Days before elections Joe Biden, the Vice-President-elect, told campaign donors: "Watch, we're going to have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle [of Obama].
" Did Joe Biden really have in mind al-Qaeda? In Britain, security officials say that there is genuine concern that during the transition period al Qaida will attempt a "spectacular" attack.
Other Security officials also are fearful of an attack and leaders of other nations have already given advice to Barack Obama.
Besides developing a certain proficiency in one-way-flights, al-Qaida is known to have been experimenting with biological agents, particularly anthrax, which they acquire from dead animals.
Now they are interested in creating a CBRN device (chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear).
The US has been preparing for this and has developed anti-CBRN units on constant patrol in main cities.
Why is al-Qaida more threatened by Barack Obama than the Bush administration? Bush's mentality and invasion of Iraq had damaged America's image around the world and reinforced al-Qaida's narrative.
Obama's promise to reverse many of the policies of the Bush administration on issues such as detentions at Guantanamo, torture and the war in Iraq dramatically improved America's image, especially in the Muslim world.
Therefore, it will more difficult now for al-Qaida to carry on their propaganda to the rest of the world that "America is still the evil crusader suppressing its own minorities".
Clearly the 2008 elections send the signal to the world that America is an open and tolerant society.
Barack's background makes him indeed a much tougher target to their propaganda attacks.
These are good enough reasons to make al-Qaida feel threatened.
Osama's second in command (Ayman al-Zawahri) released a tape to Obama.
The US officials said the message did not signal any increased threat against America.
The message consisted of despicable insults against our new president along with the remark "the dogs of Afghanistan have found the flesh of your soldiers to be delicious, so send thousands after thousands to them".
Was the last remark a fearful warning or a provocation? Guardian.
co.
uk, November 20, 2008.
Al-Qaida always felt confident that they can handle a guerrilla war with us in the steep mountains of Afghanistan and defeat us as they did it the Soviets in the 1980s.
Before 9/11 bin Laden had sought battle with Americans, envisioning that a full sized ground invasion of Afghanistan, similar to that of the Soviets, would economically deplete the USA .
Bin Laden always wanted to draw the most powerful nation in the world into a guerrilla war in which his small but fanatical and experienced forces would gradually wear the great power down, bankrupting it by an unending conflict and the resultant destabilization of the Middle East and its oil resources on which America depended.
Bush's attack on Iraq has cost $600 billion to date.
This figure increases by millions of dollars every hour.
Additionally there are future costs like long-term care for the wounded and disabled US soldiers, the replacement costs of the used up equipment, interest payments on the war debt, and the lost economic use of the resources and manpower squandered in war.
Experts estimate that the already incurred out-of-pocket and future costs of Bush's Iraq war to be $3 trillion, about the same cost as WW2.
Paul Craig Roberts, the Father of Reaganomics, said that these wars must end so that bankrupt Washington will be in a position to borrow from abroad the money it needs to bail out the US economy.
Let's face it: we blew our opportunity to catch Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida's leadership when the Bush Administration let them escape from Tora Bora, despite the CIA and the nearby US Marines asking for permission to surround and block their escape.
The clumsy use of military forces to continue the Afghan war will likely turn it into a second Vietnam further draining the already weak American economy.
The low-cost, yet the most effective way to fight terrorism is to employ police and intelligence (CIA) with the intermittent use of military force when appropriate.
Coddie Adwar
" Did Joe Biden really have in mind al-Qaeda? In Britain, security officials say that there is genuine concern that during the transition period al Qaida will attempt a "spectacular" attack.
Other Security officials also are fearful of an attack and leaders of other nations have already given advice to Barack Obama.
Besides developing a certain proficiency in one-way-flights, al-Qaida is known to have been experimenting with biological agents, particularly anthrax, which they acquire from dead animals.
Now they are interested in creating a CBRN device (chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear).
The US has been preparing for this and has developed anti-CBRN units on constant patrol in main cities.
Why is al-Qaida more threatened by Barack Obama than the Bush administration? Bush's mentality and invasion of Iraq had damaged America's image around the world and reinforced al-Qaida's narrative.
Obama's promise to reverse many of the policies of the Bush administration on issues such as detentions at Guantanamo, torture and the war in Iraq dramatically improved America's image, especially in the Muslim world.
Therefore, it will more difficult now for al-Qaida to carry on their propaganda to the rest of the world that "America is still the evil crusader suppressing its own minorities".
Clearly the 2008 elections send the signal to the world that America is an open and tolerant society.
Barack's background makes him indeed a much tougher target to their propaganda attacks.
These are good enough reasons to make al-Qaida feel threatened.
Osama's second in command (Ayman al-Zawahri) released a tape to Obama.
The US officials said the message did not signal any increased threat against America.
The message consisted of despicable insults against our new president along with the remark "the dogs of Afghanistan have found the flesh of your soldiers to be delicious, so send thousands after thousands to them".
Was the last remark a fearful warning or a provocation? Guardian.
co.
uk, November 20, 2008.
Al-Qaida always felt confident that they can handle a guerrilla war with us in the steep mountains of Afghanistan and defeat us as they did it the Soviets in the 1980s.
Before 9/11 bin Laden had sought battle with Americans, envisioning that a full sized ground invasion of Afghanistan, similar to that of the Soviets, would economically deplete the USA .
Bin Laden always wanted to draw the most powerful nation in the world into a guerrilla war in which his small but fanatical and experienced forces would gradually wear the great power down, bankrupting it by an unending conflict and the resultant destabilization of the Middle East and its oil resources on which America depended.
Bush's attack on Iraq has cost $600 billion to date.
This figure increases by millions of dollars every hour.
Additionally there are future costs like long-term care for the wounded and disabled US soldiers, the replacement costs of the used up equipment, interest payments on the war debt, and the lost economic use of the resources and manpower squandered in war.
Experts estimate that the already incurred out-of-pocket and future costs of Bush's Iraq war to be $3 trillion, about the same cost as WW2.
Paul Craig Roberts, the Father of Reaganomics, said that these wars must end so that bankrupt Washington will be in a position to borrow from abroad the money it needs to bail out the US economy.
Let's face it: we blew our opportunity to catch Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida's leadership when the Bush Administration let them escape from Tora Bora, despite the CIA and the nearby US Marines asking for permission to surround and block their escape.
The clumsy use of military forces to continue the Afghan war will likely turn it into a second Vietnam further draining the already weak American economy.
The low-cost, yet the most effective way to fight terrorism is to employ police and intelligence (CIA) with the intermittent use of military force when appropriate.
Coddie Adwar
SHARE
