Secret Assault on Terrorism Widens on Two Continents

[Catz Part Deux]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/15/w...1870127-IGqJvYTYMAOxiM u1Q66TQ&pagewanted=all

The attack offered a glimpse of the Obama administration’s shadow war against Al Qaeda and its allies. In roughly a dozen countries — from the deserts of North Africa, to the mountains of Pakistan, to former Soviet republics crippled by ethnic and religious strife — the United States has significantly increased military and intelligence operations, pursuing the enemy using robotic drones and commando teams, paying contractors to spy and training local operatives to chase terrorists.

The White House has intensified the Central Intelligence Agency’s drone missile campaign in Pakistan, approved raids against Qaeda operatives in Somalia and launched clandestine operations from Kenya. The administration has worked with European allies to dismantle terrorist groups in North Africa, efforts that include a recent French strike in Algeria. And the Pentagon tapped a network of private contractors to gather intelligence about things like militant hide-outs in Pakistan and the location of an American soldier currently in Taliban hands.

While the stealth war began in the Bush administration, it has expanded under President Obama, who rose to prominence in part for his early opposition to the invasion of Iraq. Virtually none of the newly aggressive steps undertaken by the United States government have been publicly acknowledged. In contrast with the troop buildup in Afghanistan, which came after months of robust debate, for example, the American military campaign in Yemen began without notice in December and has never been officially confirmed.

Did you know this?

 

[Jetboogieman]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/15/w...1870127-IGqJvYTYMAOxiM u1Q66TQ&pagewanted=all



Did you know this?

But I thought liberals were soft on terror?

Shadow War. That's catchy.

 

[Your Star]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/15/w...1870127-IGqJvYTYMAOxiM u1Q66TQ&pagewanted=all



Did you know this?

No, but I'm glad there doing these things.

 

[VanceMack]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/15/w...1870127-IGqJvYTYMAOxiM u1Q66TQ&pagewanted=all

Did you know this?

I did...and I have said that Obamas efforts against terrorism are the only thing I have found valuable in his presidency, but I think he has done a good job there.

 

[Erod]

But I thought liberals were soft on terror?

Shadow War. That's catchy.

Liberals aren't involved. This is the military carrying out these efforts, not Bush or Obama or anyone in the White House or its administration.

I'm sure on Day One, when the military debriefed Obama on the 157 known terrorist plots to assassinate the sitting U.S. president, he got on board with these efforts immediately.

 

[Harshaw]

1) I'm very glad this is happening. Well-done.

2) Where are the throngs of protests against these aggressive illegal acts of warmongering and American imperialism?

 

[jambalaya]

If this is truly going on I'm on board. Yes, this would have been characterized as a very sinister and evil program if Bush were still in office but that's the way it goes with the N.Y. Times. At least we seem to be doing the intelligence groundwork that went missing in the Clinton administration.

 

[MaggieD]

The White House has intensified the Central Intelligence Agency’s drone missile campaign in Pakistan, approved raids against Qaeda operatives in Somalia and launched clandestine operations from Kenya. The administration has worked with European allies to dismantle terrorist groups in North Africa, efforts that include a recent French strike in Algeria.

I can't understand by what authority the President has extended our reach into Somalia and Kenya. It is also hard to believe that the French spearheaded a recent strike in Algeria.

And, yes, Harshaw, where is the outrage? Hmmmm.....

 

[Catz Part Deux]

I can't understand by what authority the President has extended our reach into Somalia and Kenya. It is also hard to believe that the French spearheaded a recent strike in Algeria.

And, yes, Harshaw, where is the outrage? Hmmmm.....

I know this is hard to understand, but we are there AT THE REQUEST of their governments, and working in tandem with their forces. So, it's not really an invasion now, is it, dear?

 

[Harshaw]

I can't understand by what authority the President has extended our reach into Somalia and Kenya. It is also hard to believe that the French spearheaded a recent strike in Algeria.

And, yes, Harshaw, where is the outrage? Hmmmm.....

Seems to me all this is going to do is create more terrorists, right? A prime recruiting tool for al Qaeda. A military solution isn't the answer. Or, so I've heard.

 

[Harshaw]

I know this is hard to understand, but we are there AT THE REQUEST of their governments, and working in tandem with their forces. So, it's not really an invasion now, is it, dear?

According to . . . ? Perhaps in Yemen, but in Africa?

And when did the Security Council approve all of this?

 

[MaggieD]

I know this is hard to understand, but we are there AT THE REQUEST of their governments, and working in tandem with their forces. So, it's not really an invasion now, is it, dear?

Did I miss that in your post? Perhaps. Nonetheless, who cares? Doesn't change my thoughts. And who called it an invasion? Please don't patronize me. It hardly becomes you.

 

[Orion]

Presumably all of these countries have given the U.S. permission to conduct these operations, or at least I would hope. Yeah, we could go a step further and theorize that the U.S. is strong-arming them into participating, but regardless, the U.S. military can't legally act without permission.

 

[Agent Ferris]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/15/w...1870127-IGqJvYTYMAOxiM u1Q66TQ&pagewanted=all



Did you know this?

UAV's are one thing but if he's employing ground troops for longer than 90 days I think he should have to get congressional authorization in line with the war powers resolution of 1973, unless he is claiming that he already has this authorization under the AUMF of 2001 but if that were the case he could use the same justification to deploy troops anytime anywhere AQ is believed to be located.

 

[MaggieD]

Presumably all of these countries have given the U.S. permission to conduct these operations, or at least I would hope. Yeah, we could go a step further and theorize that the U.S. is strong-arming them into participating, but regardless, the U.S. military can't legally act without permission.

Yeah, I'd assume that, too. Why Catz is calling it an invasion escapes me. I'm talking about the White House activating troops in these countries...or maybe we already have troops there, so no 'permission' from Congress is necessary....?

 

[Harshaw]

Presumably all of these countries have given the U.S. permission to conduct these operations, or at least I would hope. Yeah, we could go a step further and theorize that the U.S. is strong-arming them into participating, but regardless, the U.S. military can't legally act without permission.

Why would you "presume" anything of the sort? (And who in Somalia is in any position to give permission, anyway?)

 

[Harshaw]

Plus:

For its part, the Pentagon is becoming more like the C.I.A. Across the Middle East and elsewhere, Special Operations troops under secret “Execute Orders” have conducted spying missions that were once the preserve of civilian intelligence agencies. With code names like Eager Pawn and Indigo Spade, such programs typically operate with even less transparency and Congressional oversight than traditional covert actions by the C.I.A.

Oooooh. Scary scary scary scary. At least it used to be.

 

[MaggieD]

Plus:

Oooooh. Scary scary scary scary. At least it used to be.

And THAT brings us back to THIS:

2) Where are the throngs of protests against these aggressive illegal acts of warmongering and American imperialism?

 

[Agent Ferris]

Why would you "presume" anything of the sort? (And who in Somalia is in any position to give permission, anyway?)

A) I seriously doubt that the Pakistani's would have granted permission either, but I don't really give a **** what these governments give us permission to do, if they can't or won't go after AQ then we have the right to act in our own self defense.

B) The permission that I do care about is that of Congress, I think the AUMF of 2001 is far to broad to be used as justification for any ground troop deployments save of course for in Afghanistan which that specific AUMF was clearly aimed at.

 

[Harshaw]

B) The permission that I do care about is that of Congress, I think the AUMF of 2001 is far to broad to be used as justification for any ground troop deployments save of course for in Afghanistan which that specific AUMF was clearly aimed at.

Oh, I was planning on getting around to that one as well.

 

[VanceMack]

Liberals aren't involved. This is the military carrying out these efforts, not Bush or Obama or anyone in the White House or its administration.

I'm sure on Day One, when the military debriefed Obama on the 157 known terrorist plots to assassinate the sitting U.S. president, he got on board with these efforts immediately.

Commander in chief takes the heat or gets the credit. I have no problem slamming Obama for a lack of leadership of our armed forces, but I also have to give him props for keeping to Bush's plan of attacking terrorists.

 

[Orion]

Why would you "presume" anything of the sort? (And who in Somalia is in any position to give permission, anyway?)

There are exceptions to what I said, mostly because places like Somalia lack any real government. There are also U.S. military bases in most countries. It would only be a step further to request permission to conduct Al Qaeda hunts outside of the bases.

I'm not saying I agree with it... I'm just saying that it's not illegal.

 

[Chappy]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/15/w...1870127-IGqJvYTYMAOxiM u1Q66TQ&pagewanted=all



Did you know this?

I take comfort that the conflict is now being managed in a more intelligent manner.

“For the first time in our history, an entity has declared a covert war against us. And we are using similar elements of American power to respond to that covert war.” — Representative Adam Smith, Democrat of Washington, who serves on the Intelligence and Armed Services Committees​

But, this story contains a warning that I found disturbing, too.

“We got the covert action programs under well-defined rules after we had made mistakes and learned from them. Now, we’re coming up with a new model, and I’m concerned there are not clear rules.” — Jack Devine, a former top C.I.A. clandestine officer ​

We should seek that oversight is rigorous and thorough. It may make our efforts less “efficient” but it will assure that our nation's values and ideals are preserved and protected.

Excerpted from “Secret Assault on Terrorism Widens on Two Continents” By SCOTT SHANE, MARK MAZZETTI and ROBERT F. WORTH, The New York Times, Published: August 14, 2010
… [[SIZE="+2"]S[/SIZE]]uch wars come with many risks: the potential for botched operations that fuel anti-American rage; a blurring of the lines between soldiers and spies that could put troops at risk of being denied Geneva Convention protections; a weakening of the Congressional oversight system put in place to prevent abuses by America’s secret operatives; and a reliance on authoritarian foreign leaders and surrogates with sometimes murky loyalties.

…

The Yemen operation has raised a broader question: who should be running the shadow war? White House officials are debating whether the C.I.A. should take over the Yemen campaign as a “covert action,” which would allow the United States to carry out operations even without the approval of Yemen’s government. By law, covert action programs require presidential authorization and formal notification to the Congressional intelligence committees. No such requirements apply to the military’s so-called Special Access Programs, like the Yemen strikes.

 

[Harshaw]

There are exceptions to what I said, mostly because places like Somalia lack any real government. There are also U.S. military bases in most countries. It would only be a step further to request permission to conduct Al Qaeda hunts outside of the bases.

I'm not saying I agree with it... I'm just saying that it's not illegal.

You are making my point for me.

 

[Goof Noodle]

Why are any of you surprised? People who lack a deity to place their faith in usually stat to turn towards big government to solve all their problems. The so-called "shadow war" is nothing but a solution to spread their oppressive new world order form of big government. Big government would never allow these countries to fall under sharia law without a fight. Also, what better way for Obama to get in good grace with conservatives then kill more muslims in more parts of the world.