9/11 Commission: Somalia Retreat Inspired Bin Laden -- Beirut, Too

Sweetness & Light ^ | June 17, 2006 | N/A

[Sam Hill]

From National Review's Media Blog:

Murtha: Change Directions Like Clinton Did In Somalia

06/16 06:27 PM

Rep. John Murtha appeared on The Situation Room this afternoon to talk about the Iraq resolution that passed in the House today. He spoke against the resolution and advocated withdrawing the troops like Clinton did in Somalia:MURTHA: The thing that disturbed me and worries me about this whole thing is we can't get them to change direction. And I said over and over in debate, if you listen to any of it, in Beirut President Reagan changed direction, in Somalia President Clinton changed direction, and yet here, with the troops out there every day, suffering from these explosive devices, and being looked at as occupiers — 80 percent of the people want us out of there — and yet they continue to say, "We're fighting this thing." We're not fighting this. The troops are fighting this thing. That's who's doing the fighting...

The author, Stephen Spruiell, goes on to cite the Frontline story "Hunting Bin Laden" to demonstrate how the pullout of Somalia may have inspired Bin Laden.

But we don't need to take PBS's word for it. We have the official bi-partisan 9/11 Commission's Report:

Maybe Murtha wants the battle moved to American soil?

And, lest we forget, Jack Murtha was the primary mover behind getting Clinton to retreat from Somalia.

And, as you see, "Cut & Run" Murtha also picked an unfortunate example in citing Regan's removal of the Marines from Beirut.

[Sam Hill]

But cutting and running has been John Murtha's solution for a long time.

[Sam Hill]

Murtha memory ping.

[kcvl]

Fantastic research!

[Sam Hill]

High praise, coming from you.

For the last few hours I've been trying to find Murth's speech on the House floor where he called for the troops to be removed.

I've found it, itself, but all the links back to Thomas seem to have been disappeared.

Here's the title, and how he begins:

REMOVAL OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES FROM SOMALIA (House of Representatives - November 09, 1993)

Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Speaker, let me just make a couple of points.

I expressed my opposition to our deployment to Somalia when it began. When I went to the White House, I expressed my concern to President Bush....

And here is the Thomas link that no longer works:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r103:7:./temp/~r103cpDgH0:e123712:

It's not a big deal, but it would be great to have a direct citation for this speech, if you or anybody else can find the original posting or archive.

But I do love it that Murtha cited BOTH instances that Al Qaeda were inspired by.

What a clown!

[roverman2K6]

Can I raise the black flag now? Please?

[kcvl]

http://tinyurl.com/e9zrt




http://tinyurl.com/j5ymz




http://tinyurl.com/gpkv5


******


"Our welcome has been worn out," Rep Murtha told NBC's "Today" show in Sept. 1993, a month after 4 U.S. Military Police had been killed in Somalia by a remote-detonated land mine.

The Pennsylvania Democrat announced that President Clinton had been "listening to our suggestions. And I think you'll see him move those troops out very quickly."

Two weeks later, after 18 U.S. Rangers were killed in the battle of Mogadishu, Murtha visited U.S. forces in Somalia.
Upon his return he proclaimed to the world that the Mogadishu defeat had a devastating impact on the Rangers' morale.

"They're subdued compared to normal morale of elite forces," Murtha said. "Obviously, it was a very difficult battle. A lot of Somalis were killed, but it was a brutal battle."

Murtha said the U.S. had to no choice but to pull out now, explaining, "There's no military solution. Some of them will tell you [that] to get [warlord Mohamed Farrah] Aidid is the solution. I don't agree with that."


http://tinyurl.com/n9c4h

[marron]

Al Qaeda is back in Mogadishu, so we may get the chance to fix our history by going back and pushing them into the sea.

[MizSterious]

Pertinent parts of the fatwa/declaration of war were posted here, and at the beginning of the thread is a link to the entire thing--but note reading the entire thing might cause brain damage: that guy can sure blather.

[kcvl]

Murtha also supported reinstating the draft and selecting Dean as DNC Chair.

[MizSterious]

Yes, as I mentioned on another thread, it looks like the adults are going to have to go back there to clean up the mess Clinton left. Funny he should hold up Somalia as the "ideal" example--he couldn't have found a worse one if he tried. (*Is a Republican mole writing his material for him?)

[kcvl]

Reconstructing Murtha III: It’s a Somalia Deja Vu
November 23rd, 2005

When one is trying to make a political figure look like a conservative hawk, it is in one’s best interest to hide from the public any moments when said figure acts like a dove. Such appears to be the case with the ongoing character reconstruction of Rep. John Murtha (D-Pennsylvania) since his call last Thursday to withdraw American troops from Iraq.

A story published by NewsMax on Monday stated that Congressman Murtha urged former President Clinton to remove U.S. troops from Somalia in 1993:

“Clinton took the advice and ordered the withdrawal – a decision that Osama bin Laden would later credit with emboldening his terrorist fighters and encouraging him to mount further attacks against the U.S.”

It is now approaching 48 hours since the story broke, and the results of a google news search suggest that not one mainstream media outlet has decided to pick this story up. In fact, apart from conservative radio hosts and bloggers, this issue is being largely ignored.

What makes this even more curious is that a LexisNexis search identified a number of articles confirming that Congressman Murtha was indeed instrumental in President Clinton’s decision to remove American forces from Somalia. Rowan Scarborough, who was then working for the Washington Times, reported the following on September 6, 1993:

“Foes of America’s lingering military involvement in Somalia will force the first congressional debate on the policy this month, just as some senior Democrats begin to question President Clinton’s open-ended troop commitment.”

“House aides say other senior Democrats, like Rep. John Murtha, chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee on defense, are privately expressing concerns.”

On September 22, 1993, the Associated Press published the following:

“Exasperated by the long-running U.S. military involvement in Somalia, a congressional panel voted Wednesday to impose conditions on President Clinton’s ability to deploy forces for future humanitarian operations.”

“Murtha, who has urged Clinton to withdraw U.S. forces from Somalia, recalled that President Bush told him last December, when troops first were sent to the war-torn region, that they would be out by Inauguration Day.

“‘I don’t know whose inauguration,’ Murtha quipped.”

On September 30, 1993, Rowan Scarborough reported for the Washington Times:

“‘Our welcome has been worn out,’ Mr. Murtha said on NBC’s ‘Today’ show, adding that Mr. Clinton has been ‘listening to our suggestions. And I think you’ll see him move those troops out very quickly.’

“With those comments, Mr. Murtha joined a small but influential list of Democratic lawmakers who have publicly urged the president to change the mission in Somalia.”

Finally, on October 6, 1993, Murtha’s home paper, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, reported the following:

“Rep. John Murtha, chairman of the House defense appropriations committee, yesterday called upon President Clinton to rapidly withdraw all U.S. armed forces from Somalia.

“Murtha, D-Johnstown, released his statement the same day a growing number of House and Senate members were voicing sharp objections to the Clinton administration’s decision to send 650 more U.S. soldiers to the African nation.

“While conceding that Clinton ‘’inherited a very difficult situation in Somalia,’’ Murtha said he did not ‘see any achievable goal or national security interest in this operation.’’‘

This search also produced articles with supporting content from the Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times. Yet, the mainstream media is uninterested in reporting these revelations. Could it be that, as NewsMax suggested, our withdrawal from Somalia is indeed seen as having emboldened Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, and the press don’t want to in any way link Congressman Murtha to it?

The following paragraphs from bin Laden’s 1996 Fatwa offer some insight to this question:

“Few days ago the news agencies had reported that the Defence Secretary of the Crusading Americans had said that ‘the explosion at Riyadh and Al-Khobar had taught him one lesson: that is not to withdraw when attacked by coward terrorists.’

“We say to the Defence Secretary that his talk can induce a grieving mother to laughter! and shows the fears that had enshrined you all. Where was this false courage of yours when the explosion in Beirut took place on 1983 AD (1403 A.H). You were turned into scattered pits and pieces at that time; 241 mainly marines solders were killed. And where was this courage of yours when two explosions made you to leave Aden in lees than twenty four hours!

“But your most disgraceful case was in Somalia; where- after vigorous propaganda about the power of the USA and its post cold war leadership of the new world order- you moved tens of thousands of international force, including twenty eight thousands American solders into Somalia. However, when tens of your solders were killed in minor battles and one American Pilot was dragged in the streets of Mogadishu you left the area carrying disappointment, humiliation, defeat and your dead with you. Clinton appeared in front of the whole world threatening and promising revenge , but these threats were merely a preparation for withdrawal. You have been disgraced by Allah and you withdrew; the extent of your impotence and weaknesses became very clear. It was a pleasure for the ‘heart’ of every Muslim and a remedy to the ‘chests’ of believing nations to see you defeated in the three Islamic cities of Beirut , Aden and Mogadishu.”

In addition, a May 1998 installment of PBS’ Frontline presented bin Laden in a question and answer session with his followers. This key exchange further indicates the importance of America’s withdrawal from Somalia, and how it relates to the war on terror:

Question: Describe the situation when your men took down the American forces in Somalia.

Bin Laden: After our victory in Afghanistan and the defeat of the oppressors who had killed millions of Muslims, the legend about the invincibility of the superpowers vanished. Our boys no longer viewed America as a superpower. So, when they left Afghanistan, they went to Somalia and prepared themselves carefully for a long war. They had thought that the Americans were like the Russians, so they trained and prepared. They were stunned when they discovered how low was the morale of the American soldier. America had entered with 30,000 soldiers in addition to thousands of soldiers from different countries in the world. ... As I said, our boys were shocked by the low morale of the American soldier and they realized that the American soldier was just a paper tiger. He was unable to endure the strikes that were dealt to his army, so he fled, and America had to stop all its bragging and all that noise it was making in the press after the Gulf War in which it destroyed the infrastructure and the milk and dairy industry that was vital for the infants and the children and the civilians and blew up dams which were necessary for the crops people grew to feed their families. Proud of this destruction, America assumed the titles of world leader and master of the new world order. After a few blows, it forgot all about those titles and rushed out of Somalia in shame and disgrace, dragging the bodies of its soldiers. America stopped calling itself world leader and master of the new world order, and its politicians realized that those titles were too big for them and that they were unworthy of them. I was in Sudan when this happened. I was very happy to learn of that great defeat that America suffered, so was every Muslim. ...

Putting it all together, a powerful and influential “conservative hawk” pressured the president twelve years ago to withdraw American forces from an embattled nation with the net result being the emboldening of the most heinous terrorist organization that has ever threatened the United States. Now, that same “conservative hawk” is pressuring a different president to make what could end up being the very same mistake, but with potentially more dire consequences.

Is it any wonder that the mainstream media don’t want the public to know about this?

Noel Sheppard is an economist, business owner, and contributing writer



http://tinyurl.com/osb8q

[Sam Hill]

Thank you for all those links. But did you see what I mean about how his speech re Somalia seems to have been disappeared?

Similarly, there are no transcripts from the Today re his Somalia remarks.

At the risk of sounding paranoid, this happens so often. The damning things said or done by the Dems tend to disappear from the internet.

It's especially frustrating when a purportedly reputable site like Thomas can't turn up things they used to have.

[Sam Hill]

Yep, there is no doubt that Murtha led the charge to retreat from Somalia.

And what the 9/11 Commission report points out is that AQ was even behind the attacks there that brought down the helicopter.

So they considered it a complete and utter victory. And it (and Beirut) gave them proof of how easy it is to defeat the US.

And Murtha wants to prove that to them once again.

History might not repeat itself. But stupidity sure does.

[Sam Hill]

Thanks. I skimmed some of that.

But what I liked about this is that the OFFICIAL 9/11 Commission said the Somalia withdraw inspired Bin Laden.

And that they went on to say pulling out of Beirut did as well.

Jack is two for two.

[P-40]

The 9/11 Commission Report is full of fun stuff like that. The two staff monographs, available from the Commission's website, are a wonderful read also. And don't skip the endnotes or you miss a lot.

[OldFriend]

The media loves to use the 9/11 commission report against the President but never finds anything of interest that might be detrimental to their heroes on the left.

[OldFriend]

Murtha wants the troops deployed over the horizon.

Whatever that means!

The more he speaks the more unhinged he becomes.

[Sam Hill]

"The media loves to use the 9/11 commission report against the President but never finds anything of interest that might be detrimental to their heroes on the left."

How true!

You may or may not recall the paragraphs I posted from it wherein they said that Bill Clinton was paying off Al Qaeda with millions of dollars.

I never saw that get picked up as newsworthy anywhere.

[MizSterious]

The 9/11 committee could hardly have concluded otherwise, given what the head honcho terrorist himself said, not just in that fatwa, but in many of his other writings and speeches as well. He has nothing but contempt for the likes of Clinton & Murtha, despite their attempts at appeasement.

[Anti-Bubba182]

Below is an FR post of the remarks of Murtha. The Thomas Link doesn't work now on this post.

link

"http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r103:7:./temp/~r103cpDgH0:e123712:

REMOVAL OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES FROM SOMALIA (House of Representatives - November 09, 1993)

---

Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Speaker, let me just make a couple of points.

I expressed my opposition to our deployment to Somalia when it began. When I went to the White House, I expressed my concern to President Bush.

I said, `This is a mistake, we shouldn't deploy under these circumstances, and it's going to deplete the resources of the Armed Forces,' and I asked him how we were going to get out and when we were going to get out.

Mr. Speaker, he said, `I'll have these troops out by Inauguration Day.'

Well, Mr. Speaker, the United Nations was slow in its deployment to basically take over the U.S. role. The United Nations came to depend heavily on the United States. That was a mistake, no question about it. The administration has learned substantially from this and it has listened to our voices and our advice.

When I went to Somalia the first time, Mr. Speaker, my reservations remained the same. I told the new administration, when it came in, `We should get out of Somalia as quickly as possible,' and in the middle of July I said, `Get our troops out because this could deteriorate into a very tragic situation.'

I made a second trip to Somalia in October. I know the gentleman from California [Mr. Dornan] also went there. I talked to the Rangers about the October 3 incident. It was a bloody battle. The troops conducted themselves well. They fought valiantly in a congested urban environment.

The President has reassessed the situation. He called everybody in. He listened to what was suggested by the military commanders, and that was, `We need time, first of all, to put forces in place in order to protect our American forces.' They also stated that, because the United Nations has extremely limited logistics capability and poor communications and intelligence, time was needed for the United Nations to develop these functions which had been conducted almost exclusively by U.S. forces.

Now how are we to get out of there? General Bir, the U.N. commander, said, `It would be chaos, a debacle, a disaster if the United States pulled out too quickly. We have to have time,' and these are his words, `in order to replace the logistic support the United States has been providing.' Now how do we do that?

They have a plan. They are going to do that with a civilian operation. We have provided, in our conference report tomorrow, the authority to the Department of Defense to allow them to contract with a civilian authority to provide these administrative logistics type capabilities.

Not only that, but in the conference report we set aside a sense-of-Congress resolution that says: `In the future, before you get involved in these kinds of operations, have consultation with the Congress. Don't wait until there's a tragedy. Consult with the Congress beforehand.'

In working with the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Hamilton], and the gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums], and the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. McDade], and the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman], and all the other Members, we have tried to work out some kind of a reasonable process where Members of Congress are consulted, with all the experience in the House and in the Senate, before something like this happens.

But I have to say this:

One thing we have learned from Vietnam is that we cannot from the Halls of Congress dictate to the military the strategy for any kind of operation, but we have got to leave it up to the military to make the tactical onsite decisions.

On the ground, every military commander is saying, `I need until March 31.' The recommendation by General Hoar, who spent over 2 hours briefing me about what happened in that tragic event, was `I need until March 31, because I cannot attain our objectives any quicker. Even if he gets a protective buildup done within a month, it will take considerable time beyond that to phase our forces out in a reasonable manner and to establish adequate logistic administrative support to take care of the U.N. mission. Ambassador Oakley also told me he needed until March 31. I realize this is a nonbinding resolution, I realize the Congress wants to speak on this situation, and I think the administration has heard the objections. The administration came to a conclusion--March 31 is the earliest date we can complete our withdrawal.

Mr. Speaker, I would urge the Members to vote against the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman] and give the President an opportunity to get the troops out in an orderly manner as quickly as prudently possible."