War Will Begin Within Days

TONY BLAIR cleared the way yesterday for military strikes against Afghanistan within days by declaring that the Taliban would become an enemy in the battle against terrorism unless they handed over Osama bin Laden.

Standing in the Downing Street garden, he said that America and its allies had the power to do "very considerable damage" to the Taliban. "Military conflict there will be unless the Taliban change and respond to the ultimatum given to them," said Mr Blair.

As diplomats said that military action was likely to begin "within a week", Downing Street announced that Parliament would be recalled for one day on Thursday of next week. Political leaders had already indicated that MPs should be brought back only after action had started.

Mr Blair's ultimatum, delivered 24 hours after he briefed Iain Duncan Smith, the Conservative leader, and senior parliamentarians, was seen as preparing British and international opinion for hostilities.

The Taliban were further isolated yesterday when Saudi Arabia severed all relations with the regime. Last night, a Saudi official said that Afghan diplomats had been given 48 hours to leave the country.

This leaves only Pakistan maintaining diplomatic links with Kabul since the United Arab Emirates cut ties at the weekend. President Bush, whom Mr Blair visited last week and vowed to stand "shoulder to shoulder" with in the fight against terrorism, praised the Saudis' "wise step".

Only President Musharraf of Pakistan, the traditional backer of the Taliban, said that his country would maintain contact because "at least there should be one country who ought to be able to have an access to them".

In a message to the American people, the Taliban leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar, stepped up his defiance. He said the attacks on New York and Washington were to avenge US "cruelty" towards Muslim countries.

"The American people must know that the sad events that took place recently were the result of their government's wrong policies. Your government is perpetrating all sorts of atrocities in Muslim countries. Instead of supporting your government's policies you should urge your government to reconsider their wrong and cruel policies."

He added, without claiming to know who was responsible: "The recent sad event in America was the result of these cruel policies and was meant to avenge this cruelty."

Mr Blair said the Taliban knew what it had to do. If it stood in the way of bringing bin Laden to account, it would be "every bit our enemy" as bin Laden himself. "Our enemy's friend becomes our enemy too," he said in his strongest warning yet that the Taliban would be toppled unless it agreed to hand over bin Laden.

He described the Taliban as a regime "founded on fear and funded largely by drugs and crime" where poverty and illness were endemic and women's rights "non-existent".

Mr Blair emphasised the unity of the coalition lined up against Afghanistan. He said military action would be directed at the Taliban and not at the ordinary people of Afghanistan and promised that Britain would help efforts to deliver food to Afghan refugees to avert a winter crisis.

The Prime Minister called his unscheduled press conference after a day of non-stop diplomacy aimed at securing international and domestic political backing for military action. The most significant breakthrough came late on Monday with President Putin's announcement that Russia would share intelligence with the West and help the opposition Northern Alliance in northern Afghanistan.

In a historic address to the Bundestag in Berlin, Mr Putin yesterday sought to capitalise on his gesture by calling on the West to welcome Russia back to the diplomatic top table.

Mr Blair did not state when the ultimatum to the Taliban would run out nor does the Government expect a positive response. But it was meant to increase the pressure on the regime and provide justification for America and Britain to take military action.

"We have the power to do very considerable damage to the Taliban regime, and any action we take will be directed towards the regime, and not the ordinary people of Afghanistan," he said.

As the world lined up behind the coalition, Abdul Sattar, Pakistan's foreign minister, warned against governments giving military aid to the Taliban's Northern Alliance opponents. He said: "We must not make the blunder of trying to foist a government on the people of Afghanistan."

His comments were seen as reflecting concern in Pakistan that Iran, an old enemy of the Taliban, might, after yesterday's visit by Jack Straw, have a greater say in the future of Islamabad's old client state.

Recognising the delicacy of Gen Musharraf's position, Mr Bush did not call on Pakistan to follow Saudi Arabia's lead and instructed his officials to moderate previous talk about overthrowing the Taliban.

The president said he wanted to "make sure that Pakistan is a stable country and that whatever consequences may occur as a result of actions we may or may not take, is one that we do the best we can to manage".

He called on Afghan citizens disenchanted with Taliban rule to help the US pursue bin Laden but added that he was not interested in "nation-building" or supplanting regimes. "We're focused on justice and we're going to get justice. It's going to take a while probably but I'm a patient man. Nothing will diminish my will and my determination."

The Prime Minister attempted to calm concerns that terrorists might be planning biological or chemical weapons attacks on Britain after the head of the World Health Organisation warned governments to prepare for possible attacks. He said there was no specific threat and it was important not to be "alarmist" about such possibilities.

Labour confirmed that its annual conference in Brighton next week would be cut short, finishing on Wednesday to enable MPs to return to Westminster. Mr Duncan Smith reaffirmed his "full backing" for the Government's support for America's efforts to bring the perpetrators of the World Trade Centre and Pentagon atrocities to justice. "They were attacks we simply cannot allow to go unpunished," he said.

Italics and highlighting are my doing.

I'll admit to having been a Blair skeptic in days past, but have been converted to an admirer since 911. His moving remarks on the evening of President Bush's Address to Congress expressed genuine sympathy and determined resolve, recalling the great Sir Winston Churchill's words at Christmastime, 1941:

What kind of a people do they think we are? Is it possible that they do not realize that we shall never cease to persevere against them until they have been taught a lesson which they and the world will never forget?

They seem fitting today, nearly sixty years hence.

Afghanistan and the Taliban are practically incidental to our overall objectives in this war. They are a bunch of ignorant, mule-riding students armed with 20 year old stingers and leftover Soviet rifles. They simply have the misfortune of being obstinate and in our way.

I pray that there is a reason we are massing the largest military force since WWII in the region. Hitting the Taliban and taking out bin Ladin are good first steps, but we must turn our attention to Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya and any other states that harbor and support Islamicists.

Conservatives need to let Bush know that we will not be satisfied with another Powell "exit strategy."

I'm of two minds on this .... we hear all the calls for tolerance and peace and it seems like the President is toming down his rhetoric as well. I'm starting to wonder if we're going to do anything at all.

And then another part notices that the US military force arrayed is total overkill for the forces in Afghanistan. So that part is wondering just exactly how many countries are going to get hit in the opening day of the American riposte ? I'm hoping that every single one of the terrorist states gets glassed.

It's interesting to see the parallels between the leaders in Britain and th US today and 60 years ago. In WWII, the British had a conservative Prime minister while the US had the most leftist president it had ever had up to that time. Today the political alignments is just the opposite. While Blair's economics are not particularly leftist compared with previous Labour governments, his party has gone pretty far out on the cultural left. President Bush tends to be on the conservative side of most issues both economic and cultural.

Perhaps the cross-alignment of political power between the US and Britain will result in a stronger alliance than if both were conservative or both liberal.

but we must turn our attention to Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya and any other states that harbor and support Islamicists.

Oh, I'm sure we'll talk them all to death. Our first response to Osama should have been an ICBM in the vicinity of his hang out. That would have turned the countries you mentioned into blubbering fools. So far, we still look like a Clinton America. Bush, hurry the heck up, damn the torpedos. Renaming the battle was ultimate PC. Osama must be cackling his guts out.

I am glad the Brits are on board. I also hope that no one targets them. Just as before WW2, they have disarmed, and the NRA and its members may not send extra guns and hand loaded ammo to them this time.

We must never forget the stakes in this fight.

An American or European city will be attacked with a weapon of mass destruction by the Islamicists in the next decade if we do not completely gut our enemies. This may mean taking out heads of state, weapons manufacturing plants, terrorists, and armies. As Rumsfeld has reminded us a few times, nothing should be considered "off the table."

Our response is not about revenge or even justice. It is about protecting civilization from the barbarians.

Ditto, Ditto, Ditto. You reflect my sentiments on another thread....

Afghanistan is nothing more than a hideout, a pirate's cove. It's purpose is to give cover and deniability for the governments who sponsor, train and direct terror against the west. That part of the world has long considered the culture and practices of the west to be an abomination. Rice and medicine will not solve that. We MUST, beginning with Iraq, strike in the most visibly effective means possible all states known to sponsor these groups,eliminating both infrastructure and government.

To those that say this will only increase hate, so be it. Let them hate us. Without weapons, strategy, financing and coordination they can not translate that hate into terror on US soil.

To those that say this will only increase hate, so be it. Let them hate us.

Well spoken. Cicero thought much the same:

Oderint dum metuant

"Let them hate us, so long as they fear us."

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
~~ John Stuart Mill ~~

Your submissions please:
AMERICA ATTACKED: Online FReeper library -
Post your links to videos, photos, graphics, etc. HERE

Ulmo, you are incorrect. The President has authority to undertake retaliation for the September 11th attacks from the Congress. Also as commander in chief he has authority to defend the US, and by implication retaliate against unprovoked attacks. He may also undertake other military actions when needed. We did this in the 1790 in the Quasi War with France, in the early 1800s versus the Barbary Pirates, the anti-slavery patrols off of Africa, the Boxer Rebellion expedition of 1900, etc.

I'm hoping that every single one of the terrorist states gets glassed.

"Glassed."

Your agenda is not unknown, but we cannot possibly accomplish it without declaring ourselves the mortal enemies of muslims everywhere. Very well; if we are truly to attempt a war of anihilation on a billion muslims (most of whom have no power at all to influence their rulers), for whom and what will we be fighting? I ask only for information.

As far as actually glassing ALL of the middle east that would be irrational anger speaking. However, we MUST make our response to this act of war so terrible that no one will even consider attacking the US.

As far as making enemies of a billion muslims, that is not the goal. The goal is to keep America safe from a WMD type attack. So long as those countries that are not eradicated believe that will WILL nuke at the slightest HINT of a WMD attack they will keep their populaces in line from doing so.

I have read the koran and their religion is simply NOT compatible with Western civilization, unless there is an Islamic reformation similar to the scale of the Protestant and Catholic reformation there will be global war, it's a question of when and not if.

Take out Medina or perhaps the Dome of the Rock (which was never mentioned in the koran) to show these people that we are SERIOUS about terrorism. They keep one holy city and we live in peace. If they continue, so be it.

Take out Medina or perhaps the Dome of the Rock (which was never mentioned in the koran) to show these people that we are SERIOUS about terrorism.

I happen to share your views about the dangers of Islam and the indispensability of achieving its reform. But the sentiments expressed above are at variance with your claim that you do not seek jihad with Muslims at large.

Let's be reasonable, limiting our efforts to an enemy we can find and destroy.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.