With the consulate attack in Benghazi fresh in U.S. officials' minds, the State Department isn't taking any chances with the significant amount of 'chatter' the NSA has been monitoring. Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) assessed this chatter as the most serious threat we've faced since that day almost twelve years ago. Apparently, the chatter has been emanating from Yemen where Al Qaeda is still operation on the Arabia Peninsula.
In their joint interview, Senator Durbin let Senator Chambliss answer all the questions on the threat, for which we still don't know the nature of the attack. It's obvious from these embassy closings this weekend that the Intelligence Committees must have been briefed about these terrorist plot communications at least a three to four months prior to last week. What is troublesome is if the NSA through its PRISM program has been intercepting all of these communications, why is it that we don not know the specific nature of the attack or where it is going to occur? Mostly likely, our intelligence officials have a good idea about these two notions (we hope so) but are not sharing that information.
Also, Andrea Mitchell mentioned the prison breaks of thousands of Islamic radicals in Libya, Iraq, and Pakistan. There is no coincidence here that the timing of these breaks and the threat are falling around the same time. Al Qaeda is broken, badly decimated, but these actions are its last ditch effort to counter that while at the same time, adding to the growing chaos across the region.
Given this pertinent new threat to one of our outposts overseas, it's unfortunate to hear Rick Santorum spout the same empty attack rhetoric against the president and his administration's efforts to keep the American people safe abroad. For most government officials, Benghazi was a tragedy that taught us a very hard lesson in securing our people abroad, but to some it will remain a sad political 'gotcha' that won't be fixed. Mr. Santorum said that the president has been timid and has politically withdrawn from the fight, also saying that Mr. Obama has not confronted radical Islam, citing an allegiance with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. The reason we say it's unfortunate is because Mr. Santorum is incorrect on several accounts. Starting with Egypt, the United States respected the result of democratically held election, just as we do here. But note that the Administration also didn't call the military intervention in toppling the Muslim Brotherhood to install a more moderate administration a coup, something Mr. Santorum selectively left out. As far as being timid with Muslim extremists, we would direct you to Joe Scarborough's comments about the Mr. Obama's use of drones, more ruthless than the Bush/Cheney administration had been.
Joy Reid stated it most accurately in that the Obama Administration has dialed back the blustery rhetoric but has ramped up the operations. This second part is not to be glossed over however, due to the intensity in which Mr. Obama has employed the use of drones. The reason all those embassies are closed today is the result of our use of these weapons. With the drones, we've targeted the most important Al Qaeda operatives in the Middle East and North Africa (with awful collateral damage) and when it came time to capture or kill the most radical of them all (Osama Bin Laden), we sent in personnel.
It's this notion of personnel that leads us to a broader point. The reliance of the PRISM program and drone use seems to be replacing personnel on the ground where the key intelligence is gathered and in this latest threat example, that means the where and how. However, given what happened with Edward Snowden reliable personnel has become an issue as well. Where this can be corrected is through the elimination of using private contractors for national security, as was the case with Mr. Snowden. The owners of these private firms are in business to ultimately make money and we believe that the profit motive should be taken out of the effort to provide security to American citizens.
Also, being mindful of this context, the idea of shutting down the government, as some Republican lawmakers have suggested, would leave our overseas personnel vulnerable due to a lack of resources. Additionally, it will leave us ill-equipped at home as well. Is it comforting to know that our first responders, in the case of an emergency, will be unable to operate effectively due to lack of funds? It's refreshing to know that the conservative Mr. Chambliss believes in governing, as opposed to obstruction, and that a shutdown would be detrimental to the American people. Not to mention, of course, a shutdown would hit the Republican party hardest politically.
Government shutdowns, debt defaults and isolationist approaches to foreign policy will only serve to make the United States less secure and more vulnerable. That's not to say that we agree with what Mr. Santorum called a robust approach to foreign policy. His notion of engagement is one of a unwise hawkish militarized nature. Simply droning people out is not the way to stem the most serious threats.
Interview: Assistant Democratic Leader Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Vice-Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA).
Roundtable: Host of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Joe Scarborough; former Republican Presidential Candidate Rick Santorum; managing editor of TheGrio.com, Joy Ann Reid; and NBC News Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent Andrea Mitchell.
Show Note: What was with the gratuitous introduction of the round table guests? The voice over felt like an amateurish promotion for the uninitiated. Silly and unnecessary.
End Note: We didn't find it worthy to comment more on Anthony Weiner and the like anymore, except to agree with Andrea Mitchell that it's all about ego. And with regard to baseball, if you still desire to have faith in the game and its players, you just have to remember two words (especially for you Yankee fans) - Derek Jeter.
No comments:
Post a Comment