Sunday, November 21, 2004
AQ is the opportunity cost of Iraq: Bad news, and really bad news
First, the bad news. AQ has resurfaced in Afghanistan:
Um, I thought we'd defeated AQ already? When we destroyed the Taliban in Afghanistan? Apparently not.
And what does AQ want? Loose nukes:
Of course, Bush has never been serious about loose nukes (here)
And here again, there's the bad scenario, and the really bad scenario.
The bad scenario is we lose a big city in a Blue State to a loose nuke. At that point, the Talibornagain say it's the judgement of God that fire from heaven rained down on the Godless (subtext: the fags that God hates). And in about 24 hours, the Republicans institute martial law.
The really bad scenario is that we lose a megachurch in a red state to a loose nuke (back) At that point, the Talibornagain call forjihaada Crusade. And in about 24 hours, the Republicans institute martial law.
Both scenarios look pretty grim, don't they? Of course, I know which one the Republicans would prefer....
And in either case, the terrorists will have won. Eh?
U.S.-led troops mounted overnight raids on suspected al-Qaida compounds in eastern Afghanistan, killing four people and detaining several others, officials said Sunday.
(via AP)
Um, I thought we'd defeated AQ already? When we destroyed the Taliban in Afghanistan? Apparently not.
And what does AQ want? Loose nukes:
A newly retired CIA terrorism expert said Friday he has no doubt that Osama bin Laden wants to unleash a nuclear attack on the United States, perhaps with one of about 100 "suitcase bombs" believed missing from the former Soviet Union.
Moreover, Bin Laden's Al-Qaida network likely has operatives in the United States who could obtain radioactive material from a research laboratory or medical facility and set off a "dirty bomb," said Michael Scheuer, who headed the CIA's Bin Laden unit from 1996 to 1999.
Scheuer said Al-Qaida concluded it was "too darned hard" to obtain the plutonium and equipment to build a nuclear weapon, "so they're after a kind of off-the-shelf device, if they could find one," and the Soviet Union seems the most likely place.
"What we know is that he's always said it was a religious obligation to have the same weapons as their enemies," Scheuer said. "He clearly has said he would use it. He doesn't intend it as a deterrent. It's going to be a first strike."
(Strib via Kos)
Of course, Bush has never been serious about loose nukes (here)
And here again, there's the bad scenario, and the really bad scenario.
The bad scenario is we lose a big city in a Blue State to a loose nuke. At that point, the Talibornagain say it's the judgement of God that fire from heaven rained down on the Godless (subtext: the fags that God hates). And in about 24 hours, the Republicans institute martial law.
The really bad scenario is that we lose a megachurch in a red state to a loose nuke (back) At that point, the Talibornagain call for
Both scenarios look pretty grim, don't they? Of course, I know which one the Republicans would prefer....
And in either case, the terrorists will have won. Eh?
