WASHINGTON - Undaunted by the difficult war in Iraq, President Bush reaffirmed his strike-first policy against terrorists and enemy nations on Thursday and said Iran may pose the biggest challenge for America.
In a 49-page national security report, the president said diplomacy is the U.S. preference in halting the spread of nuclear and other heinous weapons.
"The president believes that we must remember the clearest lesson of Sept. 11: that the United States of America must confront threats before they fully materialize," national security adviser Stephen Hadley said.
"The president's strategy affirms that the doctrine of preemption remains sound and must remain an integral part of our national security strategy," Hadley said. "If necessary, the strategy states, under longstanding principles of self defense, we do not rule out the use of force before attacks occur, even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy's attack."
Titled "National Security Strategy," the report summarizes Bush's plan for protecting America and directing U.S. relations with other nations. It is an updated version of a report Bush issued in 2002.
In the earlier report a year after the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush underscored his administration's adoption of a pre-emptive policy, marking the end of a deterrent military strategy that dominated the Cold War.
The latest report makes it clear Bush hasn't changed his mind, even though no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq.
"When the consequences of an attack with weapons of mass destruction are potentially so devastating, we cannot afford to stand idly by as grave dangers materialize. ... The place of pre-emption in our national security strategy remains the same," Bush wrote.
The report had harsh words for Iran. It accused the regime of supporting terrorists, threatening Israel and disrupting democratic reform in Iraq. Bush said diplomacy to halt Tehran's suspected nuclear weapons work must prevail to avert a conflict.
"This diplomatic effort must succeed if confrontation is to be avoided," Bush said.
Now, you're probably thinking this story doesn't have anything to do about Iraq, but it does. This story pretty much affirms that Bush is going to continue "staying the course," regarding the occupation and the disastrous war in Iraq. Nothing is going to change in Iraq. And what is more, the president is starting to set his sights on Iran--care to place your bets as to when the administration is going to invade Iran? The Bush White House is already starting to build its PR case for invading Iran--Iran supports al Qaida terrorists, Iran is building nuclear weapons, Iran is arming the terrorists in Iraq. I can't even comprehend the magnitude of a disaster to the U.S. if the Bush White House launches an attack, or invades Iran.
Now here's this second story off Yahoo News, titled 'Operation Swarmer' Expected to Last Days:
BAGHDAD, Iraq - U.S. forces and Iraqi troops launched what the military described as the largest air assault since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion Thursday, targeting insurgent strongholds north of the capital.
The U.S. military said the raid, dubbed Operation Swarmer, was aimed at clearing "a suspected insurgent operating area" northeast of Samarra and was expected to last several days. The Pentagon said 41 people were arrested but it was not clear if suspected insurgents put up any resistance.
Residents in the targeted area said there was a heavy U.S. and Iraqi troop presence and large explosions could be heard in the distance. The U.S. military said there was no firing or bombing from the air and the source of the blasts was not known.
"More than 1,500 Iraqi and coalition troops, over 200 tactical vehicles, and more than 50 aircraft participated in the operation," the military statement said.
The U.S. command in Baghdad said it was the largest number of aircraft used to insert troops and the largest number of troops inserted by air, although larger numbers of troops overall have been involved in previous operations.
Gen. John Abizaid, chief of the U.S. Central Command, told reporters at the Pentagon the operation was not related to any anticipated outburst of sectarian violence in the area or a significant departure from previous military actions.
Abizaid said it was aimed at al-Qaida in Iraq and other insurgent cells although there was "no specific high-value target that I know of."
"I wouldn't characterize this as being anything that's a big departure from normal or from the need to prosecute a target that we think was lucrative enough to commit this much force to go get," he said.
Hoshyar Zebari, the Iraqi interim foreign minister, said the attack had been necessary to prevent insurgents from forming a new stronghold such as they had established in Fallujah, west of Baghdad.
"After Fallujah and some of the operations carried out successfully in the Euphrates and Syrian border, many of the insurgents moved to areas nearer to Baghdad," Zebari said on CNN. "They have to be pulled out by the roots."
Samarra, 60 miles north of Baghdad, was the site of a massive bombing against a Shiite shrine on Feb. 22 that touched off sectarian bloodshed that has killed more than 500 and injured hundreds more, threatening to push Iraq into civil war.
It is a key city in Salahuddin province, a major part of the so-called Sunni triangle where insurgents have been active since shortly after the U.S.-led invasion three years ago. Saddam Hussein was captured in the province, not far from its capital and his hometown, Tikrit.
In recent months U.S. forces have routinely used helicopters to insert troops during operations against insurgent strongholds, especially in the Euphrates River valley between Baghdad and the Syrian border. U.S. warplanes are always in the air, ready to strike targets under direction from troops on the ground.
Thursday's assault was launched just hours before Iraq's new parliament was sworn in Thursday, with parties still deadlocked over the next government, vehicles banned from Baghdad's streets to prevent car bombings and the country under the shadow of a feared civil war.
Reading this article, I'm struck by the unnamed paraphrase that really showed the futility of the American pacification program in Vietnam--we had to destroy the village in order to save it. And what are we doing here in Iraq, but sending a large force of troops, helicopters, fighters, bombers, tanks, and who-knows-what-else into a supposed insurgent stronghold of Samarra. I"m sorry, but Operation Swarmer is going to be another loss for the U.S. Oh, it won't be a tactical loss--the American forces will be able to go where ever they want, and practically do whatever they want. They will march into Samarra, but they won't find much in terms of a terrorist stronghold, since the terrorists will melt back away into the countryside, and the city. They will hide--they will not openly engage against the superior American firepower. And once the Americans leave Samarra, the terrorists will go back in, and continue their low-tech warfare of bombings, planting roadside explosives, attacking Iraqi police forces, and such.
Just as in Vietnam, this is a war we cannot win.
No comments:
Post a Comment