"Outsmarting" The Terrorists By Being Incredibly Stupid? (Barry Rubin Alert)

Rubin Reports | 01/06/2010 | Barry Rubin

[goldstategop]

Here’s my usual disclaimer: I would love to be able to stop criticizing the Obama Administration but it keeps saying and doing things that shock and surprise me or—if you want to put it this way—live up to my worst expectations.

I’m sitting on a U.S. army base briefing officers along with a high-ranking State Department official who works on the Middle East. At one point, he gets a quaver in his voice and starts talking about the Arab-Israeli conflict making quite clear which side he’s on. Sounding scared he says: “While a lot of problems in the world can bring trouble only the Arab-Israeli conflict can get you and your families killed.”

The officers look disgusted. He is fitting precisely their stereotype of a cowardly diplomat. Abandon Israel and save your life and that of your children, is his message. Oh, and this is after September 11 which makes the statement even more ridiculous.

This kind of blatant cowardice is usually better concealed. It more often occurs in regard to intellectuals facing challenges like the “Danish cartoons.” But it is glimpsed at times in a sort of strategic fearfulness, a refusal to do what’s in one’s interest lest someone might get mad about it.

John Brennan is the president’s advisor on counter-terrorism and may be the dumbest of all Obama’s foreign policy appointments. Brennan is apparently ex-CIA and he has yet to persuade me that he has any understanding whatsoever about terrorism. He’s the guy who said that Hizballah wasn’t a terrorist group because it ran candidates for parliament and had lawyers among its members.

Now in a television interview, he stated that the Guantanamo prison should be closed because al-Qaida has used its existence in order to make propaganda.

A few hours later, President Barack Obama repeated this talking point in the course of discussing reinforced controls on airplane passengers:

"We will close Guantanamo prison, which has damaged our national security interests and become a tremendous recruiting tool for al-Qaida," Obama said. "In fact, that was an explicit rationale for the formation of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula."

What? Is his understanding really so minimal that he thinks the formation of a revolutionary movement to seize power in Iraq and overthrow the Saudi government took place because the United States maintained a prison in Cuba? Is this man who proclaims himself the great understander of other cultures so ethnocentric that he thinks, so to speak, that “everything is about us?”

Does Obama have any sense at all of what al-Qaida uses as recruiting tools, of their ideology and goals? And would closing Guantanamo deprive al-Qaida of a recruiting tool, would it hurt that group? Isn’t it obvious that, if anything, al-Qaida would proclaim this as a victory: Out of fear of us, the camp was closed! We have prevented the oppression of Muslims! We can make the great Satan tremble and give in! Now, that’s a recruiting tool!

I actually find Michael Scheuer, another former CIA guy, more congenial than Brennan though he also has some terrible ideas. Scheuer views anti-American terrorism as solely caused by U.S. support for Middle Eastern regimes.

The reality is that there are three causes: U.S. policies; hatred of the American culture and society not because they care what goes on inside the United States but because they believe it will ultimately transform their own societies through both power and seductive example; and a desire to prove their strength and increase their support base by humiliating the world’s leading power.

Scheuer’s main credential is that he headed the Usama bin Ladin task force at the CIA which, one would think, would mark him as a failure whose ideas didn’t work at all. On the positive side, he doesn’t just focus on hating Israel but also blames U.S. support for all the Arab regimes as well. Of course, if the United States stopped this support, these regimes would more likely be overthrown by radical Islamists (not necessarily al-Qaida) and then we could see if the Islamists stopped hating and attacking America. (I’d bet they’d step up attacks.)

But Scheuer can’t help revealing his special hatred of Israel, even when this contradicts his own thesis. In a CNN interview he said that Americans must decide whether they want their sons to die in Iraq and Yemen in order to defend Israel. Funny, I thought they were there to protect the Iraqi and Yemeni governments—which are not even friendly toward Israel—and American interests. I guess I'm the onlyone who remembers how much this sounds like Nazi propaganda in World War Two: Americans! This is just the Jews' war and not yours!

And then he makes an even more amazing statement when asked how America can stop terrorist attacks on itself:

“Ultimately we have to find a way to dissuade them from focusing their anger on us and persuade them to focus their anger at what they themselves believe to be the real enemy the governments that govern them and oppress them and Israel.”

Of course, U.S. support for Great Britain made Nazi Germany look at America as an enemy, and the same goes for U.S. support for China and imperial Japan, and U.S. support for dozens of countries and the USSR. But the United States backed these other states because it wanted to block victory for a hostile force which would use these other places, if taken over, as a base to destroy U.S. interests and to hit America more effectively.

How would someone have been treated if they advocated betraying these allies so as to plead more effectively from aggressive tyrannical movements: Please leave us alone. We promise not to inconvenience you in your march to world conquest!

But Scheuer gives us just this imaginative proposal. Urge al-Qaida and other terrorists to attack U.S. allies—which they can hit a lot harder and damage a lot more—rather than America. (Ironically, this is the reverse of what the Saudis and other Arab regimes try to do.) Of course these groups will do both!

Moreover, what happens after al-Qaida or other Islamists seize power from these abandoned regimes? No doubt they will fondly remember that the United States stopped opposing them and be good buddies of America, right? (Warning: previous sentence is sarcastic.)

Actually, though, this is what was going on during the pre-bin Ladin era. Radical Islamist groups did focus on attacking regimes in the region—especially Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia—but were soundly defeated by the governments, except in Lebanon. Facing this stalemate, bin Ladin proposed attacking America directly. This is what led to September 11.

The basic problem is that Scheuer, and Brennan and Obama, too, basically think that the Islamist assault is something that can be made to go away by some clever stratagem: flatter Muslims; move away from Israel, abandon Israel, show more sensitivity; try captured terrorists in a U.S. court; or something else. Yet the beginning of wisdom is to understand that this is a challenge parallel to that from Communism and fascism.

The idea that al-Qaida and other terrorists can be bought off by selling out all the more moderate Arab states and Israel or they can be confounded by closing Guantanamo illustrates ignorance on a stupendous scale. The point of U.S. strategy should not be to “deny” al-Qaida talking points—it will never lack for them no matter how U.S. policy changes—but defeating it, making it impossible for the group to operate, blocking its attacks by effectively targeted defensive measures.

Have all the most basic lessons from centuries of statecraft been so thoroughly forgotten by those who govern in the West?

[goldstategop]

There are ignoramouses running US foreign policy. They believe by selling out America's allies and bringing radical anti-American Islamists to power in the Middle East, they will make America more beloved there? As Barry Rubin points out, the basic lessons of statecraft appear to have been forgotten by American leaders.

More here:

"Outsmarting" The Terrorists By Being Incredibly Stupid?

The Obama Administration has no appreciation of the dangerous world in which we live. Closing Gitmo won't change that picture.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find only things evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelogus

[colorado tanker]

These are the same people who thought we should deal with the Cold War by selling out our allies and surrenduring to the Soviet Union. SSDD.

[sodpoodle]

Is the French Foreign Legion still recruiting/still in business?

[radioone]

“Guantanamo prison, which has damaged our national security interests and become a tremendous recruiting tool for al-Qaida”.....I’ll never be convinced that this was anything other than a DNC talking point to bash GWB spouted by Democrats, and then repeated over and over again by the LSM.

[OneWingedShark]

Yes, it is.

[sodpoodle]

French Foreign Legion currently nin Afghanistan; Dec 15, 09

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/Afghanistan/article6956601.ece

great article!

[2ndDivisionVet]

Could the Obama administration do a worse job of fighting terrorism? Talk about “manmade disasters”: Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is one.

First, she insisted that the system “worked” in the case of would-be airline bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.

But how could it have worked? On Christmas Day, he paid cash for a one-way ticket while carrying no luggage or passport. Yet he nearly took down a plane full of people, who live only because his bomb malfunctioned.

To top it all, the guy was on the terrorist watch list, and his own father called in to report him as a probable terrorist.

Finally, after two public appearances, Secretary Napolitano admitted the system failed.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs’ greasy spin is that with 500,000 people on the watch list, you can’t spot them all. That’s a poor excuse.

How many of us have been notified by a bank or credit union that our bank card may have been compromised when a purchase seemed out of line? If banks can watch out for defrauders, can’t Homeland Security keep track of watch-list suspects in a similar way?

Even worse, Mr. Obama wants to try this man as a common criminal. So we pay to give him lawyers instead of letting the military interrogate him to help prevent future attacks.

This administration is not unprecedented—not to anyone who’s seen the Keystone Kops.

[Sleeping Freeper]

"This administration is not unprecedented—not to anyone who’s seen the Keystone Kops."

At least the Keystone Kops were somewhat entertaining....

[libstripper]

How many of us have been notified by a bank or credit union that our bank card may have been compromised when a purchase seemed out of line? If banks can watch out for defrauders, can’t Homeland Security keep track of watch-list suspects in a similar way?

BINGO!!! I got a call from my credit card company yesterday because of a series of charges I made in the last two days totaling a little over $1,000, each of them similar to charges I'd previously made. Previously, I've gotten calls about unusual charges, some of which were not mine.

All the government needs is conduct profiles, if it's concerned about ethnicity of challenged travelers. In this case the would be bomber would have gotten nailed on several counts, an analytical process far simpler than what the credit card companies use every day.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***These are the same people who thought we should deal with the Cold War by selling out our allies and surrenduring to the Soviet Union. SSDD. **

The motto “BETTER RED THAN DEAD!” comes to mind.

[CORedneck]

I read the article. I agree. I also saw something about people who volunteer with the Israel Defense Forces. Please look at Sar-El.

French Foreign Legion currently nin Afghanistan; Dec 15, 09

> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/Afghanistan/article6956601.ece

great article!

[SJackson]

Middle East and terrorism, occasional political and Jewish issues Ping List. High Volume

If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.

..................

[Tolik]

Barry Rubin:

... Does Obama have any sense at all of what al-Qaida uses as recruiting tools, of their ideology and goals? And would closing Guantanamo deprive al-Qaida of a recruiting tool, would it hurt that group? Isn’t it obvious that, if anything, al-Qaida would proclaim this as a victory: Out of fear of us, the camp was closed! We have prevented the oppression of Muslims! We can make the great Satan tremble and give in! Now, that’s a recruiting tool!

... The reality is that there are three causes:

• U.S. policies;
• hatred of the American culture and society not because they care what goes on inside the United States but because they believe it will ultimately transform their own societies through both power and seductive example; and
• a desire to prove their strength and increase their support base by humiliating the world’s leading power.

... Of course, U.S. support for Great Britain made Nazi Germany look at America as an enemy, and the same goes for U.S. support for China and imperial Japan, and U.S. support for dozens of countries and the USSR. But the United States backed these other states because it wanted to block victory for a hostile force which would use these other places, if taken over, as a base to destroy U.S. interests and to hit America more effectively.

How would someone have been treated if they advocated betraying these allies so as to plead more effectively from aggressive tyrannical movements: Please leave us alone. We promise not to inconvenience you in your march to world conquest!

... The basic problem is that Scheuer, and Brennan and Obama, too, basically think that the Islamist assault is something that can be made to go away by some clever stratagem: flatter Muslims; move away from Israel, abandon Israel, show more sensitivity; try captured terrorists in a U.S. court; or something else. Yet the beginning of wisdom is to understand that this is a challenge parallel to that from Communism and fascism.

The idea that al-Qaida and other terrorists can be bought off by selling out all the more moderate Arab states and Israel or they can be confounded by closing Guantanamo illustrates ignorance on a stupendous scale. The point of U.S. strategy should not be to “deny” al-Qaida talking points—it will never lack for them no matter how U.S. policy changes—but defeating it, making it impossible for the group to operate, blocking its attacks by effectively targeted defensive measures.

Have all the most basic lessons from centuries of statecraft been so thoroughly forgotten by those who govern in the West?

Nailed It!

This ping list is not author-specific for articles I'd like to share. Some for the perfect moral clarity, some for provocative thoughts; or simply interesting articles I'd hate to miss myself. (I don't have to agree with the author all 100% to feel the need to share an article.)

I will try not to abuse the ping list and not to annoy you too much, but on some days there is more of the good stuff that is worthy of attention.

You are welcome to browse the list of truly exceptional articles I pinged to lately. Updated on November 15, 2009.  on  my page.
You are welcome in or out, just freepmail me (and note which PING list you are talking about).

Besides this one, I keep 2 separate PING lists for my favorite authors Victor Davis Hanson and Orson Scott Card.  

 

[Yardstick]

*Bump*