‘It’s Not About Osama’

‘It’s Not About Osama’

The Obama’s administration’s top counter terror official, John Brennan, offered the clearest view of how we’re dealing with Osama bin Laden and the other criminals who use terror against the US and its allies. Boil Brennan’s speech and subsequent remarks down to the headline and you have the essence.

Brennan argued that it’s not about Osama, “It’s about what he represents — the organization that he has tried to build. Clearly, the leadership of al-Qaeda is something that is very important. It’s part of our strategy. I think it is important to dismantle that leadership.”

To that end, Brennan and the national security team, has “presented President Obama with a number of actions and initiatives against al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups. Not only has he approved these operations; he has encouraged us to be even more aggressive, even more proactive and even more innovative, to seek out new ways and new opportunities for taking down these terrorists before they can kill more innocent men, women and children,” Brennan said during a major policy address at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

One crucial difference between the Bush administration and Obama’s: “We cannot shoot ourselves out of this challenge.” Given that simple truth, the administration is also “devoting new resources, investing in new capabilities, approving new actions and adapting our policies across the board.”

Interestingly, Brennan cast the increase in the size of the Army and Marines, as well as the expansion of Special Forces and the deployment of ISR to Afghanistan, in terms of responding to the possibility that terrorists will obtain and use a nuclear weapon. “The risk of just one terrorist with just one nuclear weapon is a risk we simply cannot afford to take,” he said.

But the president’s assistant for homeland security and counterterrorism presented a broader vision that included not just the terror threat but also how to address its causes.

“Rather than looking at allies and other nations through the narrow prism of terrorism, whether they are with us or against us, the administration is now engaging other countries and people across a broader range of areas. Rather than treating so many of our foreign affairs programs – foreign assistance, development and democracy promotion – as simply extensions of the fight against terrorists, we will do these things, promote economic growth, advocate good governance, transparency and accountability, because they serve our common interests and common security, not just in regions gripped by violent extremism, but around the world,” he said.

And there will be rewards for those who eschew the crimes of terror. They will, Brennan said, “gain favor with the United States. The same thing in the Palestinian community – those Palestinians that are really going to ensure that they pursue a path towards peace that does not bring terrorism to bear are going to be partners with the United States.”

Obama’s administration has laid out its case. Now they must execute.

Tags:

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Join the Conversation

Nothing really new here, but it will probably give fodder for the partisans.

What is new, (maybe DOD Buzz will cover it later)is that we are now giving arms aide to the Somali interim government.

Doesn’t it sound a lot like they have given up on catching Osama Bin Laden and are looking for political cover?
Wow I am getting cynical these days.

I have always had a problem with GWOT. It has never been a war on terrorism, just Islamist terrorism. Groups like the New People’s Army, Dev Sol(aka DHKP/C), and November 17 still look to target US interests and personnel, but we do nothing to neutralize them.

“… number of actions and initiatives against al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups. Not only has he approved these operations; he has encouraged us to be even more aggressive, even more proactive and even more innovative, to seek out new ways and new opportunities for taking down these terrorists before they can kill more innocent men, women and children,”

“One crucial difference between the Bush administration and Obama’s: “We cannot shoot ourselves out of this challenge.”

I guess you have to be more innovative if you can’t shoot terrorists and you can’t imprison them.

Also, anyone engaged in a firefight or on the receiving end of indirect fire is not thinking “Gee, I’m in an Overseas Contingency Operation.”

I like what he’s saying. He’s asking military planners essentially to act like Israelis. Be innovative and clever and remember that nature favors the bold. At the end of the day that is much more effective than military solutions alone.

Just my opinion.

Daniel Russ
Civilianmilitaryintelligencegroup​.com

It hasn’t been about Osama, since we left Tora Bora with our tails between our legs. Instead, it’s been about:
“Iraq terrorists” or maybe “islamofacists” or perhaps “jihadists” possibly “militants” oh certainly “insurgents” naw, “taliban” heck, its about “extremists”;

It’s bullshit.

It is true that it is not just about Osama. But it isn’t BS either. It’s about this:

http://​www​.cnn​.com/​2​0​0​9​/​W​O​R​L​D​/​m​e​a​s​t​/​0​8​/​0​7​/​i​r​a​q​.​k​i​d​n​a​p​p​e​d​.​b​o​y​/​i​n​d​e​x​.​h​tml

Daniel,
I don’t get that impression at all, the Administration is unwilling to face the reality that we are at war and its going to be a long hard slog.

This leads to Bravo Serria like this where they think they can avoid it. Its a formula for failue. The only way to be successful is to “shoot our way out”

But then as DOC75 said.…

“I guess you have to be more innovative if you can’t shoot terrorists and you can’t imprison them.”

Enough of the BS stories.….FIND OBL or resign your jobs within the Pentagon / US Government. Its TOTAL VICTORY or nothing. Heck, make me a General and I would make Patton proud.

Finding OBL is not “total victory” by any means. It actually means next to nothing. Patton would laugh at you.

Opinions are many! everone has one…The soldiers,male and female that participate in real combat are aproximately 10% of the ones in the combat zone.The rest we call them RIMFS…(Rear echelon M/F.) All of them are always scared, exept those that are under the influence of enhancement substances. Those that are brave enough to put a rucsack un their backs and go outside the perimeter and attempt to find a fight with the enemy are few and far between.However, finding the enemy is almost inposible when the community are agaist you. Afterall we dont have any bussiness policing the other non-democratic countries until we police our own!

Sfc Miranda 2nd of the 05, 82 airborne Div. combat operations/Recon…

participant of many combat related anecdotes to tell THAKS!

You’re okay Sgt Miranda. We need more like you telling it like it is.

“Afterall we dont have any bussiness policing the other non-democratic countries until we police our own!”

First, just curious, but what do we need to police our own from?

Second, should try the Marines. A lot less REMFs. They are still there, but much leaner organization.

I read this as denying the terrorist their most important asset/resource– their soldiers.

Why are these people joining the terrorists to begin with? It seems to me that is what is being addressed here in two parts– one providing so that common people don’t join terrorist orgs (due to finances, bad/corrupt government, etc.), and two encouraging other governments that turn a blind eye to terrorism to actually do something about it.

Osama has been dead for years

Cut the head off the dragon, and you kill the dragon.

Isn’t the whole idea of war to get the leaders so they eventually surrender? If you don’t have any leaders one may not be able to conduct much of an offensive against anybody. Give me a break we need a leader here in the US-not Obama. He doesn’t even respect the Commander In Chief title–he could care less about our troops and only considers the war on terror a thorn in his side–he wants to be the new King of the Uu and wars only get in his way.

We must not treat these questions as we have done in the past.We cannot afford “Bureaucratic Military Staff” to become the “Arm Chair Commandos” at the expense of the Operational Detachments. The Teams are not expendable! The Commander & Chief must ensure that the Troopers on the ground are not micro managed, to the point of them being compromised as they step out the door.When the SOF Teams are deployed, let the teams take care of the operational mechanics, to do otherwise is a waste of resources and men.Let the “Country Team” do what they were designed to do, and quit letting the “Oversized Battle Staff” micromanage the Teams in the field. If not, you are courting disaster.Since SOF inception, they have been the “Presidents Men”, so let them do what each individual is trained to do — and be successful in a military manner.Stop with “Battle Staff” Ops, and let Field Commanders do their jobs. Bet you’ll find OSBL that much sooner. –De Oppresso Liber–

If Bin-Laden is taken out, the organization would have a new leader. But if the organization morphs, like organizations sometimes do because the replacement leadership is different, then this could better the situation, or at least leave it the same as far as terrorism goes. If defeating a singular opponent and declaring victory does not change the situation or perhaps worsen it, then of course fighting an idea that cannot be killed with another idea that also cannot be killed will continue. This violent war of wills will end when one side’s replacement leadership has had enough. Bet’s on.

That was thee worst trip wire ever!How do you separate the being of the doing?Evolutionary doctrine.…

Looks like they like him!

Since the President now denies a war on terror this appears to be another part of the GRAND OBAMA APOLOGY TOUR.

Back in the 1980s we had the greatest intelligence agencies in the world. The post cold war cuts hurt those but even today we still posses some of the most capable special forces the world has ever seen.

We need to be using these assets to keep taking out their leadership. The more disorganized they are, the easier time our soldiers have on the ground.

*required

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement