Meanwhile, back at the War on Terror

While the world turns its eyes toward Iraq, as initial cruise missile attacks have the weird feel of a false start on a sprint, it’s important to remember that other war: the one on terror.

While the world turns its eyes toward Iraq, as initial cruise missile attacks have the weird feel of a false start on a sprint, it’s important to remember that other war: the one on terror.
There’s a major offensive going on in Afghanistan at the moment, with about 1,000 U.S. troops raiding villages in southeastern Afghanistan searching for members of al Qa’ida. Members of the 82nd Airborne took part in the raid, the largest since Operation Anaconda about a year ago.
But there’s been another casualty in the War on Terror: Rand Beers, the National Security Council official in charge of the war on terror resigned this week. While a spokesman for the NSC said it was for personal reasons, various sources in the intelligence community say there is widespread worry that Iraq is hurting the terror war.
“Hardly a surprise,” said one former intelligence official. “We have sacrificed a war on terror for a war with Iraq. I don’t blame Randy at all. This just reflects the widespread thought that the war on terror is being set aside for the war with Iraq at the expense of our military and intel resources and the relationships with our allies.”
This is one of my major oppositions to going to war with Iraq. (Well, I guess that’s moot now.) I’ve not been opposed to _war_ because it’s immoral or innocents will die — although dead civilians is definitely an issue. War is sometimes justified and necessary, as in Afghanistan, and innocents die in a war. That’s part of what makes it so horrible.
I’m opposed to _this_ war with Iraq because I felt it wasn’t in the national interests of the United States. It will make the war on terror harder by pushing moderate Muslims into grumbling hostility and already hostile Muslims into the arms of Osama bin Laden. In short, I think invading Iraq will lead to more terrorism rather than less. Both in the short term and in the long term.
And now the question of whether the world will be safer after Saddam is gone will be answered. I don’t think we’re going to like the outcome.

2 thoughts on “Meanwhile, back at the War on Terror”

  1. Resignations beginning?

    United Press International: Top White House anti-terror boss resigns WASHINGTON, March 19 (UPI) — The top National Security Council official

  2. Meanwhile, back at the War on Terror

    Meanwhile, back at the War on Terror While the world turns its eyes toward Iraq, as initial cruise missile attacks have the weird feel of a false start on a sprint, it’s important to remember that other war: the one…

Comments are closed.