Osama tape reminds U.S. of insecurity

By JASON WHITE

Last week, select portions of an audiotape were aired on Al-Jazeera, one of Iraq’s television stations. The CIA confirmed Osama bin Laden, through analysis of the low-quality recording, was the speaker, and the message was clear: Americans, you are losing the war, there will be another U.S.-soil terrorist attack soon, but a truce is not out of the question.

It’s difficult to calculate the effectiveness of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. By dollars alone, stamping out terrorism in Iraq has cost, according to the American Economic Association, more than $3.6 billion per week, and the long-term price tag could range anywhere up to $2 trillion. The Center for Contemporary said in a report that the short-term, direct cost of that fateful day exceeded $27 billion, though the long-term costs are quite possibly incalculable for now.

Loss of life on 9/11 seemed staggering. 7 in 10 adults claimed to experience some level of depression after that day, and 2,000 children lost parents to the attack. To date, more than 180,000 Afghan and Iraqi civilians have died as a direct result of the U.S. compulsion to defeat Al-Qaeda, which is approximately 60 times the number of civilian deaths suffered on 9/11. While Americans have lost nearly 2,500 troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, more than 38,000 Afghan and Iraqi troops have been killed. Bush would have you believe they’re simply casualties of war, but the losses are obviously disproportionate and call into question the Old Testament saying, an eye for an eye, and seem to totally discount the New Testament saying, turn the other cheek.

It’s doubtful we’re “losing” the war against terrorism. We’ve toppled two callous and bloodthirsty regimes, flecked Al Qaeda across the region and routinely capture or, usually, kill operatives and officers belonging to Al-Qaeda. Yet insurgents rage without a hint of fatigue – a fact given credence by the 30 percent rise in insurgent attacks during 2005. U.S. government agencies and bin Laden acknowledge the ever-increasing number of extremist recruits flocking from ‘round the globe to join the ranks Al-Qaeda, which Osama touted as proof that coalition operations are failing, and now, more than four years after 9/11, Osama has threatened the U.S. with another attack. But at least we’re prepared to handle another burst of destruction. Then again, maybe we’re not.

In a report published by the 9/11 commissioners last year, panel chairman Thomas Kean faulted our government for making dismal progress in increasing safety, interagency communication and technology upgrades. He condemned the Department of Homeland Security for mismanagement of funds, citing one city that used its security funding to install air-conditioners in garbage trucks, and yet another for outfitting its K9 units with full-body kevlar armor. This leads some to believe that the same deficiencies that allowed 9/11 to transpire with such ease could be laying in wait. According to the Al-Qaeda leader, changes in security haven’t deterred his agents from starting and continuing attack preparations on the U.S. mainland.

Muslim extremists of Osama’s ilk are known for their patience and plotting, while a not-so-nifty quality of U.S. tactic under Bush Jr. has been seat-of-our-pants disregard for careful planning. We now know that pre-war intelligence was inaccurate. Yet Bush pressed the United Nations and the inspectors sent to discover whether Saddam indeed harbored WMDs, and ignored the cautions of France and Germany, charging head-on into war with, even now, no clearly detailed plan to withdraw from Iraq. Now we’re trapped, and lives will continue to blink out of existence, whether friend or foe.

Then there’s the issue of a truce, something Vice President Cheney vehemently disregarded, saying the U.S. doesn’t negotiate with terrorists. But our government obliged White House sit-downs with deceased Palestinian president Yassar Arafat, once regarded as a terrorist by the U.S.

It seems Osama’s offer of truce must be carefully considered and not wholly tabled – if it is, the U.S. may be handing bin Laden legitimacy to carry out further attacks – his latest tape presents a man appealing to the world as a defender of caliphate, a leader similar to Mohammed in his historical offer of truce to warring foes. Maybe he can’t guarantee a decline in hostilities, and maybe he inspired those horrific attacks, but isn’t it possible this has gone far enough, that we should weigh our options? The FBI hasn’t officially declared bin Laden the mastermind behind 9/11, and their top-10 criminal list only presents him with connections to terrorist activities in the mid- to late-90s, contrary to how Bush refers to Osama in speeches.

We know how far extremists can go, as evidenced by Al-Zaqawri’s ruthlessness in previous years. We have Saddam, Arafat and countless icons throughout history upon which to gauge Osama and how insanely we’re pursuing a man who may in fact be dead. He’s just one man, and the debt has been paid.

Osama, this war, it’s purpose without forethought, and the consequences of a country whose citizens are dipped in a vat of apathy and bathing in its pungent stink are all items that deserve serious contemplation. Instead of looking beyond our borders to find a fight, we should look inside our executive branch, finally. Maybe then we’ll begin to repair the damage caused not only by 9/11, but also by Bush himself.