Liberal delusions about al Qaeda in Iraq threat to US

Cliff May:

Senator and presidential candidate Barack Obama wants to fight al-Qaeda in Pakistan – after accepting defeat at the hands of al-Qaeda in Iraq. His critics say that shows his inexperience. But he’s hardly alone.

A sophisticated member of what may fairly be called the Washington Foreign Policy Establishment was discussing Iraq with me. We agreed on the patterns many Americans are just now beginning to discern within the media clutter: the new American commander in Iraq, Gen. David A. Petraeus, is targeting al-Qaeda in Iraq and making progress against that terrorist organization.

But this experienced professional was willing to give the effort only two cheers. “I don't think we need to worry about al-Qaeda in Iraq attacking our homeland,” he said. “But as for al-Qaeda currently located in Pakistan, that's an entirely different matter.”

The reconstitution of al-Qaeda (AQ) in a remote region of Pakistan is both frustrating and threatening. Frustrating, because we want to bring to justice those responsible for the atrocities carried out six years ago next month. Threatening, because if Osama bin Laden feels safe, we can not.

But is there any basis for the widespread belief that the AQ operation in Pakistan is more dangerous to Americans on American soil than is al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI)? Consider: The most recent National Intelligence Estimate — the collective judgment of the American intel community – makes clear that AQI is AQ’s “most visible and capable affiliate and the only one known to have expressed a desire to attack the [U.S] Homeland.” It adds that AQI clearly intends “to plan increased attacks in and outside of Iraq."

AQI terrorists suicide-bombed three hotels in Jordan in late 2005, killing dozens of innocent people. The recent failed attacks in London and Glasgow, British intelligence services believe, “bear the fingerprints of al Qaeda in Iraq,” as CBS News has reported.

AQI carried out these attacks while also overseeing a campaign of murder, torture and suicide-bombing – up to 90 percent of suicide-bombers in Iraq are estimated to be directed by AQI, utilizing terrorists from other countries. (AQI’s leadership also is mainly non-Iraqi.)

Can you imagine what AQI will do if American troops withdraw from Iraq too soon, leaving the group in position to resume its slaughter of Iraqis who refuse to submit, and to feed off Iraq’s abundant resources? General Michael Hayden, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, said if the U.S. fails in Iraq, AQ will be likely to achieve its “goal” there – establishing a “safe haven from which then to plan and conduct attacks against the West.”

...

While some liberals are in denial that al Qaeda is even in Iraq, the ones who admit and still want to leave are just as delusional. Leaving al Qaeda in place with greater resources and less worry about attack is making them far more dangerous than the ones in caves along the Afghan Pakistan border. The voices of retreat from our battle with al Qaeda in Iraq were only a few days ago saying they were threatening the rest of the world by making it an advanced course in terrorism, now they are making the ridiculous suggestion that al Qaeda in Iraq is a benign threat.

What is really happening in Iraq right now is that our forces are destroying much of al Qaeda and have the rest on the run. To leave now would be more than absurd.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Apple's huge investment in US including Texas facility