Well, At Least They're Offering Something (Finally)

The Dems, with their primary cheerleader John Kerry, have finally come up with a plan. That's something considering that they've just been bitching for so long. Unfortunately, the plan is quite lame, not to mention vague.

Five years after Sept. 11, where are we? Bogged down in Baghdad, beleaguered around the world and bitterly divided at home.
Democrats have a unique responsibility not just to oppose what has failed but to propose a new course that can defeat jihadist terrorism once and for all.
There are many things we can and must do better, but there are five steps to start: Redeploy from Iraq, recommit to Afghanistan, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, reform our homeland defense and restore America's moral leadership in the world. These are five bold steps Democrats would take to strengthen our national security, and that the Republicans who have set the agenda resist to our national peril.

The Afghanistan vice Iraq focus is so silly that it's almost frightening. Tell me, does anyone really think that the majority of terrorist forces are in Afghanistan? I actually laughed out loud when I read that "moral leadership" statement.

We must refocus our military efforts from the failed occupation of Iraq to destroying al-Qaeda. Iraqi leaders have responded only to deadlines and we must set another deadline to get Iraq up on its own two feet: July 2007. We also need real diplomacy. Only through negotiation can you stem the growing civil war. Redeploy troops from Iraq, maintain training forces and an over-the-horizon capacity, and free up resources to fight the war on terror.
We can't sustain the delusion that the war in Afghanistan is over. On Thursday the president said we're on the offensive against terrorists in Afghanistan, even as the NATO commander made a desperate plea for more troops to stop a major Taliban offensive. We must send significant reinforcements to Afghanistan - at least 5,000 more troops, equipment and reconstruction funds so that the United States, not the Taliban, rebuilds the new Afghanistan.

Well, apparently the Dems, or at least Kerry, thinks that Afghanistan is the hotbed of terrorist control. No doubt that there is terrorist activity in Afghanistan, but this really misses a lot of reality. Iraq has more terrorists in action than any other theater. This also makes the focus Al Qaeda and misses that the reality of how Al Qaeda and the other Salafi Jihadis are advancing their agenda. 9/11 the Spanish bombings, the British bombings all came from Islamists of various cultures and primarily from Europe. Al Qaeda and their ilk are a loose network of like minded activists. Attacking Afghanistan isn't going to help there, and leaving Iraq will free many actively occupied Jihadis to take the fight elsewhere.

Third, we are threatened not just by gun barrels, but by oil barrels. The great treasury of jihadist terrorism is Mideast oil. We fund both sides in the war on terror every time we fill up our gas tanks.

I'm going to keep the rest of the points short. The third is pretty much a no-shit statement and one that the present administration has already discussed. Nothing new, except that the Dems are talking about it.

Fourth, to make America safe we must reform our homeland defense. President Bush this week said that Osama bin Laden and the terrorists plan to target AmericaÂ’s weak points. Our weak points - our borders, our chemical plants, our railways - remain weak because this administration has had the wrong priorities. For the cost of one week in Iraq, we could purchase the equipment to scan every cargo container bound for U.S. ports to protect against weapons of mass destruction.

Yep, there really should be work toward securing the chemical/industrial hazards. No argument there. But there is that cargo container BS again. The proposal is so incredibly impractical that its fascinating that the proposal constantly is thrown back on the table. I'll even take this a step more specific with the radiation detectors in ports. If a terrorist wants to attack the US with a nuclear device, do you really think they'll haul it through a major port? In fact, I'd say that the port would be a better and easier target than trying to sneak a bomb through a port.

We need to rapidly reorient the FBI to focus on counterterrorism at home. We need to reopen the bin Laden unit at the CIA, which the administration inexplicably disbanded. The 9/11 Commission found that 15 of the 19 hijackers who attacked us should have been intercepted by border authorities.

Ok, the FBI shouldn't be reoriented. Maybe they should be enhanced and enlarged for that task, but shifting the focus will leave regular law enforcement unmanned. Not a good idea. As for the Bin Laden unit of the CIA, I'd say that it is a waste of time. To fight a loosely connected organization, like Al Qaeda or the other Salafi Jihais, you have to attack the connecting nodes, not the head. If you can do both, that works as well, but Bin Laden isn't nearly as effective as he once was when he had a base for training and had a monetary system.

Border enforcement is a good idea, but the more likely attacks will come from those who already live in this country or those who will come in and wait for the appropriate time for the attack. Of coarse, the whole immigration issue has stalled fixing the border issues, and the Dems have had more than a little part in that.

Lastly, we must restore our moral authority by deploying the full arsenal of our national power with smarter diplomacy, stronger alliances, more effective international institutions - and fidelity to our values. We must remember the great lesson of the Cold War when we led the world to confront a common threat.

Heh. Smarter diplomacy? I'm guessing he means that we need to talk more. Seems that that is all they want to do is talk though. Sometimes, you really need to take action.

Strong alliances? What have we had up till now. Oh, that's right. Kerry considers them alliances of the coerced. Well, I'm certain he'd have made better alliances. Probably with France.