PDA

View Full Version : Here's a timing one for ya eg8r (LONG)



crawdaddio
08-02-2004, 08:31 PM
<font color="red"> WARNING: this is long. </font color>

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040719&amp;s=aaj071904

[Editor's Note: This afternoon, Pakistan's interior minister, Faisal Saleh Hayyat, announced that Pakistani forces had captured Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, a Tanzanian Al Qaeda operative wanted in connection with the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. The timing of this announcement should be of particular interest to readers of The New Republic. Earlier this month, John B. Judis, Spencer Ackerman, and Massoud Ansari broke the story of how the Bush administration was pressuring Pakistani officials to apprehend high-value targets (HVTs) in time for the November elections--and in particular, to coincide with the Democratic National Convention. Although the capture took place in central Pakistan "a few days back," the announcement came just hours before John Kerry will give his acceptance speech in Boston.]


..............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[s]" 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." (These sources insisted on remaining anonymous. Under Pakistan's Official Secrets Act, an official leaking information to the press can be imprisoned for up to ten years.)


.................A third source, an official who works under ISI's director, Lieutenant General Ehsan ul-Haq, informed tnr that the Pakistanis "have been told at every level that apprehension or killing of HVTs before [the] election is [an] absolute must." What's more, this source claims that Bush administration officials have told their Pakistani counterparts they have a date in mind for announcing this achievement: "The last ten days of July deadline has been given repeatedly by visitors to Islamabad and during [ul-Haq's] meetings in Washington." Says McCormack: "I'm aware of no such comment." But according to this ISI official, a White House aide told ul-Haq last spring that "it would be best if the arrest or killing of [any] HVT were announced on twenty-six, twenty-seven, or twenty-eight July"--the first three days of the Democratic National Convention in Boston.

..................The Bush administration has matched this public and private pressure with enticements and implicit threats. During his March visit to Islamabad, Powell designated Pakistan a major non-nato ally, a status that allows its military to purchase a wider array of U.S. weaponry. Powell pointedly refused to criticize Musharraf for pardoning nuclear physicist A.Q. Khan--who, the previous month, had admitted exporting nuclear secrets to Iran, North Korea, and Libya--declaring Khan's transgressions an "internal" Pakistani issue. In addition, the administration is pushing a five-year, $3 billion aid package for Pakistan through Congress over Democratic concerns about the country's proliferation of nuclear technology and lack of democratic reform.

But Powell conspicuously did not commit the United States to selling F-16s to Pakistan, which it desperately wants in order to tilt the regional balance of power against India. And the Pakistanis fear that, if they don't produce an HVT, they won't get the planes. Equally, they fear that, if they don't deliver, either Bush or a prospective Kerry administration would turn its attention to the apparent role of Pakistan's security establishment in facilitating Khan's illicit proliferation network. One Pakistani general recently in Washington confided in a journalist, "If we don't find these guys by the election, they are going to stick this whole nuclear mess up our [censored]."

...........Pushing Musharraf to go after Al Qaeda in the tribal areas may be a good idea despite the risks. But, if that is the case, it was a good idea in 2002 and 2003. Why the switch now? Top Pakistanis think they know: This year, the president's reelection is at stake.

<font color="red"> And.... </font color>

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/07/30/1511207

JOHN JUDIS: Well, we learned this story from diverse sources in the Pakistani government. We had two contacts in the ISI, the equivalent of the American CIA. We had another contact in the Interior Ministry which is in charge of Internal Security that announced the arrest and we had another contact who was a top general. We are going back to them right now in preparation for a story next week, so I can't discuss yet what we are going to find out. But I think the reason we got this story was that the Pakistanis were irritated that they were getting this kind of pressure to produce at a certain date. Mostly because what that entailed was going into these tribal areas in the north and possibly precipitating a kind of civil war.

AMY GOODMAN: John Judis, is there anything else would you like it add?

JOHN JUDIS: Well, I think what I would like to add, I would like to see this question turned out not so much on were we right, but what's the Bush administration really up to? Are they politicizing foreign policy to a degree we really haven't seen sense the Nixon years.

<font color="red">It was definitely a good thing to get this guy, and I'm glad he is in custody. Is Bush using the war to get re-elected? No! Couldn't be!

Foreign policy is not a toy. The war on terror is being executed in an ass-backwards insane manner. If we know where they are, go get them. "We're gonna smoke 'em outta their holes." Or blow smoke? Which is it?

DC~~apologizes to, and commends any and all who read that whole thing. </font color>

Wally_in_Cincy
08-03-2004, 06:44 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote crawdaddio:</font><hr> ...Is Bush using the war to get re-elected? No! Couldn't be! ...<hr /></blockquote>

If he is it doesn't seem to be working very well. If we had not gone into Iraq he would be leading by 20 points right now.

Wally &lt;~~ didn't read the whole thing.

eg8r
08-03-2004, 07:35 AM
Is the timing of the capture the real issue with you, or is the actual capture more important. I personally believe the actual capture is more important. If this coincides with the election or is choreographed that way, WHO CARES, AT LEAST THE KILLER IS BEHIND BARS SOONER THAN LATER!!!!! Would it make you feel better if we just waited a little longer and first see what the outcome of the election will be? Give me a break. This post is ridiculous at minimum. I think Berger and Clinton did enough waiting, now is time for action. If bin Laden is caught (prior to November) I hope you are true to this ridiculous conspiracy theory and you are first to report on timing.

eg8r

crawdaddio
08-03-2004, 10:23 AM
If you read the article, it states that this guy was captured three days prior to the announcement, which was made just before Kerry spoke at the DNC. It's politics. Try to take the headlines. Simple as that. Of course I think it is more important that HE WAS CAUGHT than WHEN.

[ QUOTE ]
If this coincides with the election or is choreographed that way, WHO CARES, AT LEAST THE KILLER IS BEHIND BARS SOONER THAN LATER!!!!! <hr /></blockquote>

I care, which is why I made the post, not to prove something.

[ QUOTE ]
This post is ridiculous at minimum. <hr /></blockquote>

Can't you concede that POSSIBLY, MAYBE, there's an AN OUTSIDE, SLIM CHANCE that this "theory" which is held by many, many people is more than just "theory"?

Just curious, and as always, respect your opinion, please respect mine.

DC~~"rediculous at minimum" /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

crawdaddio
08-03-2004, 10:25 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote crawdaddio:</font><hr> ...Is Bush using the war to get re-elected? No! Couldn't be! ...<hr /></blockquote>

If he is it doesn't seem to be working very well. If we had not gone into Iraq he would be leading by 20 points right now.

Wally &lt;~~ didn't read the whole thing. <hr /></blockquote>

I guess I should have asked: Is he attempting..........?
My bad.

Wally_in_Cincy
08-03-2004, 11:24 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote crawdaddio:</font><hr> I guess I should have asked: Is he attempting..........?
My bad. <hr /></blockquote>

In that case the answer is "no". IMO

highsea
08-03-2004, 12:58 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote crawdaddio:</font><hr>But Powell conspicuously did not commit the United States to selling F-16s to Pakistan, which it desperately wants in order to tilt the regional balance of power against India. And the Pakistanis fear that, if they don't produce an HVT, they won't get the planes. <hr /></blockquote>I'm not going to comment on your little conspiracy theory about the timing of the capture of HVT's in Pakistan. I follow the action in the tribal border areas daily, and it would take way too long to give an articulate explanation of what's going on. Musharref is treading a very fine line there, and neither he (or we) can risk an uprising in Pakistan.

However I will comment about this portion of your post. Pakistan was rewarded with MNNA status for their help in the battle against al-qaeda and the Taliban. Even so, it is highly unlikely we will give them F-16's, because we did it in the early 90's, and the planes found their way to China. I doubt we will take that risk again, certainly not with block 60 AC. PAF will likely end up with Mirage 2000-5's and probably some SU-27's to round out the force. Control will probably be handled with EYRIES, we won't supply AWACS for the same reason we will not supply F16's.

There was some talk with Sweden on acquiring some Gripen's, but it doesn't look like that will happen. Whatever they get, they will have to integrate into the existing force, which is predominantly older Migs. It will be easier for them to integrate the (Chinese)SU-27's, and they can count on France to support the Mirages in the future. But my money is on the SU-27's as the PAF front line fighter. Also, PAF needs TOT (transfer of technology), which we won't do on a front line AC, even for a MNNA country. Just ask Australia.

The PAK India problem is one the US has to tread very lightly around. We are more strongly allied with India than Pakistan, because PAK and China are so close. But we still have to stay close with Pakistan, because they are a nuclear country, and if Musharref falls, it is all but certain that a hard line Islamist regime will take over. That is something the region can't afford. This is another reason we don't beat on Musharref about the AQ Khan debacle. We can't afford to destabilize Pakistan.

But F-16's? Not a chance. They could hand over OBL the day before the election, and they still wouldn't get F-16's.

-CM

eg8r
08-03-2004, 01:00 PM
[ QUOTE ]
If you read the article, it states that this guy was captured three days prior to the announcement, which was made just before Kerry spoke at the DNC. <hr /></blockquote> You are busting Bush's butt over 3 days? Why didn't you cry foul when the prison crap hit the news 6 MONTHS after that happened? Where were you then? Pretty quiet if I remember correctly.

[ QUOTE ]
Can't you concede that POSSIBLY, MAYBE, there's an AN OUTSIDE, SLIM CHANCE that this "theory" which is held by many, many people is more than just "theory"?
<hr /></blockquote> No I will not concede anything. It is a theory. Just because you and many people believe something does not make it true.

[ QUOTE ]
Just curious, and as always, respect your opinion, please respect mine.
<hr /></blockquote> I have shown you no disprespect.

eg8r

Ross
08-03-2004, 01:23 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote crawdaddio:</font><hr> ...Is Bush using the war to get re-elected? No! Couldn't be! ...<hr /></blockquote>

If he is it doesn't seem to be working very well. If we had not gone into Iraq he would be leading by 20 points right now.

Wally &lt;~~ didn't read the whole thing. <hr /></blockquote>

I think you are right on this one Wally!

Ross
08-03-2004, 01:34 PM
Eg8r - "This post is ridiculous at minimum."

Eg8r - "I've shown you no disrepect."

(In "cawfee tawk" voice): Talk amongst yourselves.

crawdaddio
08-03-2004, 02:44 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> You are busting Bush's butt over 3 days? Why didn't you cry foul when the prison crap hit the news 6 MONTHS after that happened? Where were you then? Pretty quiet if I remember correctly.

<font color="red">I didn't really read very much about the prison scandal. </font color>

No I will not concede anything. It is a theory. Just because you and many people believe something does not make it true.

<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="red">One could argue that just because you believe something is false does not make it false either. So there we have it..........a brick wall.
Please don't take this (original) post as an attack, I never meant it to be. Just some discussion...........
Thanks for the replies. </font color>

Wally_in_Cincy
08-04-2004, 06:21 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote crawdaddio:</font><hr>.....I didn't really read very much about the prison scandal. .....
<hr /></blockquote>

Me neither. It barely made the news.