WASHINGTON, June 30, 2008
Officials: Hunt For Al Qaeda Ineffective
U.S. Lacks A Real Strategy To Battle Al Qaeda In Pakistan, Experts And Officials Say
-
Play CBS Video
Video
Hunting Al Qaeda
The Pentagon is being criticized for failing to dismantle Taliban and al Qaeda holdouts in Afghanistan's frontier regions, raising fears of another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. David Martin reports.
-
Photo
Recent attempts to oust al Qaeda from safe havens in tribal areas of Pakistan near the Afghanistan border have been inerffective, U.S. officials say. (CBS)
-
Fast Facts
Pakistan
Learn about the people, economy and history.
-
Interactive
Global Terror
Major terrorist organizations, the FBI's most wanted and facts and photos from recent attacks.
Pakistan's latest attempt to oust al Qaeda and the Taliban from their safe havens in the frontier area has been, according to U.S. officials, ineffective.
Pentagon consultant Seth Jones of Rand Corp. says it's not even close to what's needed, reports CBS News national security correspondent David Martin.
One militant leader was actually tipped off to the coming offensive by sympathizers within the Pakistani military.
“What's needed in the tribal area is a much longer approach, clearing territory and holding it,” Jones said.
This offensive is focused in the area of the Khyber Pass, where the Taliban publicly execute suspected American spies and mount cross-border raids into Afghanistan, Martin reports.
“The command-and-control structure of every major insurgent group is in the Pakistani side of the border,” Jones said. “So this is critical to success in Afghanistan.”
In June, more American soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan than in Iraq.
“It's reasonable to argue that the situation is far worse today than it was four or five years ago,” said CBS News homeland security consultant Paul Kurtz.
That goes not only for Afghanistan, but also for the U.S. “The most likely area that's going to be linked to an attack in the United States is coming from this area,” Jones said.
U.S. troops call in air and artillery strikes at anyone shooting at them from Pakistan, commandos sometimes cross the border on covert operations aimed at finding Osama bin Laden, and unmanned predator drones launch missiles at senior al Qaeda leaders - but the sanctuaries remain, Martin reports.
“I don't think the limited strikes from Afghanistan or predator strikes will ever accomplish what is needed that is a clearing of territory and holding it,” Jones said.
With the war against terror now in its seventh year, U.S. officials acknowledge there is no real strategy for digging al Qaeda and the Taliban out of their safe havens, Martin reports.
So why haven't members of the military been more aggressive about going after these terrorists in Pakistan?
Because U.S. Government policy wouldn't allow them to. What it's meant is they've had to stay on the Afghan side of the border and watch militants come across the border, shoot at them, kill them, bomb them and escape to safety and they could do nothing about it, CBS News chief foreign affairs correspondent Lara Logan reports.
And the U.S. government's relation with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf has something to do with it. Now that his power has been weakened significantly, it could leave a window of opportunity for the U.S. to change its strategy.
As Logan says: "It's also a critical window when you look at the reality of what's developed in the tribal areas. However, there's a power vacuum in Pakistan. The government is ... divided, there's no consensus. So it's a very difficult time for us as well. But it's an opportunity that really we can't afford to waste."
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Video and Galleries from CBS Evening News
-
Video
Evening News Online, 07.09.09
-
Video
Couric's Financial Notebook
-
Video
Baby Skates Sensation
- Latest in CBS Evening News
- The Story Behind the Skating Babies
- Sagging Sales, Even in a Beach Paradise
- Grief, Outrage over Grave Desecrations
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 144 CommentsRe: "Hunt For Al Qaeda Ineffective"
That is not entirely true. I think that is has been as effective as many similar with-hunts, black-ops, and divide and conquer efforts.
We''re still in Iraq and Afghanistan aren''t we?
The ooga-booga effect does seem to be losing its punch, however.
There is only so many times that we can re-re-re-defeat this illusive band of boogy-men, and still grab peoples'' attention.
Did someone yell "wolf" again?
U.S. Lacks A Real Strategy To Battle Al Qaeda In Pakistan, Experts And Officials Say
U.S. Lacks A Real Strategy To Battle Al Qaeda In Afghanistan, Experts And Officials Say
U.S. Lacks A Real Strategy To Battle Al Qaeda In Iraq, Experts And Officials Say
U.S. Lacks A Real Strategy To Battle Al Qaeda In Iran, Experts And Officials Say
U.S. Lacks A Real Strategy To Battle Al Qaeda In the United States, Experts And Officials Say
*snicker*
Wow!
They have MR. Martin AND Ms. Logan piling it on here.
My favorite all-time quote from Ms. Logan-
"If I were to watch the news that you''re hearing in the United States, I''d just blow my brains out. ''Cause it would drive me nuts."
We feel your pain, Ms. Logan, believe me.
Posted by truthspeake2 at 07:45 PM : Jun 30, 2008
Wrong.
Rogue nations and terrorist only get bolder when they are appeased or ignored.
See: Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton.
RE: "Rogue nations and terrorist only get bolder when they are appeased or ignored."
Posted by One-American
True. Israel provides us with a ready example of this potential result.
Posted by tankersmash at 07:49 PM : Jun 30, 2008
WELCOME BACK, TANKERSMASH!
And THANK YOU for your service to our country!
God bless!
Rogue nations and terrorist only get bolder when they are appeased or ignored.
See: Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton.
Posted by Non-American at 07:47 PM : Jun 30, 2008
Re: "The Republicans couldn%u2019t win a war if they were fighting a single group of Kalahari Bushmen arm with bows and arrows."
The Republicans couldn''t win a war with an automatic war-winning machine and a disabled opponent.
Why?
Because they have no intention of ever "winning".
"Winning" is bad for business and the "free market", you see.
Keeping it going...that''s where the real money is.
After cut and running from Vietnam and Lebanon and bungling the war in Iraq what would you expect?"
Posted by masterballs2 at 07:49 PM : Jun 30, 2008
Psssst. We ARE WINNING in Iraq and Afghanistan, dummy.
You just don''t know it yet.
Re: "Psssst. We ARE WINNING in Iraq and Afghanistan, dummy."
"You just don''t know it yet."
Posted by One-American
We can only imagine everyones surprise when they find out.
You just don''t know it yet.
Posted by One-American at 07:54 PM : Jun 30, 2008
---------
yeah, we haven''t known it since the day it all started....HAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Rogue nations and terrorist only get bolder when they are appeased or ignored.
Posted by One-American at 07:47 PM : Jun 30, 2008
Exactly. Look at Bush REFUSING to talk to Iran, because it would "legitimize" their government.
They are NOW the regional superpower, they control the insurgency in Iraq, and they''re closer than ever to having nuclear technology.
All because Bush IGNORED them, in the hope that they would "go away".
Posted by FloydZepp2
President Ding Dong ? you mean Bill Clinton...
O
Posted by FloydZepp2
President Ding Dong ? you mean Bill Clinton...
O
Posted by vietnam21 at 07:59 PM : Jun 30, 2008
----------
Clinton never invaded Iraq. Pick your Bush.
What a hoot.
Maybe you have a hard time understanding!
You''''ll MAYBE discover that every nation has at times got into tough fights. The ones that DON''''T QUIT, like you hippy dope smoking bozos say we should do now, are the ones that live safer and more secure.
tankersmash
We''ve probably had 2 (Nam, Korea) that we quit since the history book you are refering to was written. Ain''t no hippy, don''t smoke dope. Been out of the military long enough to know their head games when I read them. Thanks for the flash backs.
Re: "So why haven''t members of the military been more aggressive about going after these terrorists in Pakistan?"
Mr. Bush helped send some Taliban/al-Qaeda terrorists into Iran, to bomb some stuff, and to murder some folks though. Remember?
"ABC News Exclusive: The Secret War Against Iran"
"A Pakistani tribal militant group responsible for a series of deadly guerrilla raids inside Iran has been secretly encouraged and advised by American officials since 2005, U.S. and Pakistani intelligence sources tell ABC News."
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/04/abc_news_exclus.html
You just don''''t know it yet.
Posted by One-American at 07:54 PM : Jun 30, 2008
We don''t know it, they don''t know it, our troops don''t know it, and our allies don''t know it.
So how do YOU know it?
O
Posted by vietnam21
Er, no, President Ding Dong a.k.a. the moron-in-chief a.k.a. the worst president in history is also named after my favorite part of the female anatomy. Guess who, now?
----------
Huh. You can say "********" but you can''t use the word Hell....interesting.....
One-American,
Would you be willing to join in the debacle against Iraq, if you were guaranteed strictly flower collecting duty?
Re: "And the U.S. government''s relation with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf has something to do with it."
Why do we have such a friendly "relation" with a military dictator- with nukes?
Re: "Hunt For Al Qaeda Ineffective"
Check out Exxon-Mobil''s profits.
Ineffective?
I think not.
Why do we have such a friendly "relation" with a military dictator- with nukes?
Posted by FeelFree4U at 08:08 PM : Jun 30, 2008
---------
Because there are dictators the RINOpublicans like and there are dictators the RINOpublicans don''t like.
Of course they never bring that hypocrisy up.
Exactly! mission accomplished. Iraqi resources, U.S. tax dollars, now peoples hard-earned gas money is all going to a few uber-rich elites.
All we really need to do is drop about 20 nuclear weapons on this god-forsaken murderous Jihadist den of scumbags, and game over. No strategy needed.
...HIGHLY EFFECTIVE!
I disagree.
What is REALLY needed is around 40 B-52 bombers, all fully loaded with NAPALM, dropping their loads along that border, 24/7, for around 6 months straight.
Problem solved.
I disagree.
What is REALLY needed is around 40 B-52 bombers, all fully loaded with NAPALM, dropping their loads along that border, 24/7, for around 6 months straight.
Problem solved.
Posted by FeelFreee4U at 08:27 PM : Jun 30, 2008
-----------
Yeah, worked in Vietnam, didn''t it.
What a hoot the NASCAR bumpkins are......
Posted by FloydZepp2 at 08:34 PM : Jun 30, 2008
...........
They would be...
...but sadly, they vote too, which is why we have the problems of today!
Rogue nations and terrorist only get bolder when they are appeased or ignored.
Posted by One-American at 07:47 PM : Jun 30, 2008
That is why North Korea has more nukes now than ever...
Re: "Strategy? Heck, who needs a strategy?
All we really need to do is drop about 20 nuclear weapons on this god-forsaken murderous Jihadist den of scumbags, and game over. No strategy needed."
Posted by FeelFreee4U
To my impersonator here, Michael Totten, (@ www.michaeltotten.com)- it''s not going to happen.
Why? Because the only people that really want it to are people like yourself- people who hate and fear all non-Whites and all Muslims, yet are not willing to join the fight.
Your efforts to conn people into risking their own blood and treasure, simply to appease your own whims and irrational fears, is an increasingly losing venture.
You are running out of gullible cannon-fodder.
You have been defeated by your own cowardice.
Re: "Exactly! mission accomplished. Iraqi resources, U.S. tax dollars, now peoples hard-earned gas money is all going to a few uber-rich elites."
Posted by andor3
Agreed.
The Boosh "experience" has destroyed us.
How could a person with a brain, vote for more of this?
Re: %u201CIt''s reasonable to argue that the situation is far worse today than it was four or five years ago,%u201D Paul Kurtz, CBS News homeland security consultant, said."
It sounds like this guy is admitting that The War On Terror (TWOT), is a failure.
Problem solved.
Posted by FeelFreee4U at 08:27 PM : Jun 30, 2008
Where did this ''feely'' come from? The one I know is a al qaeada sympathizer
Posted by stevex47 at 08:58 PM : Jun 30, 2008
The people WITH brains, won''t.
RE: "Where did this ''feely'' come from? The one I know is a al qaeada sympathizer"
Posted by ToolMangler
I don''t believe your al-CIA''duh ghost stories.
If anyone here is a sympathizer, it is you.
Posted by cbscrash07 at 08:47 PM : Jun 30, 2008
What is unnecessary risk to suicide bombers ?
LOLOLOL. Ya, right.
Boosh holds their hands and kisses them.
Boosh needs bin Laden free so they can carry on the masquerade. That''s why they do things like out CIA agents.
If McSame is elected, first thing he''ll do is kiss the and hold hands with the muslims.
Hypocrits. Mission Accomplished.
Posted by IOWEIGN at 09:08 PM : Jun 30, 2008
...............
Running into a crowd, pulling the pin (or pushing a button), while chanting "ALLAH PEANUT BUTTER SANDWICHES!!!
...and nothing happens.
(my best guess)
- 1
- 2
- 3
- next
See all 144 Comments