Washington Matters
Is Obama Weak on Terrorism?
The charge may win the GOP political points, but it won't help protect the country any.
By Mark Willen, Senior Political Editor, The Kiplinger Letter
January 4, 2010
- Comments
- Email This Article
- Print This Article
- Order a Reprint
Advertisement
Maybe it’s not a good idea to start the new year in a cranky mood, but as I read about and watch the finger-pointing over the Christmas Day terrorism attempt, I’m finding it awfully hard to take it seriously. That’s not to say the attack, which almost succeeded, isn’t very serious (it definitely is) or that we don’t need to keep fighting the war against evil forces determined to destroy everything Americans believe in (we absolutely must).
But it’s getting increasingly hard to take what passes for a national security debate in this country with any degree of seriousness. Whether it’s Janet Napolitano’s lame claim that the system worked or Dick Cheney’s insulting charge that Obama is “trying to pretend we’re not at war,” it’s demeaning to even listen to it. And don’t get me started on the congressional hearings about to unfold – more like stage-managed platforms where politicians who care far too much about the upcoming elections and far too little about making sure the U.S. is being smart and effective in prosecuting the war on terror.
Cheney and his allies – from GOP Rep. Pete Hoekstra to columnist Charles Krauthammer to book promoter Sarah Palin – are having a field day accusing Obama of “not getting it.” Never mind that Obama is pressing the war against al Qaeda in Afghanistan, Pakistan and, yes, Yemen, far more than Cheney ever did. No, Obama doesn’t get it because he doesn’t walk with a swagger and doesn’t like the term “war on terror” and agrees with the courts that torture is bad and wants to close Guantanamo Bay. Never mind that it was Bush, not Obama, who released the Gitmo detainees who allegedly plotted the Christmas attack. Never mind that Obama is tripling the number of troops and doubling the money spent to fight al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan and has been pushing and coordinating attacks against them in Yemen. In fact, the Christmas attack was in retaliation for the increased U.S. effort in Yemen. Obama is bringing the fight to al Qaeda in ways Cheney and Bush promised but never delivered. Why doesn’t anyone press Cheney on that score?
There are several lessons to be drawn from the Christmas attempt, but the unreasonable GOP attacks and the knee-jerk Democratic responses are overshadowing them. And that’s depriving the American people of the debate they need and deserve. And that, in turn, may mean we don’t reach the appropriate conclusions and policy formulations that we must make to improve our chances of keeping al Qaeda at bay.
First, let’s acknowledge that the system most definitely did not work. Maybe there was no smoking gun, as Obama aide John Brennan put it Sunday, but there were plenty of smoking gun parts that weren’t put together the way they should have been. That system didn’t work. Admittedly, there is an incredible amount of data being processed each day by the U.S. government, and some of it is bound to get delayed or overlooked. But it was surely no everyday occurrence when a prominent Nigerian banker went to the U.S. embassy and reported his own son. Common sense suggests that had to be a whopper of a warning, and some U.S. official hearing it should have been screaming to call attention to it.
Second, we have to recognize that a lot more terrorist plots get foiled than we’ll ever know about. The brave and dedicated people who run our intelligence and security apparatuses hardly ever get praised for their successes because so many must remain secret. But we should recognize they have an awfully good score and not be so quick to call them incompetent.
Third, no system will ever be perfect. As New York Times columnist David Brooks pointed out recently, it’s childish for us to expect the government to do the impossible and take complete care of us in all ways all the time. We can demand that it do its best, but we have to do the rest. And that’s why we shouldn’t forget that the Christmas plot ultimately failed because brave and alert citizens of this country and others reacted swiftly and effectively. That’s part of a new awareness that is ultimately the last line of defense. And in this case, that part, at least, did work.
Fourth, in judging President Obama, we have to look at the full picture. His actions have been much tougher than his words, but his words have been plenty tough, too – tough enough, in fact, to anger his base. He won praise, even from conservatives, for his Nobel Peace Prize speech in which he insisted war is sometimes justified because real evil exists in the world. That wasn’t what his Oslo audience, or his liberal supporters at home, wanted to hear, but it’s what he believes, and he has committed the troops, money and effort to show he means it.
So instead of the finger-pointing and the silly public hearings designed to win votes in November, let’s have a real discussion and investigation of what went wrong and tighten up whatever needs to be tightened up. And let’s back the effort to go after al Qaeda anywhere and everywhere.
I know that’s unlikely to happen because it would require a spirit of bipartisanship that wouldn’t appeal to the political bases so important in midterm elections, and it wouldn’t earn big bucks for pundits, blowhards and cable networks that always argue for one extreme or the other. But that’s what we need, and it’s getting more and more costly that it’s become so impossible to get it.
Tags:
Topics:
- Comments
- RSS
Permission to post your comment is assumed when you submit it. The name you provide will be used to identify your post, and NOT your e-mail address. We reserve the right to excerpt or edit any posted comments for clarity, appropriateness, civility, and relevance to the topic.
View our full privacy policy



Reader Comments (5)
Posted by: G at 01/05/2010 12:43:51 PM
...I started to read your article, hoping against hope that someone (ANYONE!!!!!) would not be pushing their agenda, and lo and behold, there it is. Your bias is showing and it's ugly...one sided and completely and utterly wrong. I don't get why columnists call themselves columnists anymore when what they are are propogandists. It's clear you are an Obama-holic, like most of your peers. Get some help!!!!! The best source of help would be to study the law of cause and effect! Even in Obama's alternative reality in Washington, and Nancy and Harry's alternative reality in the Congress and Senate, you still cannot get something for nothing. Life just doesn't work that way, no matter how many times you try to make people believe it. Good luck on your recovery. Sincerely, A real, live, tax paying, law abiding, thinking American and part of We, the PEOPLE.
Posted by: lou at 01/05/2010 05:55:49 PM
Amazing...Try reporting news and stop giving opinions. No wonder so many people do not trust reporters and editors. Let us look at the facts that we are no longer treating terrorists as enemy combatants but putting them in the American judicial system, even though they are not Americans. Let’s close Gitmo and put terrorists in jails in the USA. Let’s send existing prisoners to countries that are harboring terrorist such as Yemen where they come back as planners of future terrorist acts. What a joke...s!
Posted by: roger at 01/06/2010 02:28:04 PM
Another great example of someone writing about something he has no idea about except to kiss the feet of his great president.
Posted by: Kent Hackman at 01/07/2010 06:12:53 PM
I believe that Obama is strong in dealing with Al Qaeda, a point reinforced today (January 7, 2010) with the news that a United States grand jury has charged Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab on six counts over the alleged plot to blow up a US airliner on Christmas Day. The 23-year-old Nigerian is accused of trying to use a weapon of mass destruction and attempted murder. The news, too, about the suicide bomb that killed seven CIA agents in the remote town of Khost, Afganistan, shows that our governments agencies are in the thick of the fight. The voices hostile to Mr. Obama represent a willingness to rush to judgment to score cheap political points before the facts are known. As the story about the Christmas Day incident emerged in the news the day after the event, my brother-in-law in Florida, with whom we were staying, ranted against the administration for giving the Nigerian legal protection...that meant that the CIA would not have a chance to work him over to extract maximum information. As we know today, my brother-in-law was wrong: Government agents questioned the young man extensively and gained considerable information, as well as a confession, before he was read his Miranda rights and had access to a lawyer. I hope Fox News has told this part of the story. Following 9/11 the nation has been in the grip of a rush to judgment and the conclusion that the nation is in a war on terrorism that demands seeing matters in black and white. The spectra of war, weapons of mass destruction, and an attack at any time has poisoned our collective psychic with fears of the unknown. While there is no denying that we, almost alone, are at war with Al Qaeda, the chance of victory seems very slim as long as the issue is seen in military terms. Those terms serve Al Qaeda well. So what is to be done? I suggest that the administration read Louise Richardsons book, What Terrorists Want: Understanding the Enemy, Containing the Theat. Her thesis, in part, is that Al Qaeda and all terrorist movements are motivated by three key goals: revenge, renown, and reaction from the enemy. The first, revenge, is not well understood. One piece is the perceived slight by the West of Islams contributions to world civilizations; another is the presence of infidels on holy ground (partly ameliorated by the Bush administrations removal of American bases from Saudi Arabia); a third is US support for Israel and indifference toward the Palestinians. These are political matters that can be dealt with off of the battlefield, as the British government was successful in dealing with the Irish Republic Army.
Posted by: Nomen at 05/06/2010 09:20:14 AM
I don't see where either party can make any valid criticisms. Obama is using the same "war against terror" play book that Bush did. Nothing has changed. Meanwhile our borders are just as porous as ever and no one really knows who is slipping in and with what(drugs or WMDs). Why isn't a serious effort being made to track 15+ million people running around with stolen or false identities? Until I see a crackdown on those right here amongst us illegally and those who are aiding them under one pretext or another, Homeland Security is nothing but an expensive farce. America will continue to be a sitting duck.