"on the real war on Islamic terrorism throughout the world, without an enormous, lengthy, costly, counterproductive war in Iraq, undertaken under false pretenses, to sap our energies."
Ok, if you were the Commander in Chief, you wouldn't have focused on Iraq. May assume you wouldn't order the US miltary to built up forces in Kuwait? Correct?
If you want to put some number US miltary in Kuwait, how many troops and what do you tell the leadership of Kuwait, as to why you want US miltary force on it's soil.
Would you continue to have the No Fly Zone be operated from Saudi Arabia?
Or do you end the sanctions, as the Europeans generally want you to do?
And perhaps as consquence of your answers to above questions: what if various Arab nations [which current have US bases] would prefer that US miltary force were to leave the area, because their miltary presence, may cause their countries to become targets of terrorist attacks. And they don't seem to be much use in regards to defending the Arab countries interests, anyhow.
What do you tell them?
"In this war, there are plenty of problem areas in the world which deserve much more of our attention, our troops, our intelligance, covert operations, investment and collaboration with our allies, etc. Places like Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Nigeria, Indonesia, the Phillipines, Kashmir, the central Asian states of the former Soviet Union, many Arab countries, etc."
First of course we are in Afghanistan. Not only US, but NATO including Canadian forces. Practically every vaguely free country in the world involved in Afghanistan in some way or the other. The Canadians from the beginning were assisting this effort [mainly in naval assets] and in last year so have large numbers [relative to Canada's miltary power] on the ground in Afghanistan. The main problem with other nations getting troops into Afghanistan is the lack of those country in the capacity to deploy troops in that country.
Pakistan. We might have attacked Pakistan, had they not agree to work with us. We currently consider them as a strong ally in War Against Terrorism and as far as I'm aware there are effective and doing as much as we could hope they would do. Pakistan is a soveriegn nation and an ally, we can't simply deploy miltary force in the country without the consent of the leadership- assuming we wanted to do this.
Now, I wouldn't be surprised if we are involved miltarily in Pakistan- and I doubt the Pakistan leadership wants us to announce the degree of this involvement.
Given the above, what would you do differently had you been Commander-in-Chief?
Somalia. We have some covert operations in this country, apparently. It's a failed state. Haiti is a goddam paradise compared to this place. I suppose you want the US to be involved in some kind of nation building project? Do want US to be involved unilaterally? If not which countries could interested in joining your enterprise. How many US forces would want use. Are you going get UN passing a resolution blessing this operation? What's your general plan? Oh, and explain why it's in US interest to be involved and what international laws allow you to be involved?
Nigeria. This state is similar to Pakistan. I saw it's leadership in Washington on CSPAN talking about it's various problems. We are involved at some levels. They are an African country and generally want the US to support efforts which strengthen the African Union and Aids is major problem they want US involvement to help deal with this.
Indonesia. A big country. High growth rate. High Muslim population. Fairly successful nation. What do you want to do with it?
Phillipines. What do you want to do with Phillipines?
Kashmir. A region in which India and Pakistan are engaged in low level proxy war. Both India and Pakistan leadership "appears" to be thankful for US role in trying resolve this issue. It's definitely in US interest to help resolve this as it could lead to nuclear war- and those are generally bad things.
What do you want to do with it?
"the central Asian states of the former Soviet Union, many Arab countries, etc". Ambitious, aren't we? Btw all these countries are involved at varying levels in sharing intel to help in the War Against Terrorism.
What do you want to do with them?
Current Events » in reply to More competent leadership would stay focused...
re: More competent leadership would stay focused...
