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 [al Qaeda] using robotic drones and commando teams, paying contractors to spy and training local operatives to chase terrorists.

Perhaps I’m jaded, but nothing in this article surprised me.

Other

Other

Other

Other

So far, the United States has spent $275,000,000,000 ($275 billion) on the war in Afghanistan. Good job! Al Qaeda only spent $200,000 on the 9/11 attacks. Losers! We’ll show them what spending real money on a war looks like! How’s that war going by the way? Well, its not clear we are calling it a war anymore:

Because the task in Kandahar is so delicate, U.S. commanders talk about squeezing rather than driving out the Taliban. The military has struggled to come up with a description of the upcoming fight avoiding terms like campaign, operation and battle because because those words and others have annoyed Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

So the U.S. is calling it “Hamkari Baraye Kandahar,” which translates as “Cooperation for Kandahar.” Karzai simply calls it a “process.”

Whatever it’s called, U.S. military leaders say that unless it succeeds, the rest of the plan for pacifying Afghanistan is hollow.

(deep sigh)…How will we know of “it” succeeds until if we don’t know what “it” is? After spending close to $300 billion, we still can’t explain we still can’t explain what we are trying to achieve in Afghanistan? (banging head on desk)

Other

Washington has so far endorsed Afghan plans for reconciliation with some Taliban…the plans echo the Awakening movement in Iraq, where tribal leaders from the country’s Sunni minority rebelled against Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia and joined forces with the Americans.

I may be the dense one here, but I don’t get this analogy. The Sunni awakening was about Sunni leaders in Iraq deciding to join forces with US troops to fight Al Qaeda. How is the US agreeing to negotiate with the Taliban like the awakening at all? I don’t get it.

Other

Bill Easterly says aid workers need to pay more attention to democracy.

There was a coup in Niger yesterday. Yet not all coups are created equal. Democratically-elected Mamadou Tandja dissolved Parliament and the Supreme Court last year when they blocked his efforts to abolish term limits. While the subsequent Parliament ended term limits, its legitimacy is highly questionable as the opposition boycotted the election and voter turnout was just 5%. So while this is clearly a coup, is it a replacing a democratic or non-democratic government? Not clear. To add to the fun, not only is Niger one of the poorest countries in the world, Al Qadea and cocaine traffickers think it’s a great place as well.

Other

Pakistani journalists asked Mr. Gates if the United States had plans to take over Pakistan’s nuclear weapons (Mr. Gates said no) and whether the United States would expand the drone strikes farther south into Baluchistan, as is under discussion. Mr. Gates did not answer.

At the same time, the Pakistani Army’s chief spokesman told American reporters at the army headquarters in Rawalpindi on Thursday that the military had no immediate plans to launch an offensive against extremists in the tribal region of North Waziristan, as American officials have repeatedly urged.

And the spokesman, Maj. Gen Athar Abbas, rejected Mr. Gates’s assertion that Al Qaeda had links to militant groups on Pakistan’s border. Asked why the United States would have such a view, the spokesman, General Abbas, curtly replied, “Ask the United States.”

Well, I am no expert on Pakistan and I have no idea what links Al Qaeda has with “militant groups” along Pakistan’s border. All I know is what I read in the news. Here’s what Lehaz Ali reported in Agence France-Presse yesterday:

A suicide bomber killed at least four people including two children on Saturday while militants destroyed a NATO tanker in a region of Pakistan known for harbouring Al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

OK, so Gates says there is a problem, the Pakistanis say there is not, and a few bombs just went off in the region where there may or may not be a problem, depending on who you ask. Seems like Pakistan and the US have some differences of opinion over this issue.

This may or may not be troubling for the US, depending on what sort of relationship it wants with Pakistan. Obama clarified this issue in his West Point speech:

…we are committed to a partnership with Pakistan that is built on a foundation of mutual interests, mutual respect and mutual trust. We will strengthen Pakistan’s capacity to target those groups that threaten our countries, and have made it clear that we cannot tolerate a safe haven for terrorists whose location is known, and whose intentions are clear.

That’s clear enough. It wants Pakistan as a partner. How’s that partnership working out? Seems to me we have a long way to go before we can tick off the checklist of “mutual interests, mutual respect and mutual trust.”

Other

Other

In the wake of the terrorism attempt Friday on a Northwest Airlines flight, federal officials on Saturday imposed a new layer of restrictions on travelers that could lengthen lines at airports and limit the ability of international passengers to move about an airplane.

Among other steps being imposed, passengers on international flights coming to the United States will apparently have to remain in their seats for the last hour of a flight without any personal items on their laps…

In effect, the restrictions mean that passengers on flights of 90 minutes or less would most likely not be able to leave their seats at all…

Does this mean I will not be able to hold a book or magazine for the last hour of any international flight coming to the US? That’s just great. I tend not to like to talk to people sitting next to me on a plane. I guess I’ll have to change this or get used to staring into space for an hour every time I fly. Also, I guess I’ll really have to watch my liquid intake before and on short flights, since I won’t be able use the bathroom.

As one might anticipate, getting on the plane is about to get more annoying as well.

…American Airlines said the T.S.A. had ordered new measures for flights departing from foreign locations to the United States, including mandatory screening of all passengers at airport gates during the boarding process. All carry-on items would be screened at security checkpoints and again at boarding, the airline said. It urged passengers to leave extra time for screening and boarding.

…Air Canada said…to be prepared for delays, cancellations and missed connections because of the new limits.

That’s just great. Another round of screening, and more missed and cancelled flights. I can’t wait for my next international trip. But, you might ask, don’t I worry about terrorism? Yes, I do. Nonetheless, I think we need to be reasonable about it, not bring international travel to a standstill every time some idiot tries to light a firecracker on a plane. Perhaps that seems reckless to you. Well, think how easy it is to blow up something. If Abdulmutalla wanted to really make a big splash, he could have easily bought some dynamite after he arrived in the US and blown himself up in Times Square; that would have been a big deal. The basic point is that it very easy to commit enormous acts of terrorism in the US, but we see almost none. What this tells me is that terrorism is not such a big threat. Al Qaeda spent $200,000 planning 9/11 and we have spent at least $1 trillion fighting “the war on terrorism.” Somewhere in a cave in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan, Osama bin Laden is laughing hysterically – and he’s right.

Kevin Drum nails it:

Apparently al-Qaeda doesn’t need to bother with real terrorism anymore: just light off a firecracker on a plane and the U.S. government will react as if a major city had been leveled. Why not just ban air flight entirely and be done with it?

Other