11/10/13

I have made many controversial statements and calls in my years and many of them are in my blog.

I want to add two here. I would hope that people reading this blog would read to the end before they pass judgment on me, my blog, and my calls.

1. September 11, 2001.

Very few days after 9/11, I wrote an e-mail to a friend where I said that the best way the US can respond to the atrocity was to bomb Afghanistan with a limited number of TACTICAL nuclear weapons. Tactical nuclear weapons are smaller and have more limited effects, although still devastating. Remember this was Afghanistan ruled by the Taliban and infiltrated by Al Qaeda. I felt that such a move would achieve the following desired effects:

  1. Combined with a clarifying presidential statement, it would teach the world at large not to mess with the US.
  2. It would make state sponsors of terrorism think many, many times before they try to attack the US again.
  3. It would dry up the vast majority of the support networks that are essential for all these terrorists to survive on. The entire population of the active terrorist “army,” take all organizations together, is not more than in the thousands. How come the US and the Western world cannot, 12 years later, bring this terror phenomenon to submission? It is mostly due to the fact that these organizations have huge support networks that work in concentric circles. Those that are VERY close to the terrorists count maybe in the tens of thousands, those that support them actively but from a far, hundreds of thousands. But those that support them passively by allowing them to exist and turning a blind eye, those count in the hundreds of millions. Such action by the US would have made these people think very carefully before allowing terror to live inside them and being passive about it.
  4. It would save the US thousands of military lives and tens of thousands of casualties. It would save trillions of $ and major social upheaval.
  5. It would allow the US to do what it does best—to come in after winning the war and with the help of money and help to make a real change, as they did after WWII in both Europe and Japan.

Of course, at the time my friend thought that I was crazy and was patronizing in his response.

True, hundreds of thousands of innocent Afghans would have paid the price of the folly of their rulers if my advice would have been acted upon. But I wonder if after 12 years of war, and indeed hundreds of thousands of people paying the price for that war and the war in Iraq and all the other consequences that these two wars brought about, whether my friend and others would think the same today. Especially given that on balance VERY little progress was made. It was a controversial call; for then-President Bush to do it would have taken huge courage, but in retrospect, I still think this was the better option.

2. Snowden

Edward Snowden is a traitor. I would, as president, sign a presidential finding authorizing a black-op mission to kill him immediately. On the execution of such mission, I would have made public my authorization to it and would have warned anyone else cooperating with him that I would do the same to them if they do not desist. You can run but you cannot hide. The world needs to learn that one does not mess with the US.

Some people are shocked by this suggestion. Their only claim is that being a US citizen he is protected by the Constitution and he is entitled to the due process of law. Yet it was his choice to run from the due process of US law. Of course had he stayed and stood trial as did his “spiritual” role-model Daniel Ellsberg of the Pentagon Papers fame, that would be different. But he chose to run, he continuously leaks damaging information to the media, and he probably already spilled everything to enemy intelligence services.

How many times will the US allow its citizens and others to rain on its parade? It is time for US hegemony and power in the world to be re-established.

We do not leave in an ideal world. It is a practical world. A world of choices. If I have to choose, then a strong and assertive US is better than Russia, China, and/or radical Islam in all its factions asserting themselves as they are doing now.