April 17, 2008

Bush’s missing bin Laden plan

To hear the White House tell it, protecting the United States and its interests against al Qaeda is the government’s top priority. It makes revelations like these all the more alarming.

The Bush administration doesn’t have a comprehensive strategy for eliminating Osama bin Laden’s sanctuary in Pakistan’s tribal region and preventing the region from being used for launching terrorist attacks on the United States, the investigative arm of Congress said Thursday.

President Bush and his senior lieutenants frequently claim that eradicating the threat that bin Laden’s al Qaida terrorist network poses to United States and its allies is their top national-security priority.

But in a scathing report, the Government Accountability Office said there was no plan that “includes all elements of national power — diplomatic, military, intelligence, development assistance, economic and law enforcement support — called for by the various national-security strategies and Congress.”

The administration’s own counter-terrorism policy and the mission of the National Counter-Terrorism Center mandate that officials have a “comprehensive strategy for meeting U.S. national-security goals” in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan. The GAO, however, found that no such strategy currently exists.

“It is appalling that there is still no comprehensive, interagency strategy concerning this critical region, and this lack of foresight is harming U.S. national security,” said Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., the chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, which requested the report.

At Democracy Arsenal, Max Bergmann added that the GAO report “may be the most damning condemnation of the Bush administration’s counter-terrorism efforts.”

The report goes on to say that the Bush administration has failed to develop any plan to address the Al Qaeda threat. Worse, the report finds that Al Qaeda is now able to attack the United States and represents the “most serious” threat to this country.

The report’s opinion of the Bush administration efforts speaks for itself: “The United States has not met its national security goals to destroy the terrorist threat and close the safe haven in Pakistan…”

The same report added: “al Qaeda is now using the Pakistani safe haven to put the last element necessary to launch another attack against America into place, including the identification, training, and positioning of Western operatives for an attack. It stated that al Qaeda is most likely using the FATA to plot terrorist attacks against political, economic, and infrastructure targets in America ‘designed to produce mass casualties, visually dramatic destruction, significant economic aftershocks, and/or fear among the population.'”

And the Bush administration doesn’t have a plan to address this.

It is, however, willing to throw money at the Pakistani military, which isn’t going into the Federally Administered Tribal Areas.

I can’t wait to hear the White House’s spin on this one.

 
Discussion

What do you think? Leave a comment. Alternatively, write a post on your own weblog; this blog accepts trackbacks.

19 Comments
1.
On April 17th, 2008 at 2:31 pm, Ed said:

Should this really surprise us? Have these nitwits ever done anything other than enrich their friends at our (the taxpayers) expense?

The incompetence of this administration will be legendary.

2.
On April 17th, 2008 at 2:39 pm, Lukeness said:

This is not surprising in any sense but one: I would actually think at this point they would be formulating serious plans to capture bin Laden as an October surprise to get McCain elected.

3.
On April 17th, 2008 at 2:41 pm, jb said:

Is it really in Bush’s interest to capture Osama? We don’t have another boogyman readily available.

4.
On April 17th, 2008 at 2:42 pm, The Commander Guy said:

Bush really is not all that concerned about UBL. He said so himself.

Irak on the other hand …… well on second thought he doesn’t seem all together concerned about it either.

5.
On April 17th, 2008 at 2:45 pm, Danp said:

jb (3):We don’t have another boogyman readily available.

Yes we do. It’s called Al Qaeda in Iran.

6.
On April 17th, 2008 at 2:48 pm, Doctor Biobrain said:

Hey, they have a hard enough time ensuring that their comprehensive plan to wipe-out Al Qaeda in Iran Iraq doesn’t actually eliminate them as a threat. They don’t have the time to actually wipe-out the real Al Qaeda, which would surely be far more difficult. One comprehensive plan at a time, please.

7.
On April 17th, 2008 at 2:50 pm, SteveA said:

Vote for McCain, he will find him……eventually.

8.
On April 17th, 2008 at 2:52 pm, Doctor Biobrain said:

Hey, the Iran reference in my comment was supposed to be struck-thru, like all the cool people do. It showed up that way in the preview, but the comment doesn’t reflect that. How lame.

For the record, I stupidly used the “del” html code, instead of the “strike” code I used here. See if it works this time. Again, that should be Al Qaeda in Iran Iraq in my comment.

9.
On April 17th, 2008 at 2:56 pm, Ed said:

Y’know, once again, this kind of revelation (the sort of which never really gets considered for too long by an American public more interested in Brittany Spear’s custody trial) once again explodes the myth of Republicans as ‘effective managers of our military.’

It’s all smoke and mirrors. Republicans are incompetents. They’ve failed at everything they’ve put their collective hands to since 1994 except, that is, perpetuating the lie that they’re more supportive of the US military and are somehow much better at dealing with national security than the Dems.

10.
On April 17th, 2008 at 3:01 pm, Dale said:

Jeez I can’t wait until someone competent (Obama) takes over the presidency from Dilbert.

11.
On April 17th, 2008 at 3:02 pm, Danp said:

We also have to deal with Al Qaeda in Venezuela, and we may have to liberate Mexico and Norway to make sure the terrorists don’t get control of our their natural resources. Pakistan? Not such a problem.

12.
On April 17th, 2008 at 3:02 pm, ml johnston said:

Dana Perino will be sent to fudge the answers to the questions from the media.

13.
On April 17th, 2008 at 3:03 pm, Memekiller said:

Wearing lapel pins is a plan. Not any better or worse than other plans we’ve implemented, but a plan, nonetheless.

14.
On April 17th, 2008 at 3:10 pm, anonymensch said:

I wish I shared Steve’s faith that the White House will even be pushed to “spin” on this. Surely the press corpse will instead ask the Idiot King to comment on last night’s oh-so-enlightening debate.

15.
On April 17th, 2008 at 3:12 pm, Steve said:

I disagree. Bu$h has a perfectly viable bin Laden plan. He points at whoever he doesn’t like, and invents linkages to bin Laden. It’s called the Cheney maneuver, and it has served him so well that it’s now being mimicked by the ridiculously stupid, inept antique who’s running against Obama for president (no, you fools—not Hillary; McSame—although they are kind of hard to tell apart these days)….

16.
On April 17th, 2008 at 3:28 pm, libra said:

Damn… I knew I forgot something… Shoulda buried GAO or, leastways, de-balled it somehow, long ago. But being President is hard work, so many details to keep track of…

17.
On April 17th, 2008 at 4:07 pm, Dee Loralei said:

In last Friday’s ABCtv interview, the other thing being ignored by the press “no not that Bush approved of torture) was that Bush and the Fed governemnt “knw that the next attack on the US is being planned for and will be carried out by AQ in Pakistan. Not in AQI or AQIr.

Thank God they spent the entire weekend and every Sunday talking heads show and last nights debate discussing neither of these things.

Jack Nichlson was right “Americans can’t handle the truth.”

18.
On April 17th, 2008 at 4:37 pm, beep52 said:

Would someone please ask what the Bush administration would do differently if they wanted alQ to attack us again?

19.
On April 18th, 2008 at 6:21 pm, B. Cobb said:

Six and a half years later, the man believed to be responsible for the greatest crime ever committed against the United States is still at large.

Not only does the White House refuse to mention his name, they’ve also spent $3 trillion and 4000+ American lives distracting the American people from the real threat.

The possibility that G.W. Bush (whose family is, after all, good friends with the bin Laden family) is protecting Osama bin Laden is sounding less and less like a “conspiracy theory” and more and more like “a theory”.