Monday, June 20, 2005

Respect For Sovereign Nations?
Since When?


Let me get this straight...

BushCo can't capture Bin Laden today because the US is concerned about respecting sovereign nations?

Didn't BushCo attack Afghanistan because Afghanistan was "harboring" the Dread Terrorist, bin Laden?

Ahem.

From the testimony of Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld...

In short order:

The Taliban regime was driven from power;

Al-Qaeda's sanctuary in Afghanistan was removed;

Nearly two-thirds of their known leaders have now been captured or killed;

Today a transitional government is in power in Afghanistan, which is transforming the country from a safe haven for terrorists to a coalition ally in the war against terrorism.

And a clear message was sent: henceforth there will be a price to pay for harboring terrorists.

From the New York Times...
(written by ** gag me** Richard Perle)

WASHINGTON -- Within hours of the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush said, "We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them." From that first statement, Mr. Bush shaped a grand strategy for the war on terrorism that is as transforming of American policy as was Ronald Reagan's pledge to consign an "evil empire" to the "ash heap of history." It breaks with the past by taking aim at states harboring terrorists as well as at terrorists themselves. It is why we have destroyed the Taliban regime in Afghanistan even as we hunt down Osama bin Laden himself. It is why the war against terrorism cannot be won if Saddam Hussein continues to rule Iraq.
So...

The justification for attacking Iraq was based on this "States that harbor terrorists" deal, which was the basis for attacking Afghanistan.

Got that, kids?

Fast forward to today...


Where is bin Laden hiding?

CIA chief Goss says he has "excellent idea"

NEW YORK - The director of the CIA says he has an "excellent idea" where Osama bin Laden is hiding, but that the United States' respect for sovereign nations makes it more difficult to capture the al-Qaida chief.

In an interview with Time for the magazine's June 27 issue, Porter Goss was asked about the progress of the hunt for bin Laden.

When you go to the question of dealing with sanctuaries in sovereign states, you're dealing with a problem of our sense of international obligation, fair play, Goss said. We have to find a way to work in a conventional world in unconventional ways. --snip--

Goss did not say where he thinks bin Laden is, nor did he specify what country or countries he was referring to when he spoke of foreign sanctuaries. LINK

And now, a message from BushCo...




Translation of the "sovereign states" crap...

Bin Laden is probably inside Pakistan.

Pakistan has probably denied BushCo access to roam freely inside its borders, and they've probably threatened retaliatory action against US forces if BushCo doesn't respect Pakistan's sovereignty.

Enough said.



1 Comments:

Blogger Random Goblin said...

That's the biggest joke ever. I thought BushCo's whole pghilosophy was that the only country whose sovreignty mattered was ours.

Oh well, change the line when it's convenient, I guess.

2:19 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home