Comments on: The Osama tape

By: Jim

Jim — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

All makes sense Sophie – except for this; why haven’t we heard from him for so long?
If he’s surviving and being supported well enough to make videos then he’s missed some real opportunities to taunt and divide.
He’s smart enough to understand the effect this will have on American voters – surely he’d prefer Kerry – so why now?

By: Jim

Jim — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

By: mark

mark — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Bush’s “war on terror” (not “terrorism”, note, but “terror”) has been a joke so far. Kerry may be as ineffective and stupid as Bush; he may be less stupid but just as ineffective; or he may be better than Bush. Either way, OBL has a range of options from “not caring” to “preferring Bush’s drive to give OBL more foot soldiers”.

Unless, of course, I’ve misunderstood you, Jim. Apropos the thread about irony, saying something along the lines of “OBL’s behaviour does not gel with reality as the RWDBs perceive it. What is wrong with OBL?” is quite brilliant from a certain POV.

By: sophie

sophie — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Jim, I think OBL hasn’t made a videotape for a while because of several factors, probably the most simple being that since he made the last one, (I think a month or two after 9/11), when was sat with Al-Zawahiri against a rock wall, he’s a/realised there are many clues in videos which may help to pinpoint your location–there was lots of blether all over the place about how the CIA was looking at the geology, flora etc as shown in that tiny bit of rock; b/he has been in disguise and did not want anyone to know what he actually looked like during that time. There’s an interesting passage in Bodansky’s book The Secret History of the Iraq War(which I blogged about earlier)which suggests that in may 2003 OBL and Al-Z were in Teheran, as guests of the regime there and that they had come as Pashtun tribesmen, with trimmed beards and, shaved heads. In this latest video, OBL’s beard is long and grey again–as it takes 12-18 months to grow a long beard back, perhaps it’s as simple as that! (He did release a number of audio tapes in that time, though). Also, there are other strategic reasons–OBL is a patient man and has shown this repeatedly. Plus there are reasons of Al qaeda politics–it’s no coincidence that this tape has surfaced only a short time after Zarqawi’s testament of allegiance to OBL, and his renaming of his band of murderers as an Al-Q offshoot. I don’t think that OBL and co give a damn who’s American president–it is America per se they hate. OBL is using those pop-liberal themes merely because he’s picked up on the idea it’s a symptom of American division, and a good thing to exploit..
Mark, I don’t see how one can say that Bush’s ‘war on terror’ has been stupid or ineffective–there have been no more attacks on America, or attacks in Britain or Australia; governments from Saudi Arabia to Indonesia are taking terrorism much more seriously, Muslim electors in places such as Indonesia and malaysia are rejecting Islamism, the so-called ‘arab street’ has certainly not exploded in revolt. Even Iraq can be seen as part of that(though I supported the war principally because of what Saddam had done to his people–after reading books like Kanan Makiya’s 1991 testimony, Cruelty and Silence, I fail to understand how one could not believe that ousting Saddam was a long-overdue necessity)–there is definite evidence linking Iraq to all kinds of terrorist groups, including Al Qaeda, well be fore the war–see Bodansky’s other book, Bin Laden, the man who declared war on America’, which was published years before the war and 9/11, for direct links betwen Iraqi intelligence and Qusay Hussein, with Al Qaeda. I think where Bush’s strategy comes unstuck is a/not taking account of the complexities of the Middle East, due to a long period of indifference towards it, and failure of both intelligence gathering and not enough Arab specialists in the CIA etc–the big threat before, after the Cold War, seemed to be shaping up to be China, in the eyes of the Clinton administration and the very new Bush one. b/there is a real problem with Iran and I think that is going to be very very hard to deal with. It is a much harder nut to crack than Iraq, and there’s no way they want to confront it directly, esp after the Iraq experience, but if something isn’t done, Iran will becomemore and more dangerous. Subtlety has to be used; who knows if this administration–or a Kerry one–could really tackle it?

By: Nick

Nick — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Well, i think the effort to grab Bin Laden has been slapdash at the best…lessons learnt by the Ruskies in Afghan mts. obviously taken into account.
But IMHO it benefits the neo-cons in the long run to keep this easily-identifiable ‘bad guy’ around as an abstract justification to keep the war on terrorism going…UBL is their ‘bogeyman’.

Also, provides excuse to push hard on Pakistan, keep Musharraf in their camp for military & corporate strategic purposes.

By: Mark Bahnisch

Mark Bahnisch — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Sophie, you’re right about ignorance of Middle-East history and culture and the need for a subtle touch. The Bush administration, in its devaluation of the State Department’s perspective and expertise, kicked an own goal, and they’ve tried belatedly to fill the gap in knowledge they themselves created. A friend of a friend of mine, who is a US diplomat, has just advanced his career markedly through a posting to Iraq – because he is one of the very few Arabic speakers left in the State Department. (He’s now in Paris which I suspect is a much more pleasant assignment). Similarly, the CIA purged a lot of their Arabic-speaking Middle East experts because the administration didn’t like the advice they were getting.

By: mark

mark — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Can it still count as “ignorance” if they know full well they’re wrong, but choose to listen to ignorant yes-men (and woman) instead?