Wednesday, August 20, 2003

Ben Sargent Nails Baylor!



Wow! A basketball player at Baylor University is dead. Baylor University is a member of the Big 12 Conference. Another of my favorite comics is Tank McNamara. Jeff Millar and Bill Hinds have created a fictional ESU (Enormous State University) in Tank McNamara's world. Baylor is attempting to compete with 11 ESUs. Someone (my Lubbock chum, Kevin) referred to Baylor as the Vanderbilt of the Big 12. (Vanderbilt is the sole private school among the ESUs of the Southeast Conference: Alabama, Auburn, Kentucky, Georgia, and you get the picture; unfortunately, Baylor is no Vanderbilt.) Baylor needs to get out of the Big 12. Baylor needs to fire the president of the university (The buck stops here, said Harry S Truman.) Baylor is in the Big 12 because the governor of Texas when Baylor was invited to join the Big 12 was Ann Richards (Baylor alum). I esteem Ann Richards, but Baylor had no business in the Big 12; her political efforts in behalf of Baylor University were misguided. In the end, the basketball program under (former) Coach Dave Bliss was corrupt from top to bottom. What does Baylor profit if it sells its soul? What would Jesus do? He sure as hell wouldn't have turned a blind eye to Dave Bliss! W will probably establish his Presidential Library (one book?) at Baylor University. W (now a born-again Methodist) could choose SMU in Dallas, but I think W's Texas home in Crawford, TX probably tilts the scale to Baylor. Bush I's Library is on the campus of Texas A&M University in College Station. W could always send Dave Bliss to Iraq to coach the Iraqi men's basketball team. The options are endless.

Ben Sargent Strikes Again!



W, the Environmental President! If this be (fair & balanced) treason, make the most of it!

Welcome To W-World!

Unintended consequences. Be care what you wish for, you might get it. The Bushies wanted to wage war on Iraq to end terrorism. Instead, they converted Iraq into a terrorist battleground. Our troops are caught in the middle. As this Harvard expert on religious militants says, We must make clear that the war wasn't an American plot to steal Iraq's oil and denigrate Islam, as the extremists argue. We have not demonstrated either allegation to be false to anyone in Iraq (and certainly not me). We can't get the electricity going in Baghdad and we can't keep it going in Ohio. Can anyone out there spell Q-U-A-G-M-I-R-E? If this be (fair & balanced) treason make the most of it!


[x NYTimes]

August 20, 2003

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR

How America Created a Terrorist Haven

By JESSICA STERN


Yesterday's bombing of the United Nations headquarters in Baghdad was the latest evidence that America has taken a country that was not a terrorist threat and turned it into one.

Of course, we should be glad that the Iraq war was swifter than even its proponents had expected, and that a vicious tyrant was removed from power. But the aftermath has been another story. America has created — not through malevolence but through negligence — precisely the situation the Bush administration has described as a breeding ground for terrorists: a state unable to control its borders or provide for its citizens' rudimentary needs.

As the administration made clear in its national security strategy released last September, weak states are as threatening to American security as strong ones. Yet its inability to get basic services and legitimate governments up and running in post-war Afghanistan and Iraq — and its pursuant reluctance to see a connection between those failures and escalating anti-American violence — leave one wondering if it read its own report.

For example, the American commander in Iraq, Gen. John Abizaid, has described the almost daily attacks on his troops as guerrilla campaigns carried out by Baathist remnants with little public support. Yet an increasing number of Iraqis disagree: they believe that the attacks are being carried out by organized forces — motivated by nationalism, Islam and revenge — that feed off public unhappiness.

According to a survey this month by the Iraq Center for Research and Strategic Studies, nearly half of the Iraqis polled attribute the violence to provocation by American forces or resistance to the occupation (even more worrisome, the Arabic word for "resistance" used in the poll implies a certain amount of sympathy for the perpetrators). In the towns of Ramadi and Falluja, where many of the recent attacks have taken place, nearly 90 percent of respondents attributed the attacks to these causes.

Why would ordinary Iraqis not rush to condemn violence against the soldiers who liberated them from Saddam Hussein? Mustapha Alani, an Iraqi scholar with the Royal United Services Institute in London, gave me a possible explanation: even in the darkest days of the Iran-Iraq war, most Iraqis (other than Kurds and Marsh Arabs) did not have to worry about personal security. They could not speak their minds, but they could count on electricity, water and telephone service for at least part of the day. Today they fear being attacked in their bedrooms; power, water and telephones are routinely unavailable. As Mr. Alani put it, Iraqis today could could care less about democracy, they just want assurance that their daughters won't be raped or their sons kidnapped en route to the grocery store.

Blaming the violence on isolated Baath loyalists was perhaps more plausible when the violence was centered in the Sunni heartland. But the recent riots in the southern Shiite city of Basra, and the sabotage of a major oil pipeline in the Kurdish north, make clear that other regions may not be peaceable indefinitely.

Shiites widely supported the operation to remove Saddam Hussein, but they are furious about what they see as American incompetence since the war. This set the stage for religious extremists. Moktada al-Sadr, a vitriolic cleric in Basra, says he has recruited a 5,000-man Shiite army to take on the occupiers. In public he is urging his followers to engage in "peaceful" resistance, but some have told Western reporters that they are prepared to carry out "martyrdom operations" if and when they receive orders to do so.

In addition, in the run-up to the war, most Iraqis viewed the foreign volunteers who were rushing in to fight against America as troublemakers, and Saddam Hussein's forces reportedly killed many of them. Today, according to Mr. Alani, these foreigners are increasingly welcomed by the public, especially in the former Baathist strongholds north of Baghdad.

As bad as the situation inside Iraq may be, the effect that the war has had on terrorist recruitment around the globe may be even more worrisome. Even before the coalition troops invaded, a senior United States counterterrorism official told reporters that "an American invasion of Iraq is already being used as a recruitment tool by Al Qaeda and other groups." Intelligence officials in the United States, Europe and Africa say that the recruits they are seeing now are younger than in the past. Television images of American soldiers and tanks in Baghdad are deeply humiliating to Muslims, even those who didn't like Saddam Hussein, explained Saad al-Faqih, head of Movement for Islamic Reform in Arabia, a Saudi dissident group in London. He told me that some 3,000 young Saudis have entered Iraq in recent months, and called the war "a gift to Osama bin Laden."

Hassan Nasrallah, head of the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah, told a crowd of 150,000 in a March religious observance that the United States was trying to create a "tragedy for humanity and to spread chaos in the world" and predicted that the people of Iraq and the region would "welcome American troops with rifles, blood, arms, martyrdom."

The occupation has given disparate groups from various countries a common battlefield on which to fight a common enemy. Hamid Mir, a biographer of Osama bin Laden, has been traveling in Iraq and told me that Hezbollah has greatly stepped up its activities not only in Shiite regions but also in Baghdad.

Most ominously, Al Qaeda's influence may be growing. It has been linked to attacks as far apart as Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and Morocco. One suspect in yesterday's attack is Ansar al-Islam, a Qaeda offshoot whose camps in Northern Iraq were destroyed early in the war. In recent weeks American officials acknowledged that members of the group had slipped into Iraq from Iran, had begun organizing in Baghdad and were suspected of plotting bombings, including the Aug. 7 attack on the Jordanian Embassy. In addition, Mr. Mir reported that Al Qaeda was carving out new training grounds in the border region between Iraq and Syria.

While there is no single root cause of terrorism, my interviews with terrorists over the past five years suggest that alienation, perceived humiliation and lack of political and economic opportunities make young men susceptible to extremism. It can evolve easily into violence when government institutions are weak and there is money available to pay for a holy war. America is unlikely to win the hearts and minds of committed terrorists. After some time on the job, it is hard for them to imagine another life. Several described jihad to me as being "addictive."

Thus the best way to fight them is to ensure that they are rejected by the broader population. Terrorists and guerrillas rely on getting at least some popular support. America's task will be to restore public safety in Iraq and put in place effective governing institutions that are run by Iraqis. It would also help if we involved more troops from other countries, to make clear that the war wasn't an American plot to steal Iraq's oil and denigrate Islam, as the extremists argue.

The goal of creating a better Iraq is a noble one, but a first step will be making sure that ordinary Iraqis find America's ideals and assistance more appealing than Al Qaeda's.


Jessica Stern, a lecturer at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, is author of Terror in the Name of God: Why Religious Militants Kill.

Copyright © 2003 The New York Times Company

It's Saudi Arabia, Stupid!

W's favorite columnist (next to Molly Ivins) — Maureen (the Cobra) Dowd — makes sense. Iraq is now overrun with Al Qaeda fighters. The Iraqi borders are the most porous in the Middle East. Where do most of these wackos come from? Saudi Arabia! 3000 Saudi men are missing? Where the hell are they? Duh! All we get from Crawford, TX is babble. Rummy and Robert Strange McNamara. Rummy would write an apology if he were alive 20 years from now. Unfortunately, before he is done, we are going to lose thousands of young people for nothing. Maureen Dowd says that we have to slug it out. If we must slug it out, we should do it where it will do the most good. On to Riyadh! If this be (fair & balanced) treason make the most of it!



August 20, 2003

OP-ED COLUMNIST

Magnet for Evil

By MAUREEN DOWD

WASHINGTON

The Bush team has now created the very monster that it conjured up to alarm Americans into backing a war on Iraq.

Rushing to pummel Iraq after 9/11, Bush officials ginned up links between Saddam and Al Qaeda. They made it sound as if Islamic fighters on a jihad against America were slouching toward Baghdad to join forces with murderous Iraqis.

There was scant evidence of it then, but it's coming true now.

Since America began its occupation, Iraq has become the mecca for every angry, hate-crazed Arab extremist who wants to liberate the Middle East from the "despoiling" grasp of the infidels.

"Increasing numbers of Saudi Arabian Islamists are crossing the border into Iraq, in preparation for a jihad, or holy war, against U.S. and U.K. forces, security and Islamist sources have warned," The Financial Times said yesterday, quoting a Saudi dissident who noted that Saudi authorities are concerned that "up to 3,000 Saudi men have gone 'missing' in the kingdom in two months."

One of the things the terrorists in Baghdad and Jerusalem blew up yesterday was the credibility of the Panglossian Bush version of what's happening in the Middle East.

The administration's optimism was exposed as a fantasy when the two efforts it holds most dear — the reconstruction and democratization of Iraq, and advancing the Palestinian-Israeli peace process — both went up in smoke yesterday, literally.

Before the Iraq war, the Bush team inflated the threats to America; since the war, the Bush team has deflated the threats to America.

In yet another spun-up government document on Iraq, the White House listed 100 ways that things were going great in the 100 days we've been on the scene. The report burbled with gimcrackery about the "10 signs of better infrastructure" — days before an oil pipeline and then a water pipeline were blown up — and about soccer balls and science textbooks.

"Most of Iraq is calm, and progress on the road to democracy and freedom not experienced in decades continues," it said. "Only in isolated areas are there still attacks."

Even the Bush people, who tend to look at excruciatingly difficult problems and say no prob, were shaken by yesterday's carnage, which delivered a terrible truth: just because we got Uday and Qusay, Iraqi militants are not going to stop blowing up Westerners. Even if we get Saddam, the resistance will no doubt keep at it, hoping the dictator will enjoy the carnage from paradise.

"The dynamics have really changed," said an administration official on the reconstruction team. "Now we're dealing with a guerrilla war, not terrorism."

Osama bin Laden was inspired to attack us partly by his hatred of the American military presence in Saudi Arabia. Now foreign zealots from Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Syria, enraged about the American military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan, are slipping over the Iraqi border to help Saddam loyalists.

Bush officials, who before the war also overdramatized the connection between Saddam and the Ansar al-Islam militants in northern Iraq, have now become spooked about hundreds of fighters coming back from Iran to attack Americans.

The Qaeda and Ansar zealots, along with old Baath soldiers and new foreign recruits, are intent on keeping Iraq in anarchy, even as Afghanistan also slips back into chaos, with a reconstituted Taliban fighting machine killing 90 in the last month.

The democracy dominoes are not falling as easily as Paul Wolfowitz and other neocons had predicted.

It's hard to believe that this is just a few "dead-enders," as Rummy says. It's hard to believe that it's going to be easy for America to get control of the streets. It's hard to believe the occupation is not going to last a very long time. It's hard to believe that liberal institutions will flourish where basic security is a distant dream.

Some United Nations experts have been saying that we have only half the number of troops we need to subdue Iraq, and Senator John McCain and others agreed yesterday that we need more reinforcements.

The countries that could help us out with more troops won't do it unless Iraq is turned over to the U.N. And Rummy & Co., always doctrinaire, doesn't want turn Iraq over to those wimpy guys with blue helmets.

So where are we? We can't leave, and we can't stay forever. We just have to slug it out.

Copyright © 2003 The New York Times Company