PDA

View Full Version : Experts bash Bush: Pullout won't bring 'enemy' to U.S.



Hardrock69
04-10-2007, 08:49 AM
By WILLIAM DOUGLAS
McCLATCHY NEWSPAPERS
WASHINGTON - It's become President Bush's mantra, his main explanation for why he won't withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq anytime soon.


President Bush meets with troops during a visit to the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, Calif., Wednesday.
(GERALD HERBERT/Associated Press)
In speech after speech, in statement after statement, Bush insists that ''this is a war in which, if we were to leave before the job is done, the enemy would follow us here.”

The line, which Bush repeated Wednesday in a speech to troops at California's Fort Irwin, suggests a chilling picture of warfare on America's streets.

But is it true?

Military and diplomatic analysts say it isn't. They accuse Bush of exaggerating the threat that enemy forces in Iraq pose to the U.S. mainland.

''The president is using a primitive, inarticulate argument that leaves him open to criticism and caricature,” said James Jay Carafano, a homeland security and counterterrorism expert for the Heritage Foundation, a conservative policy organization. ''It's a poor choice of words that doesn't convey the essence of the problem - that walking away from a problem doesn't solve anything.”

U.S. military, intelligence and diplomatic experts in Bush's own government say the violence in Iraq is primarily a struggle for power between Shiite and Sunni Muslim Iraqis seeking to dominate their society, not a crusade by radical Sunni jihadists bent on carrying the battle to the United States.

Foreign-born jihadists are present in Iraq, but they're believed to number only between 4 percent and 10 percent of the estimated 30,000 insurgent fighters - 1,200 to 3,000 terrorists - according to the Defense Intelligence Agency and a recent study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a center-right research center.

''Attacks by terrorist groups account for only a fraction of insurgent violence,” said a February DIA report.

While acknowledging that terrorists could commit a catastrophic act on U.S. soil at any time - whether U.S. forces are in Iraq or not - the likelihood that enemy combatants from Iraq might follow departing U.S. forces back to the United States is remote at best, according to experts.

James Lewis, a U.S. foreign policy analyst at CSIS, called Bush's assertion oversimplistic.

''There's a grain of truth in Bush saying it's better to fight them there rather than here, but it's also overstated,” Lewis said. ''It's not like there's going to be gun battles in the United States.”

Daniel Benjamin, the director of the Center on the United States and Europe at The Brookings Institution, a center-left think tank, agreed.

''There are very few foreign fighters who are going to be leaving the area because they don't have the skills or languages that would give them access to the United States,” said Benjamin, who served as the National Security Council's director for transnational threats from 1998 to 1999. ''I'm not saying events in Iraq aren't going to embolden jihadists. But I think the president's formulations call for a leap of faith.”

''The war in Iraq isn't preventing terrorist attacks on America,” said one U.S. intelligence official, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity because he's contradicting the president and other top officials. ''If anything, that - along with the way we've been treating terrorist suspects - may be inspiring more Muslims to think of us as the enemy.”

Carafano and Lewis believe that a U.S. troop pullout would embolden Islamic jihadists, but that they're much more likely to stay closer to home and spread violence to neighboring countries with poor records of combating terrorism, such as Somalia, Morocco, Algeria and perhaps Egypt, than they are to try to penetrate America.

Increased terrorism in those places would tax the United States, which would have to deal with the economic costs, global refugees and health crises that combat in those countries could produce.

''The danger is not that they'll follow us home,” Carafano said. ''The problems will come to our doorstep, not the terrorists.”

Lewis of CSIS believes that a U.S. pullout could prompt some foreign fighters in Iraq to go home, head to Afghanistan to fight U.S. forces there or move to Europe, where Muslim anger is high and there are more Muslim communities to blend into.

(Published: April 8, 2007)


http://www.capecodonline.com/cctimes/expertsbash8.htm

Ellyllions
04-10-2007, 09:19 AM
I hope everyone reading this is sitting down.

After what I heard yesterday, I'm ready for the troops to come home ASAP!!!!

When large numbers of Iraqi's take to the streets in protest of the troops being there, when Muslim clerics take to the "pulpit" and tell their followers to take up arms against the troops, it's time to leave them to their own devices.

I don't think (from what I heard) that there's any coicidence that Iran announces it's ability to enrich Uranium one day after the monster protests by the Shiite Muslims in Iraq. There is a plan being formulated and it will be horrible for the whole of the Middle East. There is some serious change about to take place.

It's time to get our troops home, batten down the hatches, cash in our coin collections for gas money and let them fight this out on their own.

We're about to see Armageddon played out in the Middle East. They'll say it's prophecy but it's really about oil and property.

BITEYOASS
04-10-2007, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by Ellyllions
I hope everyone reading this is sitting down.

After what I heard yesterday, I'm ready for the troops to come home ASAP!!!!

When large numbers of Iraqi's take to the streets in protest of the troops being there, when Muslim clerics take to the "pulpit" and tell their followers to take up arms against the troops, it's time to leave them to their own devices.

I don't think (from what I heard) that there's any coicidence that Iran announces it's ability to enrich Uranium one day after the monster protests by the Shiite Muslims in Iraq. There is a plan being formulated and it will be horrible for the whole of the Middle East. There is some serious change about to take place.

It's time to get our troops home, batten down the hatches, cash in our coin collections for gas money and let them fight this out on their own.

We're about to see Armageddon played out in the Middle East. They'll say it's prophecy but it's really about oil and property.

Or maybe it will just implode into a civil war and a bunch of coups thrown in, and I guarantee there will probably be a coup in Israel also. Cause you know once we pull out and leave it to the masses over there, then those on top will be defeated.

Ellyllions
04-10-2007, 11:50 AM
Well, what's feared is this: (and it's a very plausible possibility)

After Iran released the 15, the UK began an investigation on "how" it happened. They've pulled resources that opens the waters for more traffic by Iran. It's believed that this is going to give Iran time to arm the Shiites with some very nasty aresenal. The Shiites know this is coming, hence the timing of the protests (yes it all co-incides with the anniversary of the attack).

What Iran wants is control over the Southern-most (oil rich) part of Iraq. They're thinking that by getting control over that area, their problem of cut in profits from their lack of oil production in Iran will be solved. They get their cake and eat it too. Oil from Iraq, and nuclear power in Iran. Plus they'll have a larger backing to get to Israel.

The reason I said that we'll need to batten down the hatches is because we are most definately on their agenda as a force to be taken down. But in my opinion, we'll need to do it here on our own soil rather than try to take them over there. We don't need to be trying to defend anyone now.

Ahmedinijad is ready for Iran to be a leader in economics and military power. To add insult to injury, he's barking mad crazy. He's constantly changing ideals and tactics because he's got big designs larger than he can control. That's pretty apparent with the way he's let his country's budget suffer $5.5 billion dollars a year by neglecting the oil production just to get a nuclear warhead or twelve.

It's about to get very ugly in that portion of the world and there's nothing we can do to curtail it. We can send politicians and they'll just tell us what we want to hear and then do what they want.

Mark my words kiddos....and God bless us all if I'm wrong. I'll gladly eat my hat over this one.

FORD
04-10-2007, 02:06 PM
Originally posted by BITEYOASS
Or maybe it will just implode into a civil war and a bunch of coups thrown in, and I guarantee there will probably be a coup in Israel also. Cause you know once we pull out and leave it to the masses over there, then those on top will be defeated.

A coup in Israel might not be a bad thing, as long as the Likud Zionfascists get thrown out of power.

Steve Savicki
04-10-2007, 02:27 PM
Originally posted by Ellyllions let them fight this out on their own.
*give Bush and Cheney a machine gun and send them off to Iraq*

Sounds like a pullout may become a fallout.

BITEYOASS
04-11-2007, 11:01 AM
Hopefully Admenjimanda or whatever the fuck his name is will go so crazy that he will disregard the safety of those working at Iran's nuclear facilities, which will cause a chernobyl style meltdown to occur. Then he'll be laid the blame and promptly excecuted. That will probably be the only peaceful solution to this. Especially since those countries who are taught by Russia on how to run a nuclear facility, tend to have the most safety problems.

BITEYOASS
04-11-2007, 11:04 AM
Especially since you never hear anything in the news about questions involving the workplace or environmental safety conditions of Iran's nuclear program.

BITEYOASS
04-11-2007, 11:07 AM
Exactomundo, especially since the Ultra-Orthodox Jews combined with the Labour and Liberal political fronts of Israel can't stand the Likuds.

FORD
04-11-2007, 04:59 PM
Originally posted by BITEYOASS
Exactomundo, especially since the Ultra-Orthodox Jews combined with the Labour and Liberal political fronts of Israel can't stand the Likuds.

So how do the bastards keep getting elected? And this "Kadima" party which Sharon created and Olmert ran on after Sharon's brain melted down is nothing but a Likud front. They proved that with the Lebanon bullshit.

My theory is that Yitzhak Rabin was the JFK of Israel. His assassination was a right wing coup, and ever since then, things have gone to Hell in a Kosher handbasket, just like they have here since JFK was killed by right wing extremists.

If I were advise the Israeli people how to rid themselves of the Zionfascists, the first thing I would suggest is that they dismantle AIPAC, which is the Lobbying arm of Zionfascism manipulating the US congress.

Nickdfresh
04-11-2007, 05:17 PM
There was an interesting discussion on AIPAC on NPR a couple of weeks ago featuring various Jewish-American groups going at it...

The consensus was that there was more critical discussion about Israeli policies in Israel than there was in the United States...

FORD
04-11-2007, 06:09 PM
Sadly, I don't doubt it.