Wash Post: Iraq War Kept US Safe

NewsMax ^ | 5/1/05 | Carl Limbacher

[wagglebee]

In a stunning admission, the Washington Post said Sunday that President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq deserves at least some of the credit for the fact that terrorists have not been able to launch another 9/11-style strike against America.

"A broad cross section of counterterrorism officials believes al Qaeda and like-minded groups, in part frustrated by increased U.S. security measures, are focusing instead on Americans deployed in Iraq," the paper said, "where the groups operate with relative impunity." Bush administration officials have long argued that taking the war to the terrorists' doorstep was the best way of drawing fire away from the homeland, while "draining the swamp" of global terrorism's most notorious players.

Conventional media wisdom held, however, that the war had actually boosted al Qaeda recruitment - generating an even greater threat to the U.S. than would have otherwise been the case.

Intelligence officials cited by the Post, however, now say just the opposite has happened.

"Reports of credible terrorist threats against the United States are at their lowest level since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001," according to U.S. intelligence officials and federal and state law enforcement authorities cited by the paper.

Even in the Middle East, the Bush administration's offensive strategy seems to have produced results from a national security standpoint.

With their ability to communicate and move about freely limited by tight U.S. and Pakistani surveillance, Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenant, Ayman al Zawahiri, have both recently urged Abu Musab al Zarqawi, chief of al Qaeda operations in Iraq, to organize attacks on the U.S. homeland.

But Zarqawi himself remains pinned down by U.S. forces in and around Baghdad, with almost weekly reports of skirmishes where he's just barely eluded capture.

Unnoted by the Post, the war has also eliminated a key safe haven for global terrorism - Iraq had for decades played host to some of the most notorious perpetrators of attacks against American civilians.

* Abu Nidal, whose terror organization is credited with dozens of attacks that killed over 400 people, lived in Baghdad from 1999 till August 2002, when he was found shot to death in his state-supplied home.

* Abu Abbas, who masterminded the 1985 hijacking of the Achille Lauro cruise ship, during which wheelchair-bound American Leon Klinghoffer was pushed over the side to his death - died in U.S. custody after being captured in Baghdad.

* Khala Khadar al-Salahat, who was a top Palestinian deputy to Abu Nidal and who reportedly furnished Libyan agents with the Semtex explosive used to blow up Pan Am Flight 103, was captured in Baghdad in 2003.

* Zarqawi himself, who ran an Ansar al-Islam terrorist training camp in northern Iraq before the U.S. invaded in March 2003 - was treated for a broken leg at a state-run Baghdad hospital in the 1990s.

While Zarqawi and many in his inner circle remain at large, counterterrorism experts now believe they're too busy with operations in Iraq to plan and execute anything like another 9/11.

[wagglebee]

I have a feeling this Washington Post writer will either be unemployed or writing about middle school car washes by this time next week.

[AZHua87]

In a stunning admission, the Washington Post said Sunday that President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq deserves at least some of the credit for the fact that terrorists have not been able to launch another 9/11-style strike against America.

"A broad cross section of counterterrorism officials believes al Qaeda and like-minded groups, in part frustrated by increased U.S. security measures, are focusing instead on Americans deployed in Iraq," the paper said, "where the groups operate with relative impunity." Bush administration officials have long argued that taking the war to the terrorists' doorstep was the best way of drawing fire away from the homeland, while "draining the swamp" of global terrorism's most notorious players.

So I wonder how the CROW tastes over at the Wash Post? Stringy and tough I hope.

[Semper Paratus]

Sounds like a Young Republican intern got access to the editorial database just before publication.

Will await for the profuse apologize Monday.

[EBH]

It's all Bush's fault. {:-)

[AZHua87]

Yep!

[risk]

It's a long stretch of the imagination to suggest that they're too busy in Iraq to launch attacks here. WaPo can't get the good things right while trying to make up for lost ground.

[Deetes]

I feel so much better now that the comPost has made this clear. To them a big DUH !!!!! ;)

[pa mom]

Wow, I think I just saw Arnold Ziffel fly by my window . . .

[LibWhacker]

Yet I'll bet the Post's writers will uniformly screech like banshees when and if we go into Iran.

[injin]

I would like to know the original Washington Post story URL
for this item from News Max

[wagglebee]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/30/AR2005043000704.html

[mark502inf]

We are on the strategic offensive. We have taken the initiative and the enemy is reacting to us instead of the other way around.

[AmericanArchConservative]

awesome "gotcha" for us!

[MississippyMuddy]

Excellent text !

Jeff

[KC_Conspirator]

Oddly enough, there are more than a few at the Post who thought that deposing Saddam was a good thing.

[Reeses]

In France a new Airbus 380-virgins-in-heaven target peaks from behind a hangar door.

You're welcome.

[Theresawithanh]

Thanks for the link to the WaPo article, very interesting read.

[Americanexpat]

Thanks for the article. These people that say the terrorists are operating in Iraq with impunity still don't get it. Our guys and the Iraqis are killing and capturing them everyday.

[FairOpinion]

U.S. Sees Drop in Terrorist Threats.
Al Qaeda Focusing Attacks in Iraq and Europe, Officials Say

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/30/AR2005043000704.html


Same article also at:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002259135_terror01.html?syndication=rss