wbur.org
support wbur today!
Listen to this show
Who’s Winning the War on Terror?
Victor Juma who lost his father during the 1998 U.S. embassy bombing in Nairobi, Kenya, stands in front of an artist's impression of the events at the memorial for the victims in Nairobi, Kenya, Aug. 7, 2008.

Victor Juma, who lost his father, stands in front of an artist's impression of the events of the 1998 U.S. embassy bombing at the memorial for the victims in Nairobi, Kenya, Aug. 7, 2008.

Post your comments below

It’s 9/11 again. Seven years now. Years of war, bloodshed, torture, military sacrifice, and deepening concern in the United States about the country’s fundamental economic and security standing — about the country’s future.

Al Qaeda set out to attack, entangle, bleed, and weaken the United States. Seven years on, we have not been hit again. Or have we? In the pocketbook, in military readiness, in global standing?

The United States is certainly entangled, bled, and — on many fronts — weakened. And Al Qaeda’s still out there.

This hour, On Point: American security, American strategy, seven years after 9/11.

Are we better off today than we were seven years ago? Even without another attack on American soil, has Bin Laden won? What should the U.S. do now to secure its homeland and its place in the world? Does John McCain have the answer? Does Barack Obama? Do you? Join the conversation and tell us what you think.

-Tom Ashbrook

Guests:

Joining us from Berlin is Craig Whitlock, a staff writer for The Washington Post. He’s been covering the U.S. campaign against Al Qaeda in Pakistan’s tribal areas. His front-page article in yesterday’s Post reported that U.S. and Pakistani officials are shifting tactics in the hunt for Osama Bin Laden.

Joining us from Vancouver is Bruce Hoffman. He’s a professor of security studies at Georgetown University and a world-renowned expert on terrorism and insurgency. A revised and updated version of his acclaimed 1998 book, “Inside Terrorism,” was published in 2006.

And joining us in our studio is Stephen Van Evera. He’s a professor of political science at MIT and an expert on foreign policy and security. His recent article, “A Farewell to Geopolitics,” appears in the new volume “To Lead the World: American Strategy After the Bush Doctrine.”

 

Tags: , , , ,

 
Share:
  • TwitThis
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Live
  • Technorati
  • LinkedIn
  • Google
  • Furl
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Print this article!
 
Listener comments
  • How is it possible that seven years after the 9-11 tragedy that Osama Bin Laden is still alive and Al Qaeda is still carrying out attacks worldwide? The fact of the matter is that the U.S. has lost the war against terrorism.

    Posted by Joe B., on September 11th, 2008 at 7:18 am EDT
  • We started out by calling this a war on terror implying the need for a military response. A careful CIA/FBI police work behind the scene would have allowed us to build a system that will root-out these organisations and mede us safer. That would have taken too long for those who needed to politically capitalize on this tragedy.

    Posted by Eugene O, on September 11th, 2008 at 8:55 am EDT
  • Seven years after 9/11 the attacks by a handful of terrorists with boxcutters is still working its magic - our economy is still suffering due in large part to fear and bad foreign policy (iraq, etc.); fearful Americans are still courting extremely poor quality, war-mongering politicians based on their rhetoric of fear; world opinion is more against America than ever before; American infrastructure is failing due to neglect of domestic issues; Americans are losing their civil liberties and the moral high ground.

    Why would Bin Laden or any other terrorist risk the wrath of world opinion by attacking the U.S. again when 9/11 is still so effectively working its magic seven years later and into the foreseeable future? No Bush administration policy has really deterred subsequent attacks… the borders are as porous as ever, as evidenced by continued immigration problems; less than 5 percent of comes through U.S. ports is adequately inspected; the loss of intelligence talent under Bush is unprecedented; Alliances have been squandered rather than fostered.

    Bush can claim no credit for the lack of subsequent attacks on the U.S. Rather, terrorist organizations are sophisticated enough in their thinking to know a good thing when they see it - namely, a couple of hundred thousand bucks in planning and a few dollars at the hardware store is enough to bring down the world’s “greatest” power for at least a decade or more. As long as Americans are dumb enough to continue letting the attack “work its magic,” Bin laden and his ilk will not risk turning the world’s wrath against them, but instead sit and watch as we implode through our own stupidity.

    Posted by John Petesch, on September 11th, 2008 at 9:39 am EDT
  • The thought occurred to me this morning that maybe progress on the GWOT can be made if we mourn for the hijackers too.

    Once they were innocent babies. What went wrong?

    Posted by Frederic C., on September 11th, 2008 at 9:45 am EDT
  • You ask where, after the 9/11 attacks, we thought we’d be in ‘08? I thought, given our leadership, we’d be exactly where we are: isolated, financially strapped, up to our necks in winless conflict in the Middle East.

    Question: how different will that “agent of change,” John McCain, handle this issue? Where will we be in 4 years if he & Palin win the upcoming election?

    Posted by chris belden, on September 11th, 2008 at 10:14 am EDT
  • 1) Seven-years after the only administration incompetent enough to allow an attack on our country and still no impeachment hearings.

    2) Tomorrow (Sept. 12th) will mark 7-years since John McCain went on every T.V. news show to promote preventive war on rogue-states, starting with IRAQ.

    3) Seven-years after a handful of thugs financed by our “good-friends” the Saudis entered U.S. airspace undetected by the dumbest president in U.S. history.

    4) Seven-years after the President of our country continued to sit and read “The Pet Goat” for over 7 minutes AFTER being informed by Andrew Card that the country was under-attack.

    **********************************
    Seven-years later, the same administration is in power, and will shortly be replaced by another member of the same ruling party. The same member who began the war cry for Iraq on Sept. 12th 2001.
    It’s amazing that people still are unable to understand how Germans failed to recongnize that Hilter was a danger to the world. Foul me once….indeed!

    Posted by Beth-Anne M., on September 11th, 2008 at 10:17 am EDT
  • It’s time to end our dependence on foreign heroin. Heroin funds the poppy trade, which supports the Taliban, which supports Bin Laden and fights us in Afghanistan.

    Maybe invading Afghanistan wasn’t such a good idea. Mullah Omar was uncooperative in helping us find Bin Laden. Seven years later, Karzai is uncooperative in helping us find Bin Laden and Mullah Omar.

    Before we attacked, the Taliban was dramatically ending poppy farming. Once we attacked, they went back to poppies. And now they are radicalized. We are never going to wipe out the Taliban, some day we have to make peace with them. There was an opportunity lost when we declared them the enemy instead of focusing on Bin Laden.

    Posted by Tom G, on September 11th, 2008 at 10:25 am EDT
  • We must fix our foreign affairs structure.
    Military power is a diplomatic tool.
    This administration has turned our foreign affairs policy upside down.

    Posted by Steve S, on September 11th, 2008 at 10:31 am EDT
  • Its amazing how the actions we’ve taken for the past 7 years have been just a joke. Security at the airport is an inconvenience, but not real. Security of our borders is a joke. We spend billions on a needless war in Iraq. We are having problems in Afghanistan. We can’t get at them in Pakistan. Our economy shudders under this burden and our dependence on foreign oil (who knows how much of this money goes back to AQ). And people are lining up behind McCain/Palin who promise us more of the same… Come on people. Wake up! Time for a REAL change!!!

    Posted by Neil Vigliotta, on September 11th, 2008 at 10:31 am EDT
  • Terrorism is simply a symptom. The virus at the cause of this disease is economic imperialism. A discussion of terrorism that does not include this is like political coverage of lipstick and not issues. Is that too much to ask?

    Posted by Nate, on September 11th, 2008 at 10:37 am EDT
  • Indeed, Nate! Economic imperialism is exactly what we should have been addressing for the last seven years, instead we’ve embraced both it and military imperialism.

    Posted by John Petesch, on September 11th, 2008 at 10:44 am EDT
  • It seems Al Qaeda’s strategy is focused on (1) spreading us thin and (2) bleeding us (militarily, economically, etc.)

    Question: Are there strategies that we are employing to combat this?

    Posted by Joe, on September 11th, 2008 at 10:48 am EDT
  • Listen.
    It seems that after 7 years the American people can do nothing but argue that we, as a nation, have not gone in the right direction. False. Foreclosures have been at an all time high. Our foreign relations are as shaky as New York bridges, and political candidates are nothing more than the people’s puppets. We make them say “pull out our troops”, but look at the bright side…well never mind that.
    The point is I think our morals have strengthened as a nation, in the sense that we can all agree: “Bush for 4 more years.” Right? I mean the nation is going in the right direction. Isn’t it?

    Posted by Kevin H, on September 11th, 2008 at 10:56 am EDT
  • Question:

    Would we be safer if (1) we withdrew support from Israel (2) withdrew military from Saudi Arabia / Mid-east and (3) adopted a “Chinese” Foreign relation posture of non-interference with “internal issues”?

    Rash perhaps…But safer for the US?

    Posted by Joe, on September 11th, 2008 at 11:09 am EDT
  • I am from the former USSR. One of the theories of the USSR’s collapse is that Reagan and other presidents bankrupted it by relentless military spending, with which the soviets just were not able to keep up.

    Now I am looking at the US that’s spending $10 bill a month against… How much are THEY spending? $100 a day? All they need pretty much is an assault rifle, a beard, some explosives and a videotape from time to time. I think American people have been and are being duped big time.

    Posted by Alex, on September 11th, 2008 at 11:36 am EDT
  • It’s time to end our dependence on foreign heroin. Heroin funds the poppy trade, which supports the Taliban, which supports Bin Laden and fights us in Afghanistan.

    This is an excellent point and should be expanded-on.

    In the “war on terrorism” the US has been trying to shut down funding for terrorists, closing bank accounts, tracking money transfers, etc.

    But by that metric the US is one of the biggest sources of funding for terrorists in the world! This is because US “NGO’s” (drug traffickers) export 10’s of billions of dollars annually to criminal and terrorists worldwide. This money comes from the sale of illegal drugs in the US. The lowest value I could find anywhere on the web for the amount of US money ending up with drug gangs in Mexico alone was $4 billion, and I saw other estimates over $100 billion.

    In 2007 in Mexico over 1000 people were killed by narco-gangs and the police are so underarmed and riddled with corruption that the regular army has now replaced them in some places. It’s a literal war, not a figurative one.

    Thousands more have been killed and insurgents have been well-equipped and funded in Colombia, Peru, and other Latin American countries with money from the US. And, as you noted at the top, we are also funding the Taliban in this manner.

    Overall the number of innocent people killed by US-narco-funded insurgencies, drug-gangs, and terrosists worlwide since 9/11 surely exceeds the US victims of that attack. The sheer hypocrisy of the US continuing to export this kind of violence and misery to the rest of the world, while lecturing places like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia on their need to control support for terrorists from inside their borders is mind-boggling.

    Posted by Peter Nelson, on September 11th, 2008 at 11:41 am EDT
  • I didn’t hear all of the conversation; I will listen to the podcast.

    I agree with the comment about our narrowing educational system.

    I look forward to hearing(hopefully) about reform in Islam. ( And in Americandom)

    Is partisanship, division and politicking for the vote of factions that may not have a global or historical perspective what we want?

    Does the American variety of western civilization have a lifespan?

    If America is to persist, what changes need to occur?

    By the way, did anyone read the article a couple a weeks ago about the the disposable semi-submerged smuggling vessels? They travel just below the water with only a small “freeboard” for gas exchange.T hink of the possibilities. Think of the engineers.

    Posted by Frederic C., on September 11th, 2008 at 11:53 am EDT
  • To Nate, Joe, Peter - and the others giving important commentary. Americans need to take an serious look at history. The fall of the Roman Empire is the easiest example - “spread thin” by imperialism, not paying attention to problems at home, distracting the people with “bread and circuses” (well, maybe we are losing out on the bread…) Al Qaeda may have had a plan for destroying the United States - but we ourselves have exceeded their expectations in doing so.

    Posted by Barbara, on September 11th, 2008 at 12:25 pm EDT
  • Questions: Since no foreign nation has ever successfully defeated Afghani peoples in a invasive war, is not Iraq a “friendlier” battlefield on which to confront Al Qasda? Are we not facing two enemies in Afghanistan, which are mutually supportive but yet independent of each other? Laslty, we cannot realistically attack Al Aqaeda and the Taliban in Pakistan because to do so would validate all the hatred of the Great Satan that exists in the Muslim societies and nations around the world. I posit the above even though I regard the invasion of Iraq as unjustifiable and stupid.

    Posted by tom lobenstein, on September 11th, 2008 at 12:48 pm EDT
  • Al Qaeda may have had a plan for destroying the United States - but we ourselves have exceeded their expectations in doing so.

    Indeed - that’s one of the great ironies that apologists for the Bush administration fail to account for . . .

    If you add up the total cost in human life and dollars of 9/11 and compare it to the total cost in human life and dollars of our subsequent wars, not to mention the loss of our national prestige, loss of our civil liberties, etc, it’s not even close. The “war on terror” has done vastly more damage to the US than Al Qaeda could in their wildest dreams.

    It just amazes me that half the US population seems to want another four years of these policies.

    Posted by Peter Nelson, on September 11th, 2008 at 1:21 pm EDT
  • Tom, Al Qaeda didn’t exist in Iraq before we invaded and by all accounts it has again nearly disappeared from Iraq due to Iraqis own disdain for the organization. Iraq again plays no role in the “war on terror,” just as it did not before the U.S. invasion (except in that it is draining resources from the legitimate fight against terrorism.) Even pentagon officials admitted again this week that there is no military solution to terrorism… it should be a “police” effort that centers on intelligence gathering and fostering international alliances.

    Posted by John Petesch, on September 11th, 2008 at 1:25 pm EDT
  • On a day when Sarah Palin and her family are still suffering from Obama’s sexist attack, how dare the media focus on the events of 9/11 or the continuing threat of terrorism?

    If you required any more proof than this that the media are out to destroy Palin, then you must be on board with them.

    While women in the United States of America and Alaska grieve with Palin over Obama’s offensive remark, our prayers and thoughts should be with them, not on some seven year old news story.

    Posted by Groucho, on September 11th, 2008 at 4:44 pm EDT
  • Groucho
    Irony, oh irony and sarcasm on a day of remembrance no less.

    What are you 12 years old?

    Posted by jeff, on September 11th, 2008 at 4:49 pm EDT
  • What are you 12 years old?

    I thought Groucho’s comments were great, very funny. I dunno - after a certain age we all start to enter our second childhood and I’m well on my way, I guess.

    Posted by Peter Nelson, on September 11th, 2008 at 5:30 pm EDT
  • Here in western NC, USA, it took our FBI 5 years to locate a bommer. This area is sparsely populated compared to Atlanta, a short distance south…but not like the mountains where our enemies “hide.”

    They aren’t hiding, they are living free. We couldn’t catch Eric Rudoph, (who set a bomb in Centennial Olympic Park on July 27,1996), IN OUR BACK YARD! The Smokey Mountains are big, but not That Big.

    BTW, he was arrested by a town policeman as he raided a dumpster gleaning scraps.

    I wish to thank our fine men and women of our armed services, and for your safe return!

    Posted by jf, on September 11th, 2008 at 9:16 pm EDT
  • The “war on terrorism” is a joke. Are we as a nation really that dumb? I seem to recall Osama Bin Laden being declared dead more times in the past 7 years than Kenny on south park. I simply just don’t buy the Al Qaeda story anymore. I think people of this nation need to wake up and stop being afraid of media depictions of some guy in a cave thousand’s of miles away!

    Posted by christina l., on September 15th, 2008 at 6:59 pm EDT
  • oh wow christina you think this war is a joke its not osama used people who looked like him to try and fool us about 4000 good people have died trying to find him.i hope it ends soon though

    Posted by some dude, on October 23rd, 2008 at 2:35 pm EDT
Leave a comment

We welcome comments from all of our listeners.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
These comments are moderated by On Point and WBUR, but you are solely responsible for the content of your comments. On Point and WBUR cannot verify the accuracy of comments posted here.
This site supports Gravatars.

On Point Today
Hour 2
The Christmas Revels
Wednesday, December 24, 2008 Christmas Revels

The Christmas Revels invade our studio for old Wessex carols, a Somerset Wassail, and Thomas Hardy’s “Under the Greenwood Tree.”

Comments [1]
 
Hour 1
Hope in Hard Times
Wednesday, December 24, 2008 hope1

Theologian Martin Marty and physician Jerome Groopman join us for a conversation about hope in turbulent times — where we find it, and how we hold on.

Comments [14]

Recent Shows
Cures, Quacks, and Medicine Men
Tuesday, December 23, 2008 Frontier Medicine

A new look at frontier medicine, and the wildest tonics of the old Wild West.

Comments [11]
 
Caroline Kennedy’s Senate Bid
Tuesday, December 23, 2008 Caroline Kennedy, daughter of former President John F. Kennedy, listens to a reporter's question during a news conference at City Hall in Buffalo, N.Y. on Wednesday, Dec. 17, 2008. Kennedy is campaigning for the open Senate seat vacated by Hillary Clinton.  (AP Photo/Don Heupel)

Caroline Kennedy reaches for Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat. We look at the politics, the history, at Caroline, and the national mythology, all in play.

Comments [29]
On Point Blog
Here, for the holidays…
By Eileen Imada

One of the great pleasures of directing On Point is that I hear just about every show we produce. And around the holidays, I listen back to some of our best shows to rebroadcast while the staff takes a well-deserved break. This year we’ve reached deep into our archives for some gems of the past [...]

More »
 
Canon Wars, Cont.
By John Wihbey

Jay Parini, Middlebury College professor and jack-of-all-literary trades, makes the case in our second hour today for America’s thirteen “representative” books in his new tome “The Promised Land.” Of course, the idea of a great list or “canon” of hallowed must-reads is a controversial one, having its roots in now age-old academic wars. It’s fraught with huge [...]

More »
 
How Much to Pay the College Prez?
By John Wihbey

Today’s second hour looks at how the financial crisis is hitting higher education. And as belts tighten, it’s perhaps inevitable that executive compensation – the big payouts to people at the top – will come under scrutiny in academia as it has on Wall Street and in Detroit. In fact, officials at Stanford, the University of Pennsylvania, and Washington University [...]

More » | Comments [5]