able to have boots on the ground in every country or even be allow to fly UAV's in a country without permission or doing it covertly.
It really came down to trial and error and it's not over yet.
On Nation building: I am reminded of an old saying- "You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear"
Democracy has to come from within a culture and people...they are light years away from it.
Fareed Zakaria – pimping for Obama and Soros. A plant. A stooge. Bought and paid for by The One. This explains the fawning interview he had with his paymaster, George Soros. Fareed is advising and showing the love for his O-Man.
Netanyahu: "America is Easy to Push Around (English Subtitles)"
"John F. Kennedy once said that victory has a thousand fathers . . . "
Hey, Fareed, JFK also once said, "Hey, watch out! That boat's gonna hit us!"
Sorry if this is a little off topic... I enjoy reading globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com
With all the talk about Lite Drywall.
My comany really like using it. What are your thoughts?
I save a ton of $ in garbage fees. The material is very easy to pick up.