Al-Qaeda Admits Predator Drone Effectiveness, New U.S. Afghan Commander Toughens Drone Strike Policy
By Josh Price
If the title of this posts seems illogical, that’s because it is. The title of this post is illogical because the United States military under Presidents Bush and Obama has become illogical–and weak (at least in leadership positions).
Why do I write that? Because of the two following stories.
From FoxNews.com:
A new book published by Al Qaeda shows that the terrorist group is under intense pressure and in “deathly fear” of U.S. counterterrorism efforts in Pakistan, terror experts say.
The 150-page book, titled “Guide to the Laws Regarding Muslim Spies,” was recently posted on jihadist Web sites. It was written by a senior Al Qaeda commander, Abu Yahya Al-Libi, and features an introduction by Ayman Al-Zawahri, the No. 2 man in Al Qaeda.
The book accuses some in Al Qaeda’s ranks of being spies who provide intelligence, including information about Al Qaeda camps and safehouses, to U.S. forces. According to the book, these “Muslim spies” have allowed the U.S. to use its Predator drone campaign to paralyze Al Qaeda leadership. (My emphasis)
FOX News military analyst Tom McInerny said the book is a “gold mine” that attests to the success of the Predator strikes that are decimating Al Qaeda’s ranks in Pakistan.
“They are in deathly fear of airpower,” said McInerny, a retired lieutenant general in the U.S. Air Force. “Whether it’s unmanned drones or whether it’s fighters or bombers using precision weapons, they are deathly afraid.”
And now a story in the June 22, 2009 eidtion of the New York Times:
The new American commander in Afghanistan said he would sharply restrict the use of airstrikes here, in an effort to reduce the civilian deaths that he said were undermining the American-led mission.
In interviews over the past few days, the commander, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, said the use of airstrikes during firefights would in most cases be allowed only to prevent American and other coalition troops from being overrun.
Even in the cases of active firefights with Taliban forces, he said, airstrikes will be limited if the combat is taking place in populated areas — the very circumstances in which most Afghan civilian deaths have occurred. The restrictions will be especially tight in attacking houses and compounds where insurgents are believed to have taken cover.
The statements by General McChrystal signaled the latest tightening of the rules for using airstrikes, which, while considered indispensable for protecting troops, have killed hundreds of civilians.
So al-Qaeda is admitting that the Predator drone strikes are working in their mission to destroy al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders, yet our U.S. Commander in Afghanistan is tightening the use of the drones? How illogical and non-sensical is this?
I brought this up in my recent interview with the former head of the Bin Laden Unit at the CIA, Michael Scheuer, and he echoed my sentiments that General McChrystal sounds like a “loser” with this sort of policy decision. Loser might be a harsh description, but it makes absolutely no sense to reduce an activity that has proven to be effective at killing the enemy during a war; it’s a politically correct, loser’s mentality that we can’t afford.
This just reinforces my belief that many in Washington, and specifically at the Pentagon, are more concerned with the political ramifications of foreign civilian casualties than they are with the lives of American and coalition forces, and killing the enemy.
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment