• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Bushies pressuring Pakistan to nab high-ranking terrorists in time for Dem convention

Status
Not open for further replies.
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040719&s=aaj071904

Late last month, President Bush lost his greatest advantage in his bid for reelection. A poll conducted by ABC News and The Washington Post discovered that challenger John Kerry was running even with the president on the critical question of whom voters trust to handle the war on terrorism. Largely as a result of the deteriorating occupation of Iraq, Bush lost what was, in April, a seemingly prohibitive 21-point advantage on his signature issue. But, even as the president's poll numbers were sliding, his administration was implementing a plan to insure the public's confidence in his hunt for Al Qaeda.

This spring, the administration significantly increased its pressure on Pakistan to kill or capture Osama bin Laden, his deputy, Ayman Al Zawahiri, or the Taliban's Mullah Mohammed Omar, all of whom are believed to be hiding in the lawless tribal areas of Pakistan. A succession of high-level American officials--from outgoing CIA Director George Tenet to Secretary of State Colin Powell to Assistant Secretary of State Christina Rocca to State Department counterterrorism chief Cofer Black to a top CIA South Asia official--have visited Pakistan in recent months to urge General Pervez Musharraf's government to do more in the war on terrorism. In April, Zalmay Khalilzad, the American ambassador to Afghanistan, publicly chided the Pakistanis for providing a "sanctuary" for Al Qaeda and Taliban forces crossing the Afghan border. "The problem has not been solved and needs to be solved, the sooner the better," he said.

This public pressure would be appropriate, even laudable, had it not been accompanied by an unseemly private insistence that the Pakistanis deliver these high-value targets (HVTs) before Americans go to the polls in November. The Bush administration denies it has geared the war on terrorism to the electoral calendar. "Our attitude and actions have been the same since September 11 in terms of getting high-value targets off the street, and that doesn't change because of an election," says National Security Council spokesman Sean McCormack. But The New Republic has learned that Pakistani security officials have been told they must produce HVTs by the election. According to one source in Pakistan's powerful Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), "The Pakistani government is really desperate and wants to flush out bin Laden and his associates after the latest pressures from the U.S. administration to deliver before the [upcoming] U.S. elections." Introducing target dates for Al Qaeda captures is a new twist in U.S.-Pakistani counterterrorism relations--according to a recently departed intelligence official, "no timetable" were discussed in 2002 or 2003--but the November election is apparently bringing a new deadline pressure to the hunt. Another official, this one from the Pakistani Interior Ministry, which is responsible for internal security, explains, "The Musharraf government has a history of rescuing the Bush administration. They now want Musharraf to bail them out when they are facing hard times in the coming elections."


Seriously, this is a new low for the administration. It's a shame this wasn't as high a priority in 2002 or 2003.

Hopefully, the mainstream media will give this some play.
 

bionic77

Member
I didn't read the whole article, but honestly I don't see it as that big of a deal and at least he is trying to do something good for a change. Isn't this what the war are terror was supposed to be from the beginning (i.e. capturing terrorists and not invading countries for oil)?
 
The problem is that he's only making it a priority because Iraq is jeopardizing his chances for reelection. He apparently didn't consider it as important when his favorable rating was high.
 

mrmyth

Member
Slick_Advanced said:
Meh....when it gets done isn't important to me. As long as it get done is the issue.

Would it be that that was the opinion of Joe Average. But if Bush trots out Osama in chains before the election, he could eat babies for lunch and still get voted back into office.


This report actually heartens me, because its been my tinfoil-hat theory that they already had Osama and were waiting for the election to reveal him. Maybe this means they don't have him already and thus can't use him to get back in office.
 

Cooter

Lacks the power of instantaneous movement
If they nab Osama Bush wins in a landslide. If they don't he wins by a few percentage points.
 
I don't see capturing Osama as a world shattering event at this point anymore. Osama in real world terms is really removed from the current iteration of terrorism. He is like the Ronald McDonald of terrorism. Easily recognized but, not really responsible for making shitty burgers.
 

Cooter

Lacks the power of instantaneous movement
I agree slick but it would certainly help.

The facts are this: There have been no attacks on American soil, Iraq is becoming a democracy and if Osama were to be captured it would be a major blow for terrorists and a perception of victory would emerge.
 

AirBrian

Member
Slick_Advanced said:
I don't see capturing Osama as a world shattering event at this point anymore. Osama in real world terms is really removed from the current iteration of terrorism. He is like the Ronald McDonald of terrorism. Easily recognized but, not really responsible for making shitty burgers.
Very true, however it's what he represents. Regardless of his level of involvement in current planned attacks, he was partly responsible for the 09/11 attacks in which many (if not most) Americans would like to see him caught and brought to justice. It gives it a sense of closure.
 
This is not to say that he shouldn't be caught. I'm just saying that there are more things out in the world right now. And I think that people have realized that Osama is not the SSoE (Sole Soure of Evil). After witnessing the "dramatic" change and move to peacefulness in Iraq after Saddam was captured. People realize catching one fool doesn't stop the trend.


But, yes captuing Osama would lead to a bump in the polls for Bush. If US forces captured him. If Pakistani forces did then not so much.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom