2008 June 17 Tuesday
Next Terrorist Attack To Come From Pakistan?

The 9/11 attackers had a home base in Afghanistan under rule of the Taliban. America sensibly overthrew the Taliban. Then we foolishly invaded Iraq. Now an area of Pakistan under very limited control from the Pakistani government serves as a training base for Al Qaeda terrorists. Yet our focus is still on Iraq. Go figure.

Pakistan is not our enemy, yet our enemy is operating safely from within its borders, concludes Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. And there's not much we can do about it under the current political arrangement.

In Pakistan's western tribal regions, known as the FATA, al-Qaida's central command has set up its most secure base since the fall of the Taliban in neighboring Afghanistan, Mullen says. And it's now training Western-looking terrorists there to slip security and hit America.

"I believe fundamentally if the United States is going to get hit, it's going to come out of the planning that the leadership in the FATA is generating," Mullen said in a recent interview. "I'm not saying it is guaranteed to happen, or that it's imminent. But clearly we know the planning is taking place."

We could shape an immigration and visa policy aimed at keeping these would-be attackers and their supporters out of the US. Immigration and visa policies ought to be some of our top anti-terrorist policies. We do not need Muslim visitors. So why take the risk?

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2008 June 17 10:32 PM  Terrorists Activities

Stephen said at June 18, 2008 3:39 AM:

Randall said: America sensibly overthrew the Taliban

I don't think it was sensible. In fact, I think it was a huge strategic error.

Overthrowing the Taliban was entirely irrelevant to achieving our objective - hunting down Osama bin Laden.

The Taliban (lunes to a man, but local lunes rather than international lunes) did not in any meaningful sense conspire with AQ, nor did they ever have the capacity to expel AQ. They merely happen to have been one of several groups who could have been in control of Kabul in 2001. The identity of the group that happens to run Kabul (or Afghanistan for that matter) is entirely irrelevant to our proper objective - hunting down AQ.

By overthrowing the Taliban we ended up being bogged down guarding territory instead of hunting. Had we left the Afghanis alone they would have been content to let the west go about its business of hunting down AQ, and not one single western soldier would have been diverted from that hunt. Because of that stupid decision we are now tied down and continue to expend the lives of western soldiers in order to maintain the fiction of a first world system of government in a society that makes the bronze-age look sophisticated.

Really, really stupid.

Doc_nonliberal said at June 18, 2008 5:05 AM:

"Pakistan is not our enemy, yet our enemy is operating safely from within its borders, concludes Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff."

Anybody who allows your enemy to operate safely from within his borders, and protests and threatens loudly when you attempt to go after that enemy, IS your enemy.

Greg Meadows said at June 18, 2008 8:17 AM:

Another attack is plausible given the current political situation within the USA. While we
should be maintaing our guard, we are letting it down instead. AQ will see this opportunity
and most likely make another attempt. If it is successful, who will get the blame? If the
attack occurs while Bush is still in office, the left will accuse Bush of letting it happen
(as they did with the 911 attack) so as to shore up his weak poll numbers and help with the
election. The right will accuse the left of letting down our defenses. Although I think the
right is correct about the left letting down our defenses, I'm not so sure that the people
will side with the right and restore the Republicans to power.

z said at June 18, 2008 12:53 PM:

If we didn't let Arabs immigrate, none of this would be happening.

What the hell was wrong with America in 1985, when it was still overwhelmingly white and black? In fifty years, we will be reaping the whirlwind due to our present immigration stupidity. We should accept no more immigrants from any country than our own nations sends to that nation. If only five people emigrate to Pakistan this year, we should only let five Pakistanis come live here. We were fine until 1965, when Edward Cellar got his beloved Immigration DeForm Act passed via an idiot named Ted Kennedy, to fufill his goal of seeing whites outnumbered in America, passed. Its right on schedule.

A house divided against itself cannot stand..................the hard left was behind this lunacy all along. I just hope whatever terror ensues, hits some of the people who support the policy and not regular hard-working Americans. I wonder if Juan McCain's daughter were at an upscale shopping venue that exploded, tearing her corpse to pieces, if that son-of-a-bitch might reconsider just how healthy letting in half the planet is for this place but I digress. As long as the rich can retreat to gated-fortress-communities, they will feel safe and reason any terrorism will only affect "proles", they wont push for any change as they love the cheap labor.

sal said at June 18, 2008 3:33 PM:

a good first step would be to stop all foreign aid to Pakistan. Most of the money goes to corrupt politicans anyway.

tommy said at June 18, 2008 3:41 PM:

Imagine what a small fraction of the money spent on Iraq could have done in physically securing the Afghanistan-Pakistan border -- not to mention our own borders.

Stephen said at June 18, 2008 4:59 PM:

The modern concepts of 'country' and 'nationality' don't hold along the Afghan / Pakistan border. Instead, think family, village and tribal allegiance.

Stephen said at June 18, 2008 5:27 PM:

Z, desperately flailing around looking for someone to blame, decided that these guys did it:

"...the hard left...rich [in their] gated-fortress-communities [who love] cheap labor"

z said at June 18, 2008 9:41 PM:


Who is to blame isn't a "desperate" search, its obvious. The only people for the current immigration innanities are the wealthy, the corporate-sycophants, and the hard left. No, these always aren't the same folks. I had hard-left college professors back in the day who still lived in apartments in their early forties (I mean how do you spell f-a-i-l-u-r-e- right?, but these same people blamed capitalism for everything so its pointless to argue with them). The "hate-America" left, likes immigration because America being a successful place in general with happy people constantly disproves what they want to think about the place and is nowhere near the conditions Marx (still their hero, I promise you) predicted for radical change to occur, so they are for mucho immigration to present challenges to the republic so they can sit on the sidelines, comfy in their government employment, and wail about how racist and xenophobic and unaccomodating we are. The new residents failure to assimilate and succeed will be taken as proof of what a horrible place this is, and for them to howl for more immigration and more accomodation. Yes, they are this benhighted and stupid. If America fell apart tommorow, they'd still blame capitalism and churches for it, one way or another. These are merely useful idiots who can only be harmful because we employ them in Guvment' jobs and education.

The wealthy and corporate sychophants (not always the same thing) like rampant immigration for two reasons: one it lets them call people who oppose it racist in the-never-ending-one-uppedness-battle-status-competition with other whites and two it gets their yards cut cheap and their maid service cheap. For the corporate whores, its merely cheap compliant labor (at first, but they aren't smart enough to realize this yet), and since they know that the next thirty years is all that will matter to them personally, that is enough for them. Both of these groups get to live in gated-fortress communities with private police forces protecting them in mini-cities (think Scottsdale, Coral Gables, etc) where carloads of immigrant youth get detained by the cops for merely driving through and sent back to da' hood. They dont have any interaction with them but employ them indirectly at the sweatshop. Since this group works at corporate HQ, anyway................they dont even have to --see--them unless they go on a plant tour at one of their fiefdoms that they are shareholders of on paper.

These two or three disparate groups are the prime movers, through social pressure (the former) and campaign cash (the latter) that keeps subtle pressure on our local congresscritters to keep the status quo, itself an abomination of 1965 that rode the JFK-death-sentiment (his dumbass brother's name was on the bill) to passage through the revenge-minded LBJ signature. The rest is history. Immigration has a few more backers and the real estate industry, who love "churn" (white people getting uncomfortable in an area and up and moving out of paid-off houses to mortgage newer, more expensive ones in suburbia---making room for our new-mortgagees in metropolitian counties) is another entity that likes this situation, as do builders, developers, real-estate agenst, loan officers and lending institutions, etc. "Diversity" consultants and language professionals also benefit and their support can be counted on. These are all people who care more about themselves than the nation's real future for their grandchildren. Its all about self-interest in other words..............the oldest motivator out there.

Wolf-Dog said at June 19, 2008 11:19 AM:

Recall the Pakistan has many nukes, and the know-how for making nukes. If Pakistan's pro-Western government gets replaced with an Islamist system, then the coming terrorist "attack", can be very serious.

Stefan said at July 4, 2008 10:13 AM:

Ha.All lies. The only Taliban that are out there were airlifted out by the US as the fighting broke out in '01. That's MSNBC and Seymour Hersh of the New Yorker. Read this for the real story.


Elizabeth said at September 25, 2011 3:11 PM:

I believe that Pakistan should stop using nuclear weapons and should haver more peace in the world and not just in this country, we're just ourselves Destroy.

Post a comment
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
Remember info?

Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright