Endgame: The Blueprint for Victory in the War on Terror

Amazon ^ | April 12, 2004 | Thomas McInerney & Paul E. Vallely

[an amused spectator]

Editorial Reviews
From the Inside Flap
How to win the war on terror: a blueprint

Tom McInerney and Paul Vallely are retired generals (Air Force and the Army). They’ve devoted their lives to defending America. Now they’re military analysts for FOX News, privy to up-to-the-minute reports and inside sources. They know everything that’s going on within the Pentagon, the CIA, and other government agencies.

They’re also smart. When other analysts were wringing their hands and whining about "quagmires" in Afghanistan and Iraq, they calmly predicted relatively easy and decisive American victories—and they were right.

In Endgame, they devote their experience and expertise to the question of how to win the war on terror. Unlike our past enemies, radical Islam is not confined to particular nations—and thus cannot be defeated solely through conventional warfare against enemy states. Endgame is a blueprint for victory over this tenacious and bloodthirsty foe. It details the new strategy that America must adopt to fight this very new kind of war we’re in, and reveals a wealth of inside information (including the location of Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction).

The terrorists’ main target, say McInerney and Vallely, is America. But their threat, they say, is inseparable from radical Islam’s global Web of Terror. Thus in formulating a viable strategy to meet the terror threat to America, they span the range of current global hotspots:

· How we must respond to each of the eight countries that make up the principal elements of the international Web of Terror
· What America could do to reduce—quickly and drastically—the international threat from al-Qaeda
· The key to achieving lasting success in Afghanistan
· What Pakistan must do in order to prove itself truly to be our ally in the war on terror
· Why Iran will fall even more easily than Iraq did, and may reform itself without American intervention
· How Syria is a domino waiting to fall—and why it’s an ideal place to use America’s dominant sea and air power
· Why rogue state North Korea is an ally of radical Islam—and how to disarm nuclear North Korea now

Above all, say McInerney and Vallely, this is a battle of wills. During a visit to Baghdad, McInerney and Vallely were told by one young soldier that the war on terror can’t be lost on the battlefield; but it can be lost if the will of the American people falters. This book gives expert insight into why we fight, and what we must do to win.

About the Author
Lieutenant General Thomas G. McInerney, United States Air Force (Ret.), served as a fighter pilot, commander, and strategic planner in the U.S. Air Force for thirty-five years. He retired from military service as assistant vice chief of staff of the Air Force and director for the Defense Performance Review. A respected military analyst, he appears regularly on FOX News, is a frequent nationally syndicated radio lecturer and guest, and has written for the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Times, the Washington Post, and USA Today. He is a graduate of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and earned a master’s degree in international relations from George Washington University. He now lives with his Mona in Clifton, Virginia, and runs his own consulting business.

Major General Paul E. Vallely, United States Army (Ret.), served in the U.S. Army for thirty-two years and retired as deputy commanding general, U.S. Army, Pacific in Honolulu, Hawaii. He is the senior military analyst for FOX News Channel, a regular guest lecturer and guest on nationally syndicated radio shows, and has served on numerous U.S. security assistance missions. He is a graduate of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and served in many overseas theaters, as well as two combat tours in Vietnam. He now lives with his wife in Bigfork, Montana.

[an amused spectator]

These two gentlemen were on Hannity yesterday.

They were positing a worst-case scenario of 8 to 10 nukes detonated simultaneously in American cities.

OK, we've got a warning similar to the civilian passenger plane fuel bombs. What does the Left propose we do about it?

Anybody? Anybody? - John F'ng Kerry

[facedown]

McInerney is good. Vallely is a true fire-breathing, give-no-quarter, get-the-job-done kind of guy.

[weegee]

Unlike our past enemies, radical Islam is not confined to particular nations—and thus cannot be defeated solely through conventional warfare against enemy states.

Technically this war (World War IV for those keeping count) is like the last one, WWIII (the Cold War). While the Soviet Union backed covert and direct influence in America, Cuba, Vietnam, and elsewhere some nations offer state sponsorship to terrorism.

Some skirmishes were fought publicly, some battles (or near battles) we are only hearing about now (20+ years later) and some we may never hear about.

There also exists a fifth column in America like existed during the Cold War. Some "Americans" have chosen up with "the other side". Handing over nuclear secrets is the least of the actions we have to fear from these new fifth columnists.

Also, the Cold War left us with communist party faithful who still revere the old Soviet Union. I'm talking about persons in America and it is no surprise that these party faithful were among the first to mount "antiwar" (and pro-Stalin) protests.

These radical leftists have little actual chance of overthrowing the American constitutional government but it remains their longterm goal. Perhaps they side with radical Islamists in spirit because "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

Preaching seditious overthrow of the American government and even of the newly formed Iraqi government are not protected speech. The nations that oppose terrorism (Islamofascism in specific) already have the legal ability to silence those stoking the flames of hate.

England knows that such seditious materials are being screened on video at mosques yet they are (too) slow to shut down such activities. More attention needs to be focused on how long such "cover" organizations were permitted to operate in America in the 1990s in this 9/11 commission.

Maybe when the "will" is there to fight this war with genuine determination, it will be won. Otherwise we will just be winning the battles but losing the war.

We won the battle against the Soviet Union with regards to the Cold War but seditious socialism remains in America and some are no longer afraid to declare their communism and defense of Joseph Stalin.

[The kings dead]

What America could do to reduce—quickly and drastically—the international threat from al-Qaeda

I'd love to hear what this is.

[My2Cents]

McInerney and Vallely were told by one young soldier that the war on terror can’t be lost on the battlefield; but it can be lost if the will of the American people falters.

On this objective, the Sunni goons in Fallujah and the US Democrat Party are working, if not in concert, at least on parallel paths.

[My2Cents]

You make excellent points. Your comments make me think that looking at what happened, or didn't happen, prior to 9-11 is less important than looking at what we're doing, or what we're NOT doing NOW but should, to combat international terrorism. I'm less concerned that the President was "obsessed" with Iraq right after 9-11 than I am that perhaps our involvement in Iraq is preventing us from doing something bold and necessary in Iran, Syria, and North Korea.

[weegee]

Our policy towards Iraq (and Vietnam) is being watched by other nations. Qadaffi has publicly said he will disarm his WMD programs (and this was reportedly negotiated behind the scenes by the American government).

If Korea and other nations wanted to stretch America's troops thin, they would have struck during the war in Iraq. Syria and Iran ARE providing agitators who keep things from getting peaceful in Iraq. Attacking Iraqi, American, and other nationality civilians seems to get them the "best" press for going against American policy.

Civilians are unarmed while the military has all types of firepower. If American military personnel are killed, there are many countries around the world that flat out don't care. Kill some foreign national civilians and America will get the blame for "not doing enough to keep the peace"/"creating the problem in the first place". How many of these foreign nationals would even be doing business in Iraq if we hadn't gone to war to remove Saddam from power?

[an amused spectator]

http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/index.jsp?section=static&page=interviewseries

The Center for Security Policy is pleased to announce the first in a series of interviews with members of its Military Committee and National Security Advisory Council.

Over the coming months the Center for Security Policy will post these interviews on its website and distribute the contents to its member database. If you wish to receive the transcripts of these interviews when they become available, then please visit our website and become a member today.

The Center for Security Policy is honored to have as its first guest Major General Paul Vallely (USA Ret.), the Center's Military Committee Chairman.

Transcript, 23 March 2004:

CSP: General Vallely, Welcome. Thank you for joining us.

CSP: On Sunday, former Clinton and Bush Administration official Richard Clarke told 60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl the following: "I find it outrageous that the president is running for re-election on the grounds that he's done such great things about terrorism. He ignored it. He ignored terrorism for months, when maybe we could have done something to stop 9/11. Maybe. We'll never know." He surmised by saying: "I think he's done a terrible job on the war against terrorism." What are your thoughts?

Gen. Vallely: Well my thoughts are: number one, Richard Clarke is much like Paul O'Neill, sour grapes. He was ineffective when he was in the office for counterterrorism because there were no gains made in combating global terrorism. So I think from this standpoint it's sour grapes. He should be embarrassed and ashamed at the remarks that he has made, particularly against the President, who has done a tremendous job in fighting the War on Terror; and has had a plan to do it and they executed the plan. So whatever Richard Clarke had as far as planning they never executed anything to forestall or prevent September 11th. And if they had done that then President Bush wouldn't have been saddled with the September 11th responsibility. And so, the President had to devise a plan, which he did, and he executed it through military action.

----------

CSP: Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry has argued that the "war on terror is far less of a military operation and far more of an intelligence-gathering law enforcement operation." Is this the right strategy to fight and win the War on Terror?

Gen. Vallely: Absolutely not. We found out that it was not a law enforcement operation by the mere fact that when you look at the web of terror it is made up of nation states that support terrorism and it provided the opportunity for the likes of al-Qaeda to prosper and grow and spread their hate and their terror throughout the world. And so when you have nation states that are sponsoring terrorism then those regimes have to either change their modus operandi or military action or regime change has to take place. That is exactly what's happened in Afghanistan and in Iraq and the same thing will happen to Iran and Syria if they don't change their way of doing business. So John Kerry couldn't be more wrong. He doesn't get it, or if he gets it, he doesn't wish to state that, but I don't think he really gets that this is a global war on terror and a nexus of terror that has to be eradicated.

----------

CSP: In your opinion, what effect will the March 11th terrorist attacks in Spain have on the fight to eradicate global terrorism? Specifically, what lessons will global terrorists learn from the downfall of Spain's pro-U.S. government that followed these deadly attacks?

Gen. Vallely: What they will learn number one is that if you conduct terror against the nation state and inspire terror in the population as well as the political leadership it will then make them withdraw or take a step backwards rather than being aggressive and going out finding the source of terrorism, again nation states and terrorist organizations, and either destroy those organizations or the terrorists themselves. So I think this is a situation that Spain is going to regret in the future because we are going to see more terrorism if we don't preempt it and attack the nexus of terror which are the nation states and the terrorist organizations.

----------

CSP: What do you say to those who argue that democracy prevailed in Spain and that the word "appeasement" is the wrong label to describe what occurred?

Gen. Vallely: Well, they unfortunately chose political leadership that will not stand up against terrorism. Basically, it will retract from it or if they end up removing their soldiers from Iraq, it will be an indication that global terrorism in regards to Spain is winning, not losing.

----------

CSP: The Center for Security Policy believes that success in the War on Terror will ultimately require an aggressive "war of ideas" aimed at defeating the ideology of militant Islam. What are your thoughts concerning militant Islam and how can the United States best wage a "war of ideas"?

Gen. Vallely: Well our book, "Endgame - The Blueprint for Victory in the War on Terror," which is coming out, discusses this in great detail about promoting the Five Freedoms throughout the Muslim world. We talk about freedom of education, freedom of information, freedom of religion, and several others…In order for the Muslim states to benefit their people, not repress them in the future, that creates the environment for this radical Islamic terrorism, these Five Freedoms must be adhered to in order to advance their cultures. Secondly, we can't win this War on Terror alone. We need the Muslim nations to purge the radical Islamic fundamentalists that are teaching and preaching hate throughout the Muslim world. And so in the War of Ideas we've got to work closely together to ensure that we eradicate, again, terrorist cells and terrorists organizations and the nations that support terrorism. So it all comes back to the nexus of terror and the web of evil, as we call it….

The real endgame for terrorism is eliminating the roots of all terror. And that's the nations that support it and the terrorist organizations.…

----------

CSP: As you know, Israeli forces killed Hamas founder Ahmed Yassin recently. Could you comment on the significance of this event?

Gen. Vallely: Very significant. I knew ahead of time that Yassin was a target. I knew he would be taken out. It was just a matter of finding him. He is the ultimate, as bin Laden is, terrorist… He is a terrorist, just as the other ones we are fighting in al-Qaeda and around the world. They have to be incarcerated or terminated. And they terminated Yassin. That is a very good thing. Israel should continue to either incarcerate or take out all the Hamas leaders, Islamic Jihad leaders, all the terrorists, including Hezbollah to the North.

----------

CSP: And Yasser Arafat?

Gen. Vallely: I recommended to the Israelis a year ago that he not wake up in the morning. I think they need to make him disappear. And I've had them come back to me and say they'd wished they had listened to me a year ago.

----------

CSP: Did Operation Iraqi Freedom and the capture of Saddam Hussein make the United States more or less secure?

Gen. Vallely: Absolutely more secure. And I think that's what inspired Qadhafi in Libya to take the positive measures that they have. And so therefore another nation in this web of evil, Afghanistan, Iraq and now Libya, is moving towards a more realistic approach of being a responsible nation [which] does in fact make the United States and the world more secure and more stable. Now we have to reckon with the remaining members of the web of evil…Syria, Iran and North Korea. So, that's why we have to have a strategy that really attacks the inherent and intrinsic problems of global terrorism.

----------

CSP: How important is the capture or elimination of Osama bin Laden in the fight against global terrorism?

Gen. Vallely: It's very important. Just as Saddam Hussein was, Osama bin Laden is the figurehead and still, as far as we know if he is still alive, the leader of al-Qaeda. And so he is a terrorist leader inspiring hate and terrorism throughout the world and inspiring these other tentacles such as Abu Sayyef and Jemaah Islamiya and other group that… [are] operating in Iraq. So, it's very important that we capture or kill all the leaders of all the terrorist organizations, not just al-Qaeda.

CSP: General Vallely, thank you for your time.

[an amused spectator]

On this objective, the Sunni goons in Fallujah and the US Democrat Party are working, if not in concert, at least on parallel paths.

Oh, yeah....

I always get my goons confused - Teddy the Hutt, Mohammed al-Smith - they all look alike. ;-)

[an amused spectator]

I'm less concerned that the President was "obsessed" with Iraq right after 9-11 than I am that perhaps our involvement in Iraq is preventing us from doing something bold and necessary in Iran, Syria, and North Korea.

Here's what I always tell people: If you examine the map, you'll see that we just happen to have several fully armed and operational battle formations, supply lines secured (including a huge international airport), right next to both Syria and Iran.

What a coincidence.

[My2Cents]

Good point. And I notice that by being in Afghanistan and Iraq, we've made a nice "Iran sandwich."

[facedown]

They have to be incarcerated or terminated. And they terminated Yassin. That is a very good thing.

That's my guy!

[monday]

"For starters, perhaps we could secure the Mexican border?"

This could be done, but would be very expensive and involve fences, land mines, patrol dogs, and lots of guns and men. Meanwhile what about the Canadian border which is already less secure than the Mexican border? What about the thousands of miles of coastland?