|
Bush Admin. plans to Capture bin Laden During DNC
|
View this Thread in Original format
| MisterOpus1 |
Or so the conspiracy goes......
| quote: | PAKISTAN FOR BUSH.
July Surprise?
by John B. Judis, Spencer Ackerman & Massoud Ansari
Post date: 07.07.04
Issue date: 07.19.04
ate 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[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.
he 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 ."
Pakistani perceptions of U.S. politics reinforce these worries. "In Pakistan, there has been a folk belief that, whenever there's a Republican administration in office, relations with Pakistan have been very good," says Khalid Hasan, a U.S. correspondent for the Lahore-based Daily Times. By contrast, there's also a "folk belief that the Democrats are always pro-India." Recent history has validated those beliefs. The Clinton administration inherited close ties to Pakistan, forged a decade earlier in collaboration against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. But, by the time Clinton left office, the United States had tilted toward India, and Pakistan was under U.S. sanctions for its nuclear activities. All this has given Musharraf reason not just to respond to pressure from Bush, but to feel invested in him--and to worry that Kerry, who called the Khan affair a "disaster," and who has proposed tough new curbs on nuclear proliferation, would adopt an icier line.
Bush's strategy could work. In large part because of the increased U.S. pressure, Musharraf has, over the last several months, significantly increased military activity in the tribal areas--regions that enjoy considerable autonomy from Islamabad and where, until Musharraf sided with the United States in the war on terrorism, Pakistani soldiers had never set foot in the nation's 50-year history. Thousands of Pakistani troops fought a pitched battle in late March against tribesmen and their Al Qaeda affiliates in South Waziristan in hopes of capturing Zawahiri. The fighting escalated significantly in June. Attacks on army camps in the tribal areas brought fierce retaliation, leaving over 100 tribal and foreign militants and Pakistani soldiers dead in three days. Last month, Pakistan killed a powerful Waziristan warlord and Qaeda ally, Nek Mohammed, in a dramatic rocket attack that villagers said bore American fingerprints. (They claim a U.S. spy plane had been circling overhead.) Through these efforts, the Pakistanis could bring in bin Laden, Mullah Omar, or Zawahiri--a significant victory in the war on terrorism that would bolster Bush's reputation among voters.
But there is a reason many Pakistanis and some American officials had previously been reluctant to carry the war on terrorism into the tribal areas. A Pakistani offensive in that region, aided by American high-tech weaponry and perhaps Special Forces, could unite tribal chieftains against the central government and precipitate a border war without actually capturing any of the HVTs. Military action in the tribal areas "has a domestic fallout, both religious and ethnic," Pakistani Foreign Minister Mian Khursheed Mehmood Kasuri complained to the Los Angeles Times last year. Some American intelligence officials agree. "Pakistan just can't risk a civil war in that area of their country. They can't afford a western border that is unstable," says a senior intelligence official, who anonymously authored the recent Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror and who says he has not heard that the current pressures on Pakistan are geared to the election. "We may be at the point where [Musharraf] has done almost as much as he can."
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.
Massoud Ansari reported from Karachi.
John B. Judis is a senior editor at TNR and a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Spencer Ackerman is an assistant editor at TNR. Massoud Ansari is a senior reporter for Newsline, a leading Pakistani news magazine.
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040719&s=aaj071904 |
So IF bin Laden is caught during the Dem. Convention, you can at least say you knew ahead of time.
MUUUUUHAAAHAAAAHAAAA!!!!!! |
|
|
| Shakka |
| Amazing, isn't it?!:p :D |
|
|
| Yoepus |
cool I'm gonna buy a ton of stock right before the DNC then!
If all goes bad I'll just sue the author of this article for my losses/
God Bless the US system:D |
|
|
| Q5echo |
in other words, it's in the Pakistani's interest to to put the vice to "high value targets". funny, the article not worded that way.
I have no doubt the pentagon is playing a little hardball.
i'm betting HVT's like al-zarquawi and bin-laden will not be influencing anything this election, firsthand or otherwise. we'll see. |
|
|
| anuneventrade |
[barnes]
excellent.... *taps fingers together*
[/barnes]
If this is what will lead us to capture terrorists, maybe we should have an election any time we have a problem and mess with the polls... Why George, I think we've got it!! |
|
|
| emander |
| Maybe this time we can get a video of troops hauling him out of an outhouse ter. Missed the excitement of the moment when they yanked Saddam out of his hole. Would've loved to see the expression on his face then! |
|
|
| speedracer_mec |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
Or so the conspiracy goes......
So IF bin Laden is caught during the Dem. Convention, you can at least say you knew ahead of time.
MUUUUUHAAAHAAAAHAAAA!!!!!! |
| quote: | AP Poll: Bush Gains Slight Lead Over Kerry
1 hour, 25 minutes ago
By RON FOURNIER, AP Political Writer
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) has opened a slight lead over John Kerry (news - web sites) while regaining the confidence of some voters on the economy and other domestic issues, according to an Associated Press poll with a silver lining for Democrats.
AP Photo
Latest headlines:
· Bush Ad: Kerry Lacks Priorities for Job
AP - 5 minutes ago
· In Ad, Kerry Weighs in on War on Terror
AP - 9 minutes ago
· Michigan GOP Gathers Names for Nader
AP - 20 minutes ago
The addition of Sen. John Edwards (news - web sites) to Kerry's ticket appears to have helped the Democrat in the South and among low-income voters — a result the Massachusetts senator had hoped for when he selected the North Carolina populist over more seasoned politicians.
"I'm more impressed with Kerry now that he chose Edwards," said Republican voter Robin Smith, 45, a teacher from Summerville, S.C. "I look at Kerry and I don't trust him, but he's got Edwards, who's more middle-of-the-road, a strong speaker, more able to reach the common man."
The AP-Ipsos poll found Bush slightly leading Kerry 49 percent to 45 percent with independent candidate Ralph Nader (news - web sites) at 3 percent. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. A month ago, the Bush-Kerry matchup was tied and Nader had 6 percent.
The three-day survey began Monday, the day before Kerry tapped Edwards as his running mate, and asked registered voters about the newly minted ticket on Tuesday and Wednesday. Half supported the Republican tandem of Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites) while 46 percent backed the Kerry-Edwards ticket, just within that question's margin of error of 4.5 percentage points.
Voters said they were feeling better about the economy and no worse about Iraq (news - web sites), a sign that Bush may be regaining his political footing just as Democrats make a high-profile push toward their nominating convention in late July.
"I want Bush in there, because the other guy is like sending a boy to do a man's job," said Glenn Foldessy, 45, of Streetsboro, Ohio, outside Cleveland. Foldessy, who usually votes Republican, said Edwards made the Democratic ticket stronger, but not strong enough.
"We have somebody now who's established and has things on track and if we destabilize this government during the war on terror, that's playing right into the hands of the terrorists," he said.
Troubling signs for the incumbent remain, however, from the number of voters who believe the country is on the wrong track (56 percent) to his anemic, but improving, job approval numbers. Bush's overall approval rating hit 50 percent for the first time since January, according to the poll conducted by Ipsos-Public Affairs.
A month ago, the poll showed a hypothetical Kerry-Edwards ticket at 47 percent and Bush-Cheney at 44 percent, essentially a tie.
Since June, Kerry has increased his percentage of strong supporters — from 55 percent to 64 percent — a sign that he has rallied his base. He also strengthened his support in the South from 39 percent to 45 percent and among voters with incomes from $25,000 to $50,000 — 41 percent to 50 percent, the AP-Ipsos poll found.
It was unknown what, if any, credit should go to Edwards. The self-made millionaire and former trial lawyer has talked of "two Americas," one for the privileged and another for everybody else.
Republican voter Hal Pruett, a human resources director in McMinnville, Tenn., said Edwards will help the Democratic ticket in the GOP-leaning South. "Because he's from the South, people will give them a close look," said Pruett, 56.
Of the 804 registered voters surveyed, just 49 percent said they approve of Bush's handling of the economy, but that's up a few percentage points since May.
Mary Ann Hatton, 44, a Democrat who works in a Lexington, Ky., business office, said she's finding less reason to blame Bush for the economy. "I would fault him more on the war" in Iraq, she said.
Less than half, 46 percent, approve of his handling of domestic issues such as health care, education and the environment — a slight improvement over last month.
Bush gained ground among suburban women, a key constituency that increased its backing for Bush from 41 percent in June to 52 percent.
His ratings on handling foreign policy and the war in Iraq, while low, remained steady or slightly improved. The poll was taken shortly after Iraqis gained limited control of their new government.
Bush has been buoyed by a stream of economic data pointing to an economic recovery, including a plunge in unemployment insurance applications reported Thursday by the Labor Department (news - web sites).
"The conditions for a Bush victory are all there — a strong economy, an improving position in the global war on terror and a growing sense that there are sharp and clear differences in values between the two campaigns," said top Bush adviser Karl Rove.
The economy remains a potent issue for Democrats, said Mark Mellman, a pollster for Kerry.
"We're still seeing people squeezed between prices that are rising and incomes that aren't," he said.
___
Associated Press Writers Will Lester and Trevor Tompson contributed to this report. |
poll from 1hr ago
looks like bush is building a nice lead there
I still hope he drops cheney before the rep. convention
:nervous: |
|
|
| emander |
| quote: | | "I want Bush in there, because the other guy is like sending a boy to do a man's job," said Glenn Foldessy, 45, of Streetsboro, Ohio, outside Cleveland. |
LIke that one... |
|
|
| torontotrance |
| I don't think Bush will magically pull Bin Laden out during the election or the DNC, I think if they could find the rat bastard, they would get him, forget winning the election, it is all about getting rid of that bastard. If US gov't knew exactly where he was, they would kill him immediately, after all the damage that Bin Laden has done, I would not risk letting another day go by and I'm sure most gov't's would think the same way. |
|
|
| LiquidX |
| quote: | Originally posted by torontotrance
I don't think Bush will magically pull Bin Laden out during the election or the DNC, I think if they could find the rat bastard, they would get him, forget winning the election, it is all about getting rid of that bastard. If US gov't knew exactly where he was, they would kill him immediately, after all the damage that Bin Laden has done, I would not risk letting another day go by and I'm sure most gov't's would think the same way. |
easy .. politics. |
|
|
| occrider |
| I thought the conspiracy was that they captured Saddam to influence the elections? I'm continually amused by conspiracy theorists ... never a dull moment :haha: |
|
|
|
|
