Webb says two rather interesting facts came out of this interview. The first was that Mullen is "comfortable with the status of Pakistan's nukes - 'they are in safe hands,' he said, and cared for by people 'professionally and specifically focused on this.'"
I'm sure the admiral knows more about Pakistan's nukes than I do, but what I know about Pakistan makes me just a wee bit antsy. Pakistan is not noted for stability. Right now Pakistan is in the middle of a political crisis. Pakistan could not protect Bhutto. Pakistan is a likely hiding place for Bin Laden and other al-Qaida leaders.
No doubt the admiral is a very capable and intelligent man, as are all of our military leaders.
But look at the mess they made in Iraq, and Afghanistan, where the Taliban is resugent. So, I can't help but also be just a bit skeptical that Pakistan's nukes "are in safe hands."
Secondly, Mr. Webb said that Admiral Mullen thinks "that Osama Bin Laden is now so unimportant, or so low down a list heavy with other concerns, that he did not even get a mention" in talks held by Admiral Mullen in Pakistan a short time ago.
Mullen told Webb that in these meetings, right next to where Bin Laden is supposed to be hiding, amidst a discussion of "heavy" topics of concern to Pakistan and the U.S., Bin Laden's name was not mentioned.
I don't think that's surprising at all. The Bush administration never gave Bin Laden a high priority. The Bush administration was after Iraq's oil. There's no question that after 9/11, we did not pursue the perpetrators of that event, but rather declared war on a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, but did have millions of barrels of oil under its sand.
(Admiral Mullen's office got wind of Webb's report and called him to clarify that the Admiral himself does not think Bin Laden is unimportant, that Bin Laden is "still a high priority.")
That's baloney. Webb asks why is "the hunt for Bin Laden" something that "no longer ... takes up the time of senior people"?
Did it ever?
No comments:
Post a Comment