AL QAEDA'S 2ND FRONT

New York Post ^ | 6/04/02 | Dick Morris

[kattracks]

June 4, 2002 -- LIKE the agents provocateur that anti-union bosses would send into the ranks of labor pickets to foment violence, al Qaeda and other Muslim terrorist groups are trying to start jihads at each end of the Islamic world - against the Jews in the Middle East and the Hindus on the subcontinent.

[xm177e2]

1) War will help them radicalize Islamic regimes by inflaming racial and religious passions. If Pakistan fights a war (especially a nuclear one) against an "infidel" nation like India, the militant Muslims are likely to increase support from the 10 percent to 15 percent of recent elections to a near majority. With this increased pressure, they might be able to take over yet another country - Pakistan - and this one has nuclear weapons.

A couple problems with this.

1) Pak is not a democracy (evidence: the sham yes/no election Musharraf held a few weeks ago), so if there is an Arab war with Israel, Musharraf will stay in control.

2) if Pak loses a nuclear war with India, it will cease to exist as an independent country, or at least an independent country with nukes.

So either way, hardliners don't get nukes.

[FightThePower!]

His logic makes sense. However, if Pakistan is radioactive, I don't see how it would be a very good base. ;)

[Mitchell]

However, if Pakistan is radioactive, I don't see how it would be a very good base. ;)

Unfortunately, it would make a very good base for terrorists. Such people plan on a shortened life span anyway; why would they care about some radioactivity? They thrive on disorder, on weak governments that can be bullied and on petty officials who can be bought. A defeated Pakistan, with extreme Islam on the rise in the populace and with the "moderate" Musharraf government defeated and discredited, would be an ideal location for terrorist bases.

And there are missiles with atomic warheads there. This would be a major attraction.

[Mitchell]

Ping.

[FightThePower!]

I hate to say this, but I would say that if Al Qaeda was able to cause enough disruption to take over a country with Nuclear weapons we would have no choice but to attack with a first strike.

[Mitchell]

I hate to say this, but I would say that if Al Qaeda was able to cause enough disruption to take over a country with Nuclear weapons we would have no choice but to attack with a first strike.

Who actually controls the nuclear weapons in Pakistan right now?

[pariah]

Time is Saddam's key ally. Once he goes nuclear, the United States will not be able to stop him.

Correction: it will just require the killing of many innocents to stop him, and that would be very regrettable, but not prohibitive. Nuclear installations can be detected by satellite and hit with cruise missiles. It's the biological weapons that worry me. Dickie is right about Al Qaeda trying to buy time for Saddam though. Best to take him out asap.