I Will Send Them 15,000 by 15,000

President Obama decided this week to send an additional 30,00 troops to Afghanistan. I oppose this move because I think it prolongs the attempt at a military solution where there is no military solution to be found. The position which John Kerry took in the 2004 election is I believe the right one; Terrorism is a law enforcement issue much more than a military one.

The correct way to defeat international terrorism is to increase use of law enforcement methods, and that includes the use of civilian Federal Court system. Increased international cooperation among police and intelligence agencies are also important tools in the arsenal against international terrorism. The best way to combat international terrorism is to invest in resources for 1st responders and capabilities to rebuild, increase the use of law enforcement and criminal justice resources, and reduce the use of the military. It would also be very beneficial to stop taking actions (like invading countries for no reason) that increase the risk of terrorism.

I remember when the purpose of going into Afghanistan was to capture Osama Bin Laden "dead or alive." Somehow that has turned into a long term effort to stabilize Afghanistan. I am afraid that this mission creep will cause the Obama administration to lose sight of the goal, which as far as I am concerned as been to bring the perpetrators of 9/11 to justice. The hijackers can not be brought to justice because they died in the attacks, and the alleged mastermind will brought to trial in a New York courtroom. That leaves only bin Laden as the last real Al Qaeda leader remaining. Since the safe house for the planning of the 9/11 attacks was in Hamburg, Germany, occupying various Afghan provinces does not really make us safer and it might be harmful if this "surge" keeps the government's focus away from Al Qaeda.

I do not feel betrayed by Obama because this is what he said he was going to do. However, I do feel like a moment that could have been used to reorient our policy had been lost. President Obama could have moved towards a more law enforcement approach. Instead he continue the imperial project and increased our military presence, and I do feel very dispaointed about the opportunity missed.

Trying the Terrorists

This big news this weekend is that Attorney General Eric Holder decided to try some of the Al-Qaeda terrorists in U.S. Federal Courts. One of the people that will be tried is the person the government believes masterminded the attacks on 9/11/01. I think Holder's decision is a courageous and wise decision and I wish he would extend it to cover all the alleged terrorists that we hold in custody.

I have some thoughts about this decision.

1. It is my belief that this is the best way to defeat the terrorists. Al-Qaeda sees itself at war with the West and they want to west to react militarily so that the West overreacts and muslims respond by joining Al-Qaeda. Why would we want to play by the rules? I think treating Al-Qaeda like criminals will defuse the myth that they are super villains and deflate their standing.

It is my firm belief that the best way t defeat them is to use the institutions that enshrine the values of our democracy. Our ideals and values are stronger and more enduring than any bomb. Demonstrating our values in action before the world(friend, enemy, and skeptical) will do more to come closer to victory then any military action.

2. I do not understand the objections to the Attorney General's decision. I no see no security threat. Our courts and police have handled plenty of terrorists and other dangerous criminals. The Federal courts have successfully prosecuted the first world trader center bombers(in New York City), Eric Robert Rudolph, the Oklahoma City Bombers, and 20th hijacker Zacarias Moussaoui. All of these trials went off safely and without any security disruption.

As for the fear of terrorists being released on a technicality; I think that fear is is misplaced. A "technicality" usually means the police or the prosecutor were sloppy. On a case as important as one involving Al-Qaeda, we would want our police and prosecutors to give their best and most detailed effort.

I also don't buy the threat of losing an intelligence resource. If there are safety considerations about an informant then our government contains plenty of people with expertise in providing security to witnesses. Otherwise the chance to public bring Al-Qaeda terrorists to justice and hold them to account in front of the whole world is worth the risk to our intelligence resources.

The U.S. effort against Al-Qaeda has suffered from too many self inflicted wounds. It is time that the U.S. anti-terrorism efforts earn a victory by upholding U.S. values and the institutions that uphold those values. Attorney General Holder's decision is a good first start.

The Fruits of Torture...

...are apparently nothing.  According to this Washington Post article the CIA used waterboarding and other forms of torture at the behest of top White House and CIA officials on a al-Qaeda supporter named Abu Zubaida.  Under torture, Zabaida confessed to all sorts of plots that didn't exist.  The Post quotes an intelligence official saying, "we spent millions of dollars chasing false alarms."

The fact that torture does not work is the least of the problems with using it as a tool.  Torture is first and foremost a moral outrage and a crime against humanity.  Reports are now coming out that the same Spanish prosecutor that convicted Augusto Pinochet is investigating Bush administration officials William Haynes, David Addington, John Yoo, Jay Bybee, Douglas Feith, and former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.  Spanish Judge Baltasar Garzon is investigating the six for creating the legal justification for President Bush's torture program.

The world now views the U.S. as being on par with the Pinochet regime.  Thank you George Bush and Dick Cheney for nothing but making us equal to Augusto Pinochet.