President Obama: Success in Pakistan

Published 10:00 am Friday, May 6, 2011

In a paraphrase of a JFK statement “success has a thousand fathers, failure is an orphan,” this week many would-be fathers are handing out cigars to the unsuspecting public. None more than Bush administration devotees, Republicans and pundits on the right.

The bold decision by President Obama and the brave actions of our Navy Seals resulted in the killing of Osama bin Laden in his Pakistani mansion this week.

The U.S. intelligence community provided the location and the confidence to act; the president provided the courage to risk success and accept the possibility of failure.

Had the mission failed Obama would indeed have been an orphan, much as President Carter’s presidency may have been lost in a failed rescue attempt in Iran.

And there was no certainty that success would be realized … indeed there was a very real possibility that the Seals might have been attacked by the Pakistani air force during the incursion into Pakistan.

But the Bush fans set aside the risk of decisions taken by this president and suggest that the laurels belong to the previous president. House Majority Leader Cantor said in a statement “I commend President Obama who followed the vigilance of President Bush in bringing bin Laden to justice.” Ex-VP Cheney credited the military and intelligence professionals for their efforts, noting, in his opinion, most of the work was accomplished during the Bush administration. Rush Limbaugh said the current administration owed the Bush administration an apology for the success of the mission.

Other Republicans rushed to claim that it was torture that provided the intelligence that led to the raid, and that the Bush administration was the ones brave enough to torture captured prisoners.

In the flush of success, all of this might be understandable on the many fathers theory noted above, were it not for the incredible dishonesty of the claims.

First, the intelligence community under Bush was fragmented in silo’s of conflicting information that led to false Intel taking us to war in Iraq, ignoring Intel preceding 9/11, and few “boots on the ground” Intel sources in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Second, while President Bush did once declare Bin Laden “public enemy number one” he later said “I am truly not that concerned about him” (bin Laden) in 2002.

And it must have been true that President Bush was not too concerned since in December of 2001 the Bush administration refused to attempt to capture or kill bin Laden in Tora Bora.

Later in his presidency President Bush sanctioned the ending of the CIA unit, named Alec Station, dedicated to finding bin Laden. The units head, Michael Scheuer, later noted that closing the unit was a “mistake” and “a questionable decision.”

So the Bush administration ignored Intel, trusted false Intel, and fragmented the intelligence community and VP Cheney wants to take credit for the work of that community when now, years later, the reorganized U.S. intelligence efforts succeed.

That not being enough chutzpah, these same folks are still attempting to validate the war crime of torture as a virtue. And the truth is, that while some Intel did derive from prisoners who were tortured, there is no affirmation by the CIA that any critical intelligence came from torture.

We invaded Afghanistan to capture and kill Al Qaeda. This week, 10 years later, we can say we have largely accomplished that mission. Their remaining assets, none in Afghanistan and few anywhere, are on the run and now subject to new Intel gained from the bin Laden compound. Their relevance is greatly diminished.

Congratulations President Obama, our brave Seals and our intelligence community.

Maybe it is time to bring everyone home.

Jim Crawford is retired educator and political enthusiast living here in the Tri-State.