Posted on 12/31/2002 3:09:11 AM PST by kattracks
Capitol Hill (CNSNews.com) - One homeland security advisor to the Bush administration charged Monday that the U.S. could not rely on defensive measures to gain victory in the war against terrorism. Other experts warned that terrorists will attempt another mass casualty attack against the U.S. in 2003.
Dr. David Kay is a counter-terrorism expert with the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies (PIPS), which sponsored a seminar Monday on the success of U.S. efforts to respond to terrorism and to deal with future threats. The chief U.N. nuclear weapons inspector in Iraq following the Gulf War, Kay believes the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks provoked an important change in the attitudes of government officials.
"I think 2002 ... was the tipping point when the metaphor for dealing with terrorism changed from 'terrorism is a crime' and the appropriate institutions for dealing with it are the police, law enforcement, and the judiciary," Kay said, "to 'terrorism is war,' and the appropriate tools for dealing with terrorism as war are completely different."
Such a shift in mindset is absolutely essential, Kay warned, for dealing with a threat he believes is eminent.
"Although we have often talked in the past ... about weapons of mass destruction or mass disruption, chemical, biological," Kay recalled, "I think 2003 will see terrorists finally making offensive use of technology to do us great harm."
Because of the potential for that threat to become a reality, Paul Bremer, chairman and CEO of Marsh Crisis Consulting, said the U.S. must fundamentally change its primary response to terrorist threats.
"This war cannot be won on the defensive," Bremer said. "No matter how good we make our homeland security, there is virtually no way we can defend all of the targets that terrorists can come after."
A member of the Bush administration's Homeland Security Advisory Council, Bremer served as ambassador-at-large for counter terrorism under President Reagan after spending 23 years with the U.S. Diplomatic Service. In 1999, House Speaker Dennis Hastert appointed him chairman of the National Commission on Terrorism.
Bremer believes terrorists' motivations have changed over the past 20 years from attracting attention for their causes to exacting retribution and revenge for perceived wrongs. That, combined with the potential for access to weapons of mass destruction, means the U.S. must abandon any ideas of responding to terrorism as a law enforcement problem.
"Wait and respond is no longer acceptable," Bremer explained. "We have to move from 'wait and respond' to 'detect and destroy.'"
Because potential targets are unlimited, terrorists would only need to seek out a "weak link" in U.S. security to launch a successful attack. That, Bremer said, leaves the administration with only one option.
"We have to go on the offensive," he said. "To be blunt, we have to kill the terrorists before they come here and kill us."
Michael Swetnam, CEO and chairman of the board of PIPS, offered his assessments of U.S. efforts to accomplish that and other counter-terrorism goals in 2002.
"I think that we can give ourselves a full bevy of mixed grades in our war against terrorism," he said.
Swetnam - co-author of Usama bin Laden's al-Qaida: Profile of a Terrorist Network , and a member of the technical advisory group to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence - gave the U.S. the following "grades" for its counter-terrorism efforts:
- A to A-minus: Assembling world coalitions in the fight against terror. Swetnam noted aid provided by Syria, Yemen and Pakistan, nations that have traditionally harbored terrorists;
- B to B-minus: Efforts to fight al Qaeda. While the U.S. has disrupted the organization, seized some of its money, and captured or killed many of its leaders, more then three-fourths of the group's leadership is alive and attempting to regroup;
- C-minus: Reconstructing domestic civil defense. While the federal government has created a Department of Homeland Security, state and local governments have, Swetnam believes, been given little direction and no money;
- D: Addressing the root causes of terrorism. Swetnam believes the U.S. is losing the propaganda war to bin Laden and other Muslim extremists who promote hatred of Americans;
- F: Addressing shortcomings of the intelligence community: Swetnam believes the problems in U.S. intelligence agencies, which allowed the 9/11 attacks to be planned and executed without detection, still exist;
"We have a mixed grade this first year of our war on terrorism," Swetnam concluded. "Unfortunately, we will probably have many years yet to improve upon these grades before this war on terror is fought to the point where we can feel comfortable again."
E-mail a news tip to Jeff Johnson.
Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.
Bump!
And for those who think this was a good thing, there's the Democratic Underground.
The point is that "great" presidents in the past have acted outside the law and have evaded the principles of our Constitution any number of times.
Behold the FReeper who says that Bill Clinton was our greatest President.
200 years from now, I want their children's children's children's children to cower and cringe in fear whenever they hear the sounds of jet engines overhead because their legends tell of fire from the sky.
I want them to hide in dark caves and holes in the earth, shivering with terror whenever they hear the roar of diesel engines because the tales of their ancestors talk about metal monsters crawling over the earth, spitting death and destruction.
I want their mothers to be able to admonish them with "If you don't behave, the Pale Destroyers will come for you", and that will be enough to reduce them to quivering obeisance.
I want the annihilation to be so complete that their mythology will tell them of the day of judgment when the stern gods from across the sea .. the powerful 'Mericans .. destroyed their forefathers' wickedness. (Original created by BlueLancer, Free Republic ... 13 September 2001)
Yes they do. Years ago when things were differant, we gave them to them. There are no records of the WMD being destroyed.
Yes, you're right, they do. I just heard the best explanation yesterday for why we absolutely know they have them.
Because when Rumsfeld was ME Envoy years ago, he was the one who sat down with Saddam and gave him WMD and either bio or chem (can't remember now) weapons. At the time, we had to make sure that Saddam won the war with Iran, so this is why we know what he's got.
And why it's even more important that we get them away from him now. We gave them to him, and now we're going to take them away.
Lately, however, the distinction between a law abiding Muslim and a terrorist is becoming dimmer. Pretty soon, all Muslims will be targets.
If another attack comes, I wouldn't want to be caught in a mosque.
You won't strike fear into the hearts of people who are willing to die for God.
What we have to do is find and kill them, and that will neutralize their supporters, and the so called moderate Muslims who are waiting to see how the battle goes, before jumping on the bandwagon. - Tom
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.