US soldiers attend a 9/11 commemoration in Afghanistan - Photo: AP / M. Sadeq
A new audio tape from Osama bin Laden has been released. Addressing the American people, bin Laden tells the president, "If you end the war (in Afghanistan), so let it be. But if it is otherwise, all we will do is continue the war of attrition against you on all possible axes. You are waging a hopeless and losing war for the benefit of others, a war the end of which is not visible on the horizon."
The message was issued late Sunday night, Sept. 13th. It was posted on the website of al-Qeada sponsored media group, Al-Sahab. According to IntelCenter, a company that monitors terrorist propaganda, this is the 49th message released by Al-Sahab in 2009 alone.
Here is the video of bin Laden's latest message, from YouTube.
The message comes in the middle of a commotion of bad news from and relating to Afghanistan, in the war torn country, and in the US. The August 20 elections in Afghanistan are still in dispute. The Associated Pressreports:
Repeated delays in announcing full results from the Aug. 20 presidential vote, along with mounting evidence of fraud, have raised fears of new political instability in Afghanistan at a time of rising Taliban violence and an increased U.S. military presence.
An election complaints commission supported by the U.N. has said it found "clear and convincing" evidence of fraud in several areas and ordered about 2 percent of the ballots quarantined. The big question now is if the cheating was large-scale enough to overturn President Hamid Karzai's lead in the count so far.
The Afghan-run Independent Election Commission was meeting Monday morning and would to make an announcement later, spokesman Noor Mohammad Noor said. The commission had been expected to say when it would announce long-delayed full preliminary results, but later it issued a brief statement saying only that there would be no further reporting of vote counts Monday.
At home, US involvement in Afghanistan is highly politicized and contentious. Congressional Democrats are beginning to question US involvement, and worry about the money and troop commitments already in place, in light of the growing realization that as many as 25-45,000 more troops will be needed. In July, a temporary expansion of the Afghanistan forces was passed by the Senate, effective through 2012, which has not been fully deployed yet. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told reporters last Thursday, "I don't think there's a great deal of support for sending more troops to Afghanistan in the country or in the Congress." Possibly in response to this, Sens. Linsey Graham (R-SC), John McCain (R-AZ) and Joe Liberman (I-CT) published an article in the Wall Street Journal yesterday titled, "Only Decisive Force Can Prevail in Afghanistan." Interestingly, the authors, while pushing for a troop surge, similar to the one used in Iraq, also seem to be criticizing the former Administration for not handling Iraq properly, and allowing similar mistakes to be made in Afghanistan. Here is an excerpt that sums up their points:
More troops will not guarantee success in Afghanistan, but a failure to send them is a guarantee of failure. As we saw in Iraq, numbers matter in counterinsurgency. Protecting the population and developing capable indigenous security forces are inherently manpower-intensive endeavors. Moreover, in the absence of basic security, the other crucial components of successful counterinsurgency—fostering the emergence of effective, legitimate government and economic development—simply cannot get off the ground.
It is precisely this middle path—which the previous administration pursued for too long in Iraq—that is a recipe for quagmire and collapse of political support for the war at home. Mr. Obama was right when he said last year that "You don't muddle through the central front on terror . . . You don't muddle through stamping out the Taliban."
We recognize that a decision to increase the number of American troops in Afghanistan will be politically difficult here at home. Some will say we can't afford it. Others will warn the president of "quagmire" and urge him to send either no new forces, or fewer than Gen. McChrystal recommends—perhaps with the promise of "re-evaluating" further deployments later on.
The President seems to be in favor of a troop increase, although cautiously. Aware that Democrats, many of whom initially supported the increased focus on Afghanistan, are now resisting any further ramp-up, the White House has downplayed its interest in the situation. General Stanley McChrystal, top US commander in Afghanistan has offered a formal assessment of the war, which is being considered at this time. It is widely believed that this assessment will result in a request for more troops. In the 2008 presidential campaign Afghanistan was a means of criticizing Bush, Republicans and, by association, John McCain (who was portrayed as "Bush III,") i.e.: we screwed up in Iraq, ignored Afghanistan, and look what happened; we need to get out of Iraq and into Afghanistan. Now we've done that, and pundits are already calling it "another Vietnam." Possibly it is, considering how long the US has been involved. The Washington Postsums it up fittingly:
Obama held it up as the "good" war that he was determined to win, unlike the "bad" war in Iraq that he would end. He promised a military surge in Afghanistan, and he dared John McCain and the outgoing administration to get to his right on the issue.
The above quote is from an article discussing the similarities between the current situation in Afghanistan and the situation in the 1980's which drew the attention of then-Rep. Charlie Wilson who (some believe) single-handedly got the support in Congress to bring about the defeat of the Red Army and the end of the Cold War. They claim this is the second time in 25 years that Afghanistan has been the "good war." Therein lies the rub, however. Now, Bush is out of office, Americans are placated that we are done with Iraq, one of the most mismanaged and unpopular wars in recent history, and more pressing concerns at home have turned popular attention away from distant wars -- and to the kitchen table, which is overflowing with bills and lay-off notices.
Any war provides endless examples of why it is bad, why we should get out, and what is at risk if we stay. The real question remains: what is at risk if we leave? Congress is always hesitant to authorize more troops, more spending, committing more resources to increasingly complex situations. Yet, we have the architects of the 9/11 terrorist attacks saying, "Ask yourselves to determine your position: Is your security, your blood, your children, your money, your jobs, your homes, your economy, and your reputation dearer to you than the security of the Israelis, their children and their economy?" Eerily similar to what opponents of the war are saying, too.
Is Afghanistan the "good" war? I have no idea, but I do know we are involved, and it will not be over soon. How we proceed matters at least as much, perhaps more, than if we do or do not. Ironically, in light of the Republican resistance to just about all things Obama, it may be Republicans who get behind the President on Afghanistan. In part of his effort to muster Congressional support for the continued war effort, the President is offering a series of 50 "benchmarks" to measure progress in Afghanistan, much as was done in Iraq. Additionally, it seems that the Afghani perception of US involvement is as much of a concern, in terms of partnership with the Afghani people, government, and security forces, as US opinion. Defense Secretary Robert Gates told Bloomberg News that he was concerned about, “the implications of significant additional forces in terms of the foreign footprint in Afghanistan, whether the Afghans will see this as us becoming more of an occupier or their partner, and how do you differentiate those.” Gates also counters the calls for withdrawal by pointing out, “The notion that you can conduct a counter-terrorist campaign and do it from a distance simply does not accord with reality." He acknowledges that American opposition to the war is not surprising, saying, “This nation has been at war for eight years. Americans are tired of having their sons and daughters at risk.”
For more info: News stories related to Afghanistan.
Bin Laden is one of those viruses that refuses to go away. As a Muslim, I have known about him and his evil behavior for a very long time, and I know that his time will come where he will be brought to justice. I just pray that we don't have to see the loss of innocent lives until that moment comes. Rest assured, he does not have the support of all Muslims in the world. Those of us who are literate enough to read the Quran and understand Islam know very well that his actions and his words are contrary to the teachings of Islam.
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!
Comments
bunker buster that whole mountain range
Bin Laden is one of those viruses that refuses to go away. As a Muslim, I have known about him and his evil behavior for a very long time, and I know that his time will come where he will be brought to justice. I just pray that we don't have to see the loss of innocent lives until that moment comes. Rest assured, he does not have the support of all Muslims in the world. Those of us who are literate enough to read the Quran and understand Islam know very well that his actions and his words are contrary to the teachings of Islam.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!