War on Terror Criticized for Lack of Focus

The Sept. 11 commission report offers a broad critique of a central tenet of the Bush administration's foreign policy -- that the attacks have required a "war on terrorism."

The report argues that the notion of fighting an enemy called "terrorism" is too diffuse and vague to be effective. Strikingly, the report makes no reference to the invasion of Iraq as being part of the war on terrorism, a frequent assertion of President Bush and his top aides.

"The first phase of our post-9/11 efforts rightly included military action to topple the Taliban and pursue al Qaeda. This work continues," the report said. "But long-term success demands the use of all elements of national power: diplomacy, intelligence, covert action, law enforcement, economic policy, foreign aid, public diplomacy, and homeland defense. If we favor one tool while neglecting others, we leave ourselves vulnerable and weaken our national effort."

So that's what the partisan joke known as the 9/11 commission intended to do. First they highlight the fact that their joke of a report blames neither President Bush nor Clinton (even though they have Clinton on tape admitting he refused bin Ladin when the Sudan offered him to Clinton). They do this to win back the credibility they lost on their partisan witch hunt for Rice, Bush, and Ashcroft during the hearings.

So after having made it clear, on the first day the report comes out, that they blame neither President, by the second day they make sure the partisan liberal media starts highlighting the fact that the report generally criticizes Bush's handling on the war on terror. (Of course they don't criticize anything specificlly because they have nothing to criticize.)

The Dems on the committee really duped the moronic Republicans on that committee by coming up with something that sounds good but means nothing since Bush is using diplomacy as well as the military in the war on terror. They are basically criticizing the name, "war on terror," and making it seem as if they are criticizing Bush's methods.

The Republicans on that committee were real idiots, but Bush is at fault for chosing these morons and letting the Dems chose a partisan like Ben-Veniste and a Clintonite Gorelic who was part of the Clinton adminstration and had a huge confict of interest.

And wasn't the 9/11 commission only supposed to be looking into 9/11, not the whole war on terror?

I don't know much about computers, but almost every time you click on the article, a Kerry ad pops up complimenting the content of the article.

...they blame neither President, by the second day they make sure the partisan liberal media starts highlighting the fact that the report generally criticizes Bush's handling on the war on terror [waged after only 8 months in office]...

And they don't criticize Clinton's lack of a "War on Terror" deserving of the name after 8 years in office.I noticed that Pelosi, ever the partisan on 9/11, took note of the commission's conclusions, but not without the gratuitous preface: "9/11 took place on President Bush's watch."

...by coming up with something that sounds good but means nothing...

The concept of a "Failure of Imagination" really does mean nothing. In fact, it's a line taken from that Earth to the Moon series by (I think) HBO of a few years ago. The line was based on Congressional hearings into the Apollo I disaster. The HBO story line may have been apocryphal or scripted from the actual hearings. I don't know.

I suppose we could argue that the government was really at fault in its imaginings because we didn't have anyone at the head of some power center that was insane enough to know that the Arabs had hired kamikazes.

I wonder if the commission appointed by the Taliban faulted a "Failure of Imagination" on the part of the Taliban in failing to imagine an American President with the character necessary to rout them from power less than one third of a year after the 9-11 attack. Perhaps not, although I may just be too sane to understand that ruling a cave might be as valuable as ruling a country...or perhaps I just have a failure of imagination.

I wonder if the press can imagine that some of the true failings of the government were due to the gutting of the intellegence community by the likes of John Kerry.

I can imagine the outcry we will hear if Bush tries to push for some cabinet level post of Intellegence and then appoints the likes of Ashcroft to be Secretary. Oh, and didn't the commission recommend the proper coordination of intellegence authorities such as the CIA and FBI, the very coordination that the Democrats worked so hard for so many years to prevent?

I may buy the report to see where it takes us, but will do so understanding that, at least for Democrats, the report is the accomplishment because if you talk about solutions, you don't need to actually do anything simply because you talked about it.

They also warn that the 9-11 report should not be used for political purposes, and then they turn around and state that they believe in it so much that THEY want to make it an issue in this campaign. They are all "on the road" now promoting their "book". They keep calling each other "Chairman" and "Committee Member". When does their "job" end?? These spotlight seeking, self promoting, "has been" political hacks need to get off the payroll and go home. The show is over.

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.