Al-Qaeda Runs Free in Area the Size of Texas
A Democratic-led Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee learned at a hearing this week that not only is al-Qaeda not on the run, but it controls a huge chunk of west African territory as a safe haven and possible launching pad for attacks.
Earlier this year, a military coup deposed Mali’s government, leaving the country split by ethic fighting and an area the size of Texas under control of al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb.
It’s now the largest territory controlled by an Islamic terrorist group in the world. To make matters worse, over the summer U.S. Africa Command noted that AQIM was inviting terror groups Boko Haram of Nigeria and Somalia’s al-Shabaab to come hang, train, and join forces in this haven of plenty.
With an interesting choice of words, Chairman Chris Coons (D-Del.) said at his Subcommittee on African Affairs he’s concerned that the U.S. approach to Mali might not be “forward-leaning enough” to address the security, political, and humanitarian crises there, despite the U.S. freezing assistance to the country.
“With growing ties between extremists and terrorist groups in Mali, Nigeria, Libya, Somalia, and beyond, there’s growing concern AQIM will leverage its new safe haven in Mali to carry out training, and advance plan for regional, or transnational terrorist attacks,” Coons said.
“I also have concern any time al-Qaeda takes advantage of a vacuum, or flows into an area because of poverty, or because of lack of governance,” said Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), the subcommittee’s ranking member.
The UN Security Council is expected to vote in the coming weeks on authorization for regional military intervention by the Economic Community Of West African States and the African Union.
Still, a State Department official testifying before the panel ranked terrorism as the “third challenge” in Mali, after detailing concerns about the coup itself and territorial integrity.
Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Johnnie Carson said AQIM, in conjunction with the Movement for Oneness and Jihad in west Africa (MUJOA — listed by the State Department today as a foreign terrorist organization), has crushed much of the country “to impose their ideology on local communities.” A Department of Defense official later clarified this as “a harsh version of Sharia law.”
Cities controlled by the terrorists include historical Timbuktu, where Islamists have destroyed mausoleums, shrines, amulets, ritual masks, and other items of immense significance.
“Any attempt to militarily oust a AQIM from northern Mali must be African-led. It must be Malian-led. It must be well-planned, well- organized, and well-resourced to be successful,” Carson said. “…Algeria, Mauritania, and Niger are all deeply concerned that any military intervention in northern Mali will cause a spillover of extremists into their own countries. These governments strongly favor exhausting all political dialogue before any intervention.”
“Beyond the obvious threat to Mali’s citizens and its neighbors, the growing terrorist presence in Mali also threatens U.S. citizens and interests in the region, to include the ability to attack embassies and conduct kidnapping operations,” testified Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for African Affairs Amanda Dory. “Although AQIM has not demonstrated an ability to attack targets in the United States homeland, it does have a history of attacks in the Sahel and Maghreb and has expressed an intent to target Europe.”
Under questioning from Isakson, Dory conceded AQIM “played a role” in the Benghazi attack that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, but “the rest is better left to a closed session.”
The administration strategy is basically to encourage restoration of a democratically elected government, as existed for 20 years before the coup, in hopes that this puts pressure on AQIM.
“We are continuing to push as hard as we can for political negotiations between Tuareg groups and non-terrorist groups in the north, with the government,” Carson said.
But bin Laden is dead! The war on terror (radical Islam) is supposed to be over.
/sarc
rbj, and not only is Osama dead, but Obama is supposed to have freed the world from Al Qaeda too! After all, he is ‘The One’!
And it is not for nothing, since he has been in office, threats from Islamism has grown exponentially. And this blogger has amassed more than enough evidence to prove her claim.
The following is just one, out of too many to cite here – http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/12/07/world-war-3s-place-markers-set-up-through-barack-hussein-obamas-mid-east-fires-addendum-to-northeast-intelligence-network-posits-a-direct-nexus-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/
We’ve been killing cock roaches for a few thousand years and have yet to defeat them.
Pretty hard to defeat an enemy that is not specifically identifiable and under some central command structure. They have the ability to operate at will wherever they want to, hop skipping and jumping from country to country. As the perceived AQ wars in Iraq and Afghanistan come to an end, they will move around creating internal havoc from country to country trying to suck the U.S. and its allies back into some military conflict somewhere.
We didn’t win the N. Korean war. We didn’t win the Vietnam war. But for UN and an EU military operation force in Bosnia we haven’t won that conflict. There is no idications we have actually won anything in either Iraq or Afghanistan.
The U.S. and some of its allies always divert a military win into nation building and we consistantly lose in the end. When will we learn?
The US and NATO fought on the wrong side in Bosnia and Kosovo – on behalf of the Muslims in each case. Under no circumstances should the US ever fight on the side of Muslims. Here’s the upshot: the jihadis now have two strongholds in Europe, which they can use as a meeting place and a transit point for trafficking in weaponry, drugs, personnel, and other contraband.
That UN small arms treaty should disarm those who follow Muhammad, and free the slaves.
Next 9/11 anniversary the US should reduce it’s stockpile of missiles by launching them at AQIM. You know, kind of like a reminder to them that we’re still at war. We should do it every 9/11.
Since World War II when the allies fought a punitive war, a war to destroy our enemies and their will to fight, we have fought nothing but ‘peace-keeping’ campaigns as in Korea or ‘nation-building’ fiascoes as in Iraq and Afghanistan.
We are too good and nice for our own good. Let us return to those glorious days of yesteryear when we fought war as war. If we keep up our modern ways we will never win and will forever be in debt – and a poor country cannot wage a viable war.
Quite a conundrum.
All the more so considering the area East of Mali’s capital Bamako, perhaps Mopti.. it’s quite desolate and any kind of campaign would require a great deal of logistical analysis and action.
Mali being one of France’s former colonies and a vacation haven for many Frenchies (the late-Ghadafi/ Libya bankrolled much of Mali including Bamako’s Sofitel Hotel where Euro’s often holiday) I’ll bet they’ll come to their aid ‘any day now’. Right?
These Stete Dept. people are as dumb as doorknobs. If Hitler were alive, they’d be all for “engaging” him & having “useful discussions” with the swine. They always remind me of a bunch of ganga toking totally oblivious hippies on their way to be excuited chanting, “all we are saying, is give peace a chance!”
Sadly this notion of not wanting confrontation is pervasive, not just at the state level, but all the way down to the workplace where HR reps like to use words like “reach out to people”.
UGH!
It’s disgusting.
When one employee is doing their damnedest to make others’ lives miserable, confrontation is not only acceptable, it’s required.
Back in the beginning of all this with Dr Schlock’s ridiculous notions of child-rearing, going against thousands of years of human history, the middle-class somehow thought it would propel them into some higher plain of consciousness and moral superiority.
All it did was produce lazy kids and lackluster performance overall.
Interestingly, the socialists who were raised on that garbage now espouse that achievers and the “wealthy” are to blame for all the misery in the world.
Stop the world, I wanna get off!
You are also not hearing much about al Qaeda in failed nation-states like Somalia and Yemen. These were always big areas of activity and recruiting for al Qaeda and we haven’t even mentioned Pakistan, where there are still drone strikes against al Qaeda going on as we speak. In fact, you can read here about a story that just went public yesterday: http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2012/12/al_qaeda_religious_l.php
Al Qaeda is not only alive and well, it’s making a major comeback throughout Africa and the Middle East. When Obama said during the election that al Qaeda was “On the run,” he was not only lying, but he was also minimizing a growing threat, which when we did the same thing during the 1990s eventually lead us to 9/11/2001. And when we suffer the next major al Qaeda attack here in the United States (and that day will come), I hope the mainstream media remembers that throughout the election Biden and Obama kept bleating that “Osama bin Laden is dead and al Qaeda is on the run.” Sure, fat chance of that ever happening.
The democrats must’ve been truly conflicted. Embracing violent islam while also wanting to make their metrosexual president seem “macho” and “in-charge”. Oops. So…by committing to the notion that OBL is dead, ipso facto terrorism is dead is so…oh…1940′s with the demise of Hitler, Mussolini, Tojo…
Hate to bring it to WWII/Hitlerisms but…the democrats love to claim victory over that whole thing when in reality, if they themselves had been called up to go fight in Europe or in the Pacific, they would’ve whined, cried, carried on and demanded that we had no business going there.
Not sure? Well, just compare the attitudes they have between Pearl Harbor and 9/11/01. Their parents went to war…called up as it were but also the recruiting offices were running at max capacity. Vietnam? Nope. Not only that, they still hate their own country for dropping the bomb on Japan and now firmly believe that the US is the root of all the evil in the world. I knew this was coming when bulimia became recognized as some form of “disease” instead of the mental disorder of self-loathing it really is.
But my main point being that the boomers were not interested in slapping down the enemy but very much were interested in blaming Bush for making it all happen. So many decades of believing that we’re the bad guys rotted their minds and continues to this day. It’s remarkable, really. Then, they play the game of “thanking our military” in their lovey-dovey commercial spots while condemning them privately at every turn, just as they did during Vietnam.
It’s the same argument all over again. Only they’ve become practiced at hiding their flagrant hatred of the military that affords them the luxury of being free to spout how much they believe “we deserved it”.
Mali is in Africa, right? An area the size of Texas in it that contains AQ hornless bulls in large numbers.
Doesn’t that say hunting preserve to you? Who doesn’t want to go on safari in Africa?
You could market that as “the hunting adventure of a lifelime” to a lot of Americans who love to hunt and who are the sworn enemies of the jihadi crowd.
Hell, if that works, we could declare Deerborn Michigan a hunting preserve too.
(disclaimer: wishful thinking does not translate to hunting licenses. I would hunt out of season only if the herd shows up at a location near me, brandishing Kalashnikovs and offering up targets of opportunity.)
I suppose the good news is that Al Qaeda isn’t running free in the actual Texas! Mali is in the middle of no where, and the US is already after them. Not to worry.
this and I quote she said this election sulohd not be about national security. I strongly disagree. The security of this country comes first, as far as I’m concerned. And this government, with supporters like Richard Pombo, will do everything we can to protect you. (Applause.) Of course, to give the Leader some credit, given her party’s record on national security, I can see why she feels that way. (Laughter.) I wouldn’t want to be talking about the record, either. Ad Hominem Circumstantial. Perhaps what Pelosi really meant is there might be other pertinent issues that sulohd occupy the campaign slate, but then again, she’s just saying that because she’s a Democrat and they can’t talk national security, because their poor record in this area predisposes them to focus on other areas.