Nicely said. I hope you are right, and that we will ease ourselves out of that corner of the world. Even if Pakistan has a nuclear arsenal — and I personally have my doubts — that is no reason for staying.
“Bid Laden’s death is not, as Peter Beinart suggests in the Daily Beast, the end of the war on terror. Unfortunately a shadowy underworld of ‘Islamic’ terror groups continue to pose an unprecedented threat around the world. Unlike anarchist and communist terror groups in the past, they can kill hundreds and even thousands of people at a time, and they have the ability to disrupt commerce and the free flow of people around the world. The threat that these groups could acquire chemical, biological or nuclear weapons of mass destruction is still very much alive; we live in an era in which non-state actors can wield levels of violence on a scale once restricted to states.”
Beautifully put (and on the whole a superb article). But for me the supreme wonder and irony of it all is that these unprecedentedly noxious ideologies should have come to thrive in, of all eras, the past two decades – our very own globally enlightened post-Cold War period! Surely you’d have thought we were much more modern than all that?
As for jihadism wanting to bring back (as some argue) the Middle Ages or some other past Golden Era, perhaps there are serious gaps in my knowledge of history. But frankly my guess is you could search the Record of Mankind from front to back, and for sheer indiscriminate murderousness – for pure “god is hate” rage and contempt of humankind simply for being human – you’d be hard-pressed to find anything to compare with the madness of al-Qaeda & Sons. Indeed I often ask myself if they aren’t one of the many seamy undersides – or unforeseen side-effects? – of today’s global “hypermodernity.”
I can even imagine Osama having the last and best laugh – especially were his legacy ever able to convince us to DENATURE ourselves politically. God forbid we Westerners should finally exchange what’s left of our representative democratic institutions for some highly corporatized, informationally insatiable mass surveillance state. I may be grossly over-reacting, but stranger things have happened . . .
Maybe you can comment on the notion that there is a “deep state” in Pakistan — defined by Wikipedia as “influential anti-democratic coalitions within the political system composed of high-level elements within the intelligence services (domestic and foreign), military, judiciary,”etc — which really runs the country? It was striking that Musharraf, the military dictator until 2007, publicly objected to Osama’s killing as a violation of Pakistani sovereignty.
Well stated @ 2, J.R. Yankovic!!!
There’s always a new Mahdi.
“May God have mercy on us all” indeed. It occurs to me that the debate of proper burial for OBL vs. boiled-in-lard is irrelevant. God will do with this mutt as He will, three clean sheets or no.
For some reason this reminds me of an old story. The date is 1953, and Stalin has just died. A man asks his priest who he was praying for at such length, and the priest says, “Stalin”. The man explodes, “Stalin? He wasn’t even religious!”. The priest replied, “He is now!”.
“Maybe you can comment on the notion that there is a ‘deep state’ in Pakistan — defined by Wikipedia as ‘influential anti-democratic coalitions within the political system composed of high-level elements within the intelligence services (domestic and foreign), military, judiciary,’ etc — which really runs the country? It was striking that Musharraf, the military dictator until 2007, publicly objected to Osama’s killing as a violation of Pakistani sovereignty.”
Ditto for me regarding Professor Mead’s comments on the subject. Meanwhile a few of my own for what they’re worth: I think “deep state” is definitely the operative word here – at least as Wikipedia defines it. As for Musharraf, I suppose we’re learning the final worth of certain “allies.” And as for our alliance with Pakistan itself:
“[Bin Laden’s death] also begins to untie the unhealthy knot that has bound the US and Pakistan together since 9/11. Pakistani nationalists by and large hate and fear the United States, especially since the US-India rapprochement puts us firmly in favor of India’s emergence as a global power. Americans are frustrated by what we can only see as Pakistan’s slow but inexorable national suicide . . . Pakistanis often blame Washington’s war in Afghanistan for their own country’s grim slide into chronic instability and for their frustrations in Afghanistan. They are likely soon to discover that the only thing worse than a Washington breathing down their necks is a Washington relegating the region to a lower priority level. The Russians, the Chinese, the Indians and the Iranians all agree that the conversion of Afghanistan into a sanctuary for radical, Sunni-linked religious terror movements is a very bad thing. Pakistan’s isolation on this issue is not America’s fault; as the US steps back, Pakistanis will have to grow up. For too long Pakistan has had a security culture that nurtures fantasies and illusions; when those illusions don’t pan out, Pakistani nationalists blame the United States.”
AMEN. And while we’re at it, may the soft(-headed)ness towards the Pakistani military that prevails in certain US circles – which I believe dates back at least 3 or 4 decades – be once and for all consigned to the hell from which it came.
PS – By all means let’s hope Osama’s death redounds in some major way to the benefit of Israel.
Obama’s idiots sure aren’t keeping their mouths shut anymore. Witness “Osama bin Laden raid yields trove of computer data.”
Morons. They should have released that Osama’s computers were all booby trapped and they couldn’t retrieve anything. I don’t have to explain why to you, but apparently someone needs to explain it to Panetta.
Regardless of the actual state of the files, one might want others to believe that something valuable may have been found.
If they actually got nothing it would make sense to pretend they got a treasure trove, but they would have to have gotten literally nothing, or next to nothing, since they are speaking out before having much chance to assess anything they did get.
Not really. Keep them guessing and keep them nervous.
I’m certainly glad Bin Laden is dead. It couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy. Still, I can’t help but wish it had happened in 2008 or 2013. OBL hadn’t been a threat to the US since Tora Bora in December of 2001. Obama’s policies and lack of leadership, however, are a clear and present danger to the republic. Frankly, I’d rather see OBL alive and Obama defeated in 12 than the reverse. Now, Obama’s reelection has become, if not certain, much more likely. I shudder to think what the Obami will do to this country over the next 6 years.
Lest not run away with ourselves: Prior to the collapse of the former Soviet Union, aid had been given all over the world (Europe, Africa, Latin America, Middle East, Asia) by U.S. to further both our international relationships and interests. This framewok helped to engender now questioned activities and arrangements of supported interests like Pakistan’s deep state and Sunni linked religious terror movements. Moreover, mankind’s record for indiscriminate murder is indeed mankind’s; not restricted to any particular group madness.
Obama is turning out to be the nightmare that many of us have been warning about. This time he wants to impose his socialistic views on the United States by subjecting our citizens to the International Criminal Court ICC ..He recently dispatched a delegation to The Hague to explore issues involving United States involvement in the ICC an organization that USJF believes could be used to prosecute American soldiers and political leaders on trumped up criminal charges brought by left wing or terrorist supporting governments like Iran..Barack Obama believes that the United States should be subject to global laws instead of the United States Constitution. Constitutions provisions protecting defendants in criminal trials such as the right to trial by jury and protections against double-jeopardy which are the cornerstones of the Bill of Rights..A main tenet of the ICC is that its jurisdiction extends only to those nations that ratify the ICC treaty.