Mill & intell people est 500 Al Quida left in Pak&Afg.

[revelarts]

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/2010/07/a_question_from_dana_intellige.html

A question from Dana: intelligence agencies and al-Qaeda

As Top Secret America wraps up its first week, I wanted to join in here with an observation and a question.

Over the past two years, one of the most thought-provoking observations I have heard from both military and intelligence folks is this: There are probably 500 al-Qaeda members left in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region. At most, the organization may have a couple thousand people worldwide.

Why do we need such a large intelligence effort---the 1,300 agencies we identified that are a part of this effort--- to defeat a couple thousand people? And why haven't our efforts been even more focused on the al-Qaeda network in the last nine years?

"Mission creep" seems to have triumphed in all but the most disciplined of organizations. These are taboo subjects for officials to discuss in public because it can so easily be interpreted as minimizing the threat (although notice that CIA director Leon Panetta said as much on a recent Sunday talk show.)

Can anyone help me out here? Is this a valid way to look at things? And why not focus almost exclusively on al-Qaeda?

I am told that the other side of the coin is getting Americans, Congress and the media (yup, that's me) to have a more realistic reaction to near-misses and even attacks as well. What do you think?

I'm looking forward to your responses in the comments section. We're seeking debate and information here, not ranting and politicizing.

why do we need that much intel effort? Why do we need so many soldiers there? Why are we trying to make war with the whole of the Muslims world, to get the job done?

OH they all hate us AND WILL GET US IF WE DON'T GET THEM 1ST. Ok never mind?

500 guys!??!?!
1500 PEOPLE WORLDWIDE?!???!?!?

300million people an ocean away in fear over a couple of thousand guys hidin out in caves and tents with ak47s and underpants bombs that don't work.

wow

[Gaffer]

I would like to know the names of some of these intelligence agencies, aside from the usual ones. Who do they report too. Are they run by political appointee's as a reward for services?

There may be 1500 al queda world wide, but there are millions that support them. A supporter is as guilty as the one doing the actual deeds. There are thousands of taliban, who work in conjunction with al queda. So that increases their numbers as well. And they in turn have millions of supporters. Then we expand out. iran has 50,000 quds force operatives working throughout the ME. These guys are all terrorists. hizbollah and hamas are terrorists, they need watching as well. Then there's the muslim brotherhood, the grand daddy of all the muslim terrorist groups, based in egypt. They all interact and support one another. syria and iran provide weapons, money and training. The saudi's provide money and smile to present a nice face to the west. What you, the media, the white house and congress, and many other people don't realize is we are at war with islam. It's a war that has been going on since the 7th century and will go on as long as islam exists. The goal is to impose sharia law on the world by any means necessary, whether through violent jihad or soft jihad.

[revelarts]

who should we attack next the gaffer?
You named a lot of enemies and an ongoing threat.
What do you think would be the best plan of action?

[Gaffer]

who should we attack next the gaffer?
You named a lot of enemies and an ongoing threat.
What do you think would be the best plan of action?

What I think is irrelevant as I'm not in a position to do anything. The enemies I named are all real and all working actively to bring about their goal. What I would propose would be condemned by people like you and considered unconstitutional. So we will continue to plug along in the endless war. We will need to take care of the enemy within before we can worry about the enemy without.

[revelarts]

What I think is irrelevant as I'm not in a position to do anything. The enemies I named are all real and all working actively to bring about their goal. What I would propose would be condemned by people like you and considered unconstitutional. So we will continue to plug along in the endless war. We will need to take care of the enemy within before we can worry about the enemy without.

ok so what do you think we need to do with the enemies within, how do we "take care of them". I guess your talking about all the Muslims in our country right? Your not talking about people like me or the constitution are you? It's hard to tell the you worded it.

[Gaffer]

ok so what do you think we need to do with the enemies within, how do we "take care of them". I guess your talking about all the Muslims in our country right? Your not talking about people like me or the constitution are you? It's hard to tell the you worded it.

You are not on my list. The enemies within are currently in congress and the white house. And many in state governments. They are the socialist elites. They have to be removed first. And where the Constitution gets stepped on is banning the practice of islam. Denying islamic immigration. It's the state cracking down on a particular religion, and that is totally unconstitutional. Then develop all our own oil and coal resources and completely cut off all trade with islamic nations. islam is a political entity, not a true religion. It's about controlling people. That is what's being ignored by our government and most people.

[PostmodernProphet]

Why are we trying to make war with the whole of the Muslims world, to get the job done?

I'm puzzled why anyone with any intelligence would claim we were trying to make war with the whole Muslim world.......

[PostmodernProphet]

What do you think would be the best plan of action?

perhaps the best place to start would be with massive intelligence gathering, to determine who exactly is acting as our enemy........


Why do we need such a large intelligence effort---the 1,300 agencies we identified that are a part of this effort--- to defeat a couple thousand people?

there's your question, here's your answer.....to identify who the couple of thousand people are and separate them from the rest of the 6 billion......

now, if you are asking the more intelligent question, such as "can we do the same or even better job with 13 agencies instead of 1300 agencies, I won't argue with you......

[pete311]

I'm puzzled why anyone with any intelligence would claim we were trying to make war with the whole Muslim world.......

half this board is anti muslim, but i guess your qualifier nullifies this response :)



there's your question, here's your answer.....to identify who the couple of thousand people are and separate them from the rest of the 6 billion......


furthermore, we've been hunting one man for 9 years and haven't found him, just one man

[PostmodernProphet]

half this board is anti muslim, but i guess your qualifier nullifies this response :)

and the same half is racist....doesn't mean the United States is waging war on blacks now, does it.....

[Kathianne]

The article in the OP is a writer talking about her own blog, citing general 'military and intelligence sources.' There's no substance, but then again if the point is 'there aren't enemies' I guess this flies.

I am against the US paying for and protecting the first world countries from those that want to destroy them. Indeed, I think Europe, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand can take care of themselves without US military.

Regarding the ME, that is a very different kettle, as we need the oil. When the US invests in nuclear and own natural resources exploitation, then perhaps the situation will change. In the meantime, those wanting to just 'come home' are wearing tinfoil.

[pete311]

Japan


The PM of Japan recently stepped down because he wouldn't remove a US army base. He wouldn't move it because the Japanese know without the US the Chinese would be a massive threat in which Japan would be helpless. Besides Britian and Germany, Europe is pretty weak. No one cares about the Kiwis or Aussies.

[Kathianne]

The PM of Japan recently stepped down because he wouldn't remove a US army base. He wouldn't move it because the Japanese know without the US the Chinese would be a massive threat in which Japan would be helpless.

Japan can afford the cost of military, as can Europe. The US can afford to take care of itself and its own vital interests. We shouldn't be caring for those that can pay their own way.

[pete311]

Japan can afford the cost of military, as can Europe. The US can afford to take care of itself and its own vital interests. We shouldn't be caring for those that can pay their own way.

As for Japan, there is no way it can fend off a Chinese attack without a US presence. There is a reason the US is the leader of the world and it's not because we hide in our walls.

-MIA for a few days

[Gaffer]

After WW2 the Japanese constitution stated they could only have a security force. The US and the Japanese themselves determined a large standing army wasn't necessary as the US was there. It still stands today.

The US is not looking for one man. He is a figure head. The US is out to destroy his organization, al queda. It's hard to do when most of the muslim world supports them. If you think capturing or killing bin laden ends things you need to think again.

[Kathianne]

As for Japan, there is no way it can fend off a Chinese attack without a US presence. There is a reason the US is the leader of the world and it's not because we hide in our walls.

-MIA for a few days

China invading Japan? The world will be at war then, not just US China. No reason for US to be world policeman.

[Kathianne]

After WW2 the Japanese constitution stated they could only have a security force. The US and the Japanese themselves determined a large standing army wasn't necessary as the US was there. It still stands today.

The US is not looking for one man. He is a figure head. The US is out to destroy his organization, al queda. It's hard to do when most of the muslim world supports them. If you think capturing or killing bin laden ends things you need to think again.

Over a decade ago, the US recognized that the post WWII ban on Japanese offense was passe. Japan can afford to supply its own defense. If others need to help with manpower, Japan will have to pay for.

[Gaffer]

Over a decade ago, the US recognized that the post WWII ban on Japanese offense was passe. Japan can afford to supply its own defense. If others need to help with manpower, Japan will have to pay for.

Yes, the Japanese have amended their constitution to allow them to build a larger military. I do think a lot of it has to do with them taking the cheap way out and keeping US forces there means they spend less in defense. At the same time we do need bases in the region.

As for pete's comment, china's not about to invade Japan. They are still trying to work up the nerve to take Taiwan. Japan's main concern is north korea.

[Kathianne]

Yes, the Japanese have amended their constitution to allow them to build a larger military. I do think a lot of it has to do with them taking the cheap way out and keeping US forces there means they spend less in defense. At the same time we do need bases in the region.

As for pete's comment, china's not about to invade Japan. They are still trying to work up the nerve to take Taiwan. Japan's main concern is north korea.

Agreed. And the threat of NK is the reason that Japan must take care of their own defense. I don't know if 'bases' are all that necessary given nuclear powered carriers.

[Gaffer]

Agreed. And the threat of NK is the reason that Japan must take care of their own defense. I don't know if 'bases' are all that necessary given nuclear powered carriers.

Even nuclear carriers have to be resupplied and do general maintenance. And if a war needs to be fought in the region its easier to have troops already there and a quick way of supplying them then carting it across the Pacific. The reasons for the bases are logistical. They also serve as early warning sites.

[Kathianne]

Even nuclear carriers have to be resupplied and do general maintenance. And if a war needs to be fought in the region its easier to have troops already there and a quick way of supplying them then carting it across the Pacific. The reasons for the bases are logistical. They also serve as early warning sites.

Build more of the carriers and use them instead of foreign bases. If there were to be invasion of Japan needed, which considering nuclear threat is unlikely, it would get done.

I just don't see the purpose of permanent bases that are to protect other's interests. As I said earlier, the ME is a different kettle.

[revelarts]

I agree we don't need bases in japan. Not only for the reasons you've mentioned Kath but also I've heard (unconfirmed sources) that Japan does have a highly trained militia. I've been told that it's huge. Plus Okinawa has been a black eye against us as afar as PR goes. GI's raping young girls and other generally bad behavior and disrespect for the locals up and down the command. Means were not well liked by some certain factions there. Overall the Japanese like Americans but the the bases, It's my understanding, not so much.

China? when's the last time China Attacked anyone? Japan attacked China the last few times. I get the impression that china really doesn't want any more people to lord it over... directly.

As far as the Middle East Goes. We've never had bases there before Bush 1 and have been able to get oil from there without to much trouble. pay the right people the spiket opens. Even when Saddam was in control of Iraq. And you know as well as i that there's more than enough oil right here in our hemisphere to supply our needs. Plus we don't even get most of our from there anyway. Oil is not a real excuse. except for the oil companies. And we should stop having a troops die for the oil companies in foreign countries. the oil companies make enough money let them hire there own troops to protect the Afghan pipelines and Iraqi Oil fields.

[Kathianne]

China has not been an aggressor nation historically, outside of Asia. Japan's military is unlikely 'huge' due to population limitations alone, not to mention space limitations.

Bases in ME? Iran, Israel as proxy, Iraq in past, Kuwait, Yemen, Bahrain, etc. Then there has been Turkey, via NATO. Uneasy alliances all, but necessary due to oil. We will keep the straits open, if it means ground troops, they will be there. That is not something that would require a world war to necessitate.

[Gaffer]

China attacked US and UN forces in Korea in 1951-52 forcing Korea into a stalemate. They have numerous skirmishes with the russians and invaded and took over Tibet. They also invaded and fought Vietnam in the late 70's early 80's. They have been curtailed somewhat in their expansion by lack of a navy. They have slaughtered their own people to the tune of 60 million. Japan has a right to be concerned about them. And we need to as well.

Japan expanded it's empire in the 20's and 30's because it needed raw material. China has the same needs now. when a country gets big enough they need a lot more, then they start looking at their neighbors.

[Kathianne]

China attacked US and UN forces in Korea in 1951-52 forcing Korea into a stalemate. They have numerous skirmishes with the russians and invaded and took over Tibet. They also invaded and fought Vietnam in the late 70's early 80's. They have been curtailed somewhat in their expansion by lack of a navy. They have slaughtered their own people to the tune of 60 million. Japan has a right to be concerned about them. And we need to as well.

Japan expanded it's empire in the 20's and 30's because it needed raw material. China has the same needs now. when a country gets big enough they need a lot more, then they start looking at their neighbors.

Please note that I said, 'outside of Asia.' US entered Korea, pushing down towards China. Vietnam was under the sphere of influence of both Russia and China. While Russia was certainly using the domino push with US, China confined itself to what it considered its sphere.

The Middle Kingdom is strong in China, only something drastic like open door policies could change a Japan or China.

[Gaffer]

He asked, "when was the last time china attacked anyone?" I pointed out when. I fully agree with your part of the conversation.

[Sweetchuck]

Keep in mind that with the exception of the cave dwelling Islamic fucks, the new warfare frontier might be economically based.

[revelarts]

China attacked US and UN forces in Korea in 1951-52 forcing Korea into a stalemate. They have numerous skirmishes with the russians and invaded and took over Tibet. They also invaded and fought Vietnam in the late 70's early 80's. They have been curtailed somewhat in their expansion by lack of a navy. They have slaughtered their own people to the tune of 60 million. Japan has a right to be concerned about them. And we need to as well.

Japan expanded it's empire in the 20's and 30's because it needed raw material. China has the same needs now. when a country gets big enough they need a lot more, then they start looking at their neighbors.

N-Korea. China attacked US and U.N. forces that were rallied from around the world against a neighbor and fellow commie state. I wouldn't exactly call that aggression, not self exactly self defense either. and the last I checked north Korea is still sovereign, run by it's own special nut job.
Veit Nam. similar. Commie Sovereign but influenced by.
Tibet. I'll give you that.
Russia. ? i don't know anything about that - ya got me

Do we want to compare China's aggression to the ours.
We've attacked multiple countries in South America, in Africa, in the Middle East, in Europe and a few in Asia. Most of whom never attacked us. But we did it for Freedom or humanitarianism. (many times really because of Oil or other resources or corporate control)

China is horror show for it own people but, they are willing to buy most of what they need. And graffer they don't like radical Muslims either. maybe the U.S can team up to solve the Muslim problem.

[LuvRPgrl]

who should we attack next the gaffer?
You named a lot of enemies and an ongoing threat.
What do you think would be the best plan of action?

get a new president

[LuvRPgrl]

N-Korea. China attacked US and U.N. forces that were rallied from around the world against a neighbor and fellow commie state. I wouldn't exactly call that aggression, not self exactly self defense either. and the last I checked north Korea is still sovereign, run by it's own special nut job.
Veit Nam. similar. Commie Sovereign but influenced by.
Tibet. I'll give you that.
Russia. ? i don't know anything about that - ya got me

Do we want to compare China's aggression to the ours.
We've attacked multiple countries in South America, in Africa, in the Middle East, in Europe and a few in Asia. Most of whom never attacked us. But we did it for Freedom or humanitarianism. (many times really because of Oil or other resources or corporate control)

China is horror show for it own people but, they are willing to buy most of what they need. And graffer they don't like radical Muslims either. maybe the U.S can team up to solve the Muslim problem.

However, the US didnt attack to occupy

As for Japan, we dont want or have bases there to protect Japan, they are for other reasons