Another claim of negligence

[Peter K.]

MM:
>Hell, Doug, even capturing bin Laden has become a distinctly secondary objective.  We know where
the concentrations of AQ strength are, and NONE of them are the objects of the next phase of the
war.  It's clear that crushing AQ isn't part of the imperial agenda because we've stopped trying to
crush AQ.  As soon as we announced that Pakistan - AQ's creator and patron - was our "ally" in this
war, it was entirely predictable that the AQ camps outside Afghanistan would go untouched.

Tariq Ali says that those sympathetic to AQ in Pakistan are waiting
for the time when the US is no longer focused on Pakistan and then
Musharraf is a dead man. So, maybe if the US made a strong move
on the ISI, it would cause civil war in Pakistan with the result that
their nukes fall into extremists' hands. Didn't Musharraf make some
moves on those sympathetic to AQ? Didn't he replace a general or
two? Also didn't he call for elections in October? (Granted, he and
the military will still be "overseeing" the new government. Sounds
similar to what occurred in Chile when Pinochet introduced elections
and made himself Senator for life.)


>Does anyone on this list have any evidence that the U.S. is now actively engaged in an attempt to
crush the very substantial remaining capability of AQ, or that the new foci of our military
mobilizations will do anything to degrade AQ's capabilities?
>
>MM