The Terrorist and The Dictator
Porter Goss, Director of the CIA, had an interesting conversation with Time Magazine. The 1st question out of the gates was about the guy who planned the 911 attacks: Osama bin Laden.
The response raised questions itself (bold by me):
"WHEN WILL WE GET OSAMA BIN LADEN? That is a question that goes far deeper than you know. In the chain that you need to successfully wrap up the war on terror, we have some weak links. And I find that until we strengthen all the links, we're probably not going to be able to bring Mr. bin Laden to justice. We are making very good progress on it. But when you go to the very difficult question of dealing with sanctuaries in sovereign states, you're dealing with a problem of our sense of international obligation, fair play. We have to find a way to work in a conventional world in unconventional ways that are acceptable to the international community."
So Saddam Hussain's problem wasn't he was an evil ruler; it was that he was a dictator. If he was a terrorist like bin Laden - with no permanent home and an amorphous army - he would have been able to go his merry way and continue to torture and maim and kill. Because as a terrorist, he can go to a friendly nation that the U.S. wants to keep good relations with and hide without having to worry about soldiers blowing him up.
Instead, he was a dictator (living in his own country) who liked to torture, maim and kill. And that made him an easy target. And because he was an easy target, we went after him instead of bin Laden. I like to think of it as going up against Dr. Doom instead of Magneto; both are evil men, but you know where Doom is and outside his own country not as much as threat.
Marvel anaolgies aside, as long as bin Laden hides out in countries we don't want to tick off, he and his posse can recruit members to be insurgents in places like Iraq.
The response raised questions itself (bold by me):
"WHEN WILL WE GET OSAMA BIN LADEN? That is a question that goes far deeper than you know. In the chain that you need to successfully wrap up the war on terror, we have some weak links. And I find that until we strengthen all the links, we're probably not going to be able to bring Mr. bin Laden to justice. We are making very good progress on it. But when you go to the very difficult question of dealing with sanctuaries in sovereign states, you're dealing with a problem of our sense of international obligation, fair play. We have to find a way to work in a conventional world in unconventional ways that are acceptable to the international community."
So Saddam Hussain's problem wasn't he was an evil ruler; it was that he was a dictator. If he was a terrorist like bin Laden - with no permanent home and an amorphous army - he would have been able to go his merry way and continue to torture and maim and kill. Because as a terrorist, he can go to a friendly nation that the U.S. wants to keep good relations with and hide without having to worry about soldiers blowing him up.
Instead, he was a dictator (living in his own country) who liked to torture, maim and kill. And that made him an easy target. And because he was an easy target, we went after him instead of bin Laden. I like to think of it as going up against Dr. Doom instead of Magneto; both are evil men, but you know where Doom is and outside his own country not as much as threat.
Marvel anaolgies aside, as long as bin Laden hides out in countries we don't want to tick off, he and his posse can recruit members to be insurgents in places like Iraq.
Comments