Having rejected Bush's false metaphor of the GWOT, John Edwards today returned to the subject of combatting terrorists.
In a speech delivered only steps away from New York City’s "Ground Zero," Democratic White House hopeful John Edwards declared President Bush's terror policy a "failure" Friday and proposed a new multilateral organization to combat future threats.
cnn.com
In August of 2001, while George Bush was in Crawford ignoring memos about the threat from Al Qaeda, I authored an op-ed in which I named terrorism as the most vital national security challenge our country would face in the coming years. I still believe that today.
A New Strategy
More after the fold.
[I]nstead of leading a truly visionary campaign against global terrorism, our president led America down a garden path. He used the attacks to justify a preconceived war against a nation he now admits had no ties to Al Qaeda. He then offered belligerence and hostility to the world community, and we have been rewarded in kind
A New Strategy
"Today, terrorism is worse in Iraq, and it’s worse around the world," Edwards said in a speech at Pace University, four days before the six-year anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. "So what does all this mean? It means the results are in on George Bush’s so-called 'global war on terror,' and it’s not just a failure. It’s a double-edged failure."
cnn.com
"President Bush, like the Republicans following him today and even some Democrats, was stuck in the past, and he still is. He had no grasp of the new threats we faced, so he failed to offer a vision to keep us safe in a world that had changed. Saddam Hussein was the threat he knew, so Iraq was the war he waged.
"We needed new thinking and a bold vision to protect the world for our children; instead, George Bush literally gave us his father's war—but without his father's allies or his father's sense of decency. What's more and what's worse, the so-called "war on terror" he used as his excuse for war in Iraq became his excuse for trampling our Constitution and, most perversely, for ignoring the demands of the actual struggle against terrorism. Because in George Bush's reality, disagreement is called weak, challenge is suspect, and opposition downright unpatriotic."
A New Strategy
As president, Edwards will launch a comprehensive counterterrorism policy that will be defined by two principles – strength and cooperation. The centerpiece of this policy is a new multilateral organization called the Counterterrorism and Intelligence Treaty Organization (CITO). CITO will create a coalition of partner nations who clearly declare that terrorism is unacceptable and will call out those nations who refuse to join this cause.
"Instead of Cold War institutions designed to win traditional wars against large, fixed enemies and protect traditional borders, we need new institutions designed to share intelligence, cooperate across borders and take out small, hostile groups," Edwards explained. "CITO will allow members to voluntarily share financial, police, customs and immigration intelligence. Together, nations will be able to track the way terrorists travel, communicate, recruit, train and finance their operations. And they will be able to take action through international teams of intelligence and national security professionals who will launch targeted missions to root out and shut down terrorist cells."
The CITO proposal is part of a comprehensive set of proposals intended to move beyond the failed "war on terror" approach. These proposals include: improving human intelligence capacity; strengthening multilateral efforts to shut down the global sale and transport of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction; working to launch comprehensive strategies to support intelligence agencies in other countries; escalating efforts against homegrown radical extremism by engaging and collaborating with the American Muslim community; and reducing American dependence on foreign oil. Edwards also outlined his proposals for combating the emergence of terrorist cells and the support for terrorism in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
Bold Anti-Terror Strategy
John Edwards is leading again on this key issue.
While Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney and John McCain only offer us "Bush on sterioids," and at least one person running for the Democratic nomination even argued that the Bush-Cheney approach has made us safer (hint: HRC), John Edwards rejects the GWOT while facing our true threats with a multi-lateral aproach.
Are we really any safer than we were six years ago? Do you really think so? I sure as hell don't. Not only has Bush infringed on our sacred freedoms, but he also has failed. That's a two-fer folks. Immoral and incompetant!
I like the Edwards plan. I think it is a start to turning things around. What do you think?
UPDATE I: From Citizen 53's Excellent Diary a few months ago: EDWARDS Gave Warnings of Terrorism BEFORE 9-11
Targeting Terrorism
by John Edwards
Littleton Observer
August 16, 2001
As a member of the Senate Intelligence committee, I've become convinced that terrorism is the most important national security challenge our country will face over the next decade. That is why I am working on new ways to address the threat of terrorism.
The spread of chemical and biological weapons combined with the growth of hostile terrorist groups is a recipe for disaster. The reality is that we face terrorism not only abroad, but also right here at home.
Protecting our nation's seaports from terrorist attack presents a real challenge. Seaports are the center of our global trading network. They are also ground zero in the fight against illegal drugs, bribery and theft, illegal immigration, and a potential target for terrorists. We must do a better job safeguarding our seaports. A terrorist incident at a major U.S. seaport could cripple commerce, destroy infrastructure, and endanger lives.
We need to install new technologies at our ports to detect chemical, biological and nuclear weapons before they cross our borders. Sophisticated technology like "smart containers" that use global positioning systems can help us track cargo. New computer programs can help us speed up the movement of legitimate cargo through our ports, allowing port authorities to focus on screening suspicious and potentially dangerous cargo.
EDWARDS Gave Warnings of Terrorism BEFORE 9-11
UPDATE II: THE ENTIRE ARTICLE:
Targeting Terrorism
by John Edwards
Littleton Observer
August 16, 2001
As a member of the Senate Intelligence committee, I've become convinced that terrorism is the most important national security challenge our country will face over the next decade. That is why I am working on new ways to address the threat of terrorism.
The spread of chemical and biological weapons combined with the growth of hostile terrorist groups is a recipe for disaster. The reality is that we face terrorism not only abroad, but also right here at home.
Protecting our nation's seaports from terrorist attack presents a real challenge. Seaports are the center of our global trading network. They are also ground zero in the fight against illegal drugs, bribery and theft, illegal immigration, and a potential target for terrorists. We must do a better job safeguarding our seaports. A terrorist incident at a major U.S. seaport could cripple commerce, destroy infrastructure, and endanger lives.
We need to install new technologies at our ports to detect chemical, biological and nuclear weapons before they cross our borders. Sophisticated technology like "smart containers" that use global positioning systems can help us track cargo. New computer programs can help us speed up the movement of legitimate cargo through our ports, allowing port authorities to focus on screening suspicious and potentially dangerous cargo.
We also need to modernize and strengthen the Coast Guard to help interdict threatening cargo before it reaches our shores. I also believe we can do a better job of coordinating federal, state and local law enforcement agencies' efforts to combat terrorism. We can help fight terrorism abroad by sharing new port protection techniques with our allies and trading partners.
Computers and technology are important weapons in the fight against terrorism, but they also make us vulnerable to a new kind of terrorist. We become more reliant on technology every day. From communications, to banking, to law enforcement, to the systems that deliver power and water to our homes, computer systems are instrumental in our daily lives.
All of this makes us susceptible to so-called cyber attacks. Imagine a terrorist group hacks into the computer system for the local power company. They disrupt the power supply, creating chaos in our homes, schools, and places of work. This may sound like something from a Hollywood sci-fi blockbuster, but it could happen here at home.
The good news is that we can stop this hi-tech brand of terrorism before it starts. The FBI is already working through the National Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC) to help the technology industry partner with law enforcement to identify potential national security threats to our infrastructure, but we need to do more.
If we can predict where, when and how attacks will occur, we can stop them before they happen. We need the technology in place to track cyber attacks and to predict them. In case a cyber attack on our infrastructure ever does occur, we need an effective Crisis Management System in place to restore critical services like power and water as rapidly as possible.
We need to find ways for government agencies to recruit and retain computer security experts, such as offering scholarships to computer-savvy students who are interested in using their skills to protect our nation's computer systems. The University of North Carolina at Charlotte offers this type of program. In fact, UNC-Charlotte has done such a good job that they have been named a model for other schools by the National Security Agency. We can keep government computer experts on the cutting edge of technology through continuing education opportunities.
Our world is more interconnected than ever before, thanks to technology and trade. These connections strengthen our bonds with other nations. They also challenge us to find ways to protect our national security in the global marketplace. By addressing the potential threat of terrorism now, we can promote a peaceful, prosperous future both at home and abroad.