nerdgirl

KSM was apprehended during the predawn hours while sleeping; it was more “somnolentic” than kinetic. In March 2003, where I was in Nepal -- due to Nepal’s domestic insurgency -- was more kinetic than Rawalpindi. Your own criteria in opposition to announced policy decision and in favor of military tribunal was “Bottom line, these guys were caught in theater, by military assets.” You later amended/expanded that criteria to “kinetic situations.” In the case of Omar Khadr, who was captured in theater (Afghanistan), by military assets (US Army), and while in a kinetic situation (firefight) – all of your criteria – the Obama administration plans to try him under the Military Commissions Act in a military tribunal. In the case that fits your criteria, the Obama administration policy and your recommendation are the same. What you called “the single dumbest-idiotic-retarded idea” is following your own criteria. Now to be fair, Khadr is a clear(er) case. In a case that is not as clear-cut *w/r/t your 3 criteria,* al-Nashiri, who was apprehended outside of theater by UAE, is also being tried in a military tribunal. (The al-Nishiri/USS Cole bombing case may be clear-cut under *other* criteria.) Otoh, the 5 detainees announced to be tried in federal court on international terrorism charges were not apprehended in theater, were not apprehended by military assets, and in 3 of 5 cases (I don’t know w/r/t the latter two, so I’m not making an assertion), were not apprehended in kinetic situations. (If someone is interested in investigating the latter two cases, I enthusiastically invite it!) They do not satisfy even 1 out of 3 of your own criteria. Back to the ‘how’ and ‘why’ you came to your conclusion. If your earlier assertions and conclusions – “Bottom line, these guys were caught in theater, by military assets. These should be settle [sic] by military tribunal. ” – were based on something less than complete information, does that suggest to you that it might be worth revisiting? Or does that not matter to you? If not, why not? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Serious question: what would you recommend? If Congress does not have the forensic and other findings from federal and military law enforcement, on what should they base their assessment? Congressional hearings don't do original on-scene investigations, e.g., forensics. I can't think of an example. Anyone? I couldn't find local law enforcement mentioned in the article cited; it does state "until federal law enforcement and military authorities have completed their probes...." /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Holder also said Khadr is facing a tribunal along with others at gitmo. And I think he was captured by US Soldiers in afghanistan. So I'm confused, to get a Tribunal you have to be caught by U.S. forces? You're right - it can be confusing. Yes, Omar Khadr was captured by the US Army. He was captured at the conclusion of a fairly well-documented (there are pictures), outright firefight in Afghanistan. He's being tried under the Military Commissions Act for actions against US forces w/r/t Laws of War not for international terrorism. W/r/t the Khadr case it's not who captured him but for what he's being charged. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

I've done cross-country moves (2000 & 3000 miles) w/~5k lbs stuff; I have lots of books. The only difference from your scenario is I've done my own packing. Both cost less than $3K. The 3000 mile move cost $2600 in Aug 2005. A 650 mile move with 7500 lbs was $3K in Aug 2007. Gas surcharge at the time added a couple hundred. In all scenarios the companies have found ways to tack on additional $250 to $500 charges but nothing that I felt was criminal. YMMV. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

I know that ... I was hoping to understand better Max's thinking underlying his assertion and how he got to that. Summary of captures of 5 detainees to be tried in federal court: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was captured in Pakistan by the Pakistani ISI. There may (likely) have been some involvement by CIA. Among the first Americans to interrogate KSM were FBI special agents, i.e., purview of DOJ. Ali al-Aziz Ali was captured in Karachi by Pakistani police originally w/r/t a plot to bomb the US Embassy in Pakistan. He was transferred to the FBI initially. Waleed bin Attash captured in Pakistan by Pakistani police. He was transferred to the FBI initially also. (The last two I had to look up, both who were the detainees & where they were captured) Ramzi Binalshibh was captured in Pakistan by ISI. Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi was captured in Pakistan by ISI. He is the only one who was transferred directly to US military assets (Bagram). Otoh, Abd al-Raheem al-Nashiri, who is accused of planning Al Qaeda’s bombing of USS Cole, was captured in the UAE by the UAE (unsure police, intelligence, or military) and then transferred to CIA. AG Holder announced he is to be tried in a military tribunal. I'm not sure that the metric of "who" does the capturing and/or "where" the capturing takes places is the most important one. Maybe someone can convince me otherwise? "Who" and "what" were the targets may, imo, be a better metric. For 9-11 the targets were a mix of civilian (WTC and White House or Capitol) and military (PNT). In that case, which takes precedence? I have an opinion. The target of the USS Cole bombing was military. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

It’s partially historical. The original selective service Acts go back to WWI and WWII. President Carter tried to have the Act amended to require women to register. A lot of folks didn’t/don’t like the idea of women potentially being required to go into combat. It ended up in a Supreme Court Case, Rostker v. Goldberg. Former Justice Rehnquist wrote the majority opinion. Personally, I would either like to see the Act ended or required for all. Might be an interesting poll.

Are you sure? /Marg p.s. who's changing variables? Initially it was "in theater." Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

While I recognize some may have that motive, I don’t think all do. And I’m not much inclined to speculate on Mayor Giuliani’s motives. At the same time, I very much think it is a policy decision worth discussing. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Andy - thanks for your calm and thought-out replies throughout this thread! And thanks to [TrophyHusband] for his questions. Hard questions are good. They improve my thinking. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

If that is the metric, what if they weren’t? I.e., what if they were not captured by military assets and not captured in theater? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Unless the military has invented a new way to authorize additional forces through the executive branch...??? Hell if I know.... Most folks, and I suspect this extends well beyond you, don't know if the current time span represents a long time or a short time for such a decision to be made. There is a notion that it should be faster; what's the source of that inclination or perception? And who benefits from that perception? And who is harmed by perpetuation of that perception? Previously it has been suggested here that one explanation might be that the National Security Advisor disagrees with GEN McChrystal's assessement: Gen Jones (ret) is the statutory pointman of national security strategy. He is also the gate-keeper. I think it's more than that; at the same time, however, I do think that's an important explanation to consider. As far as I am aware, no one here has commented on what the CJCS Adm Mullen might think. He is in the direct chain of command to the President. Another player, the current Ambassador to Afghanistan, retired LTG Karl Eikenberry, USA, reportedly opposes a significant increase in troops. The reported main concern is the Karzai government. Something about which I already wrote here w/r/t a strategic delay in making a decision. And I don’t have any interactions w/the US Afghan delegation … but interesting intersection, imo. Since taking office, President Obama has made quite a few decisions regarding Afghanistan, e.g., in February, authorizing the deployment of 17,000 more combat troops (Marines and soldiers) to Afghanistan almost immediately after he received GEN Petraeus’ request through the SecDef and another 4000 in late March; authorizing another 13,000 support troops (military intelligence, civil affairs, engineers) this summer; expanding targets to include major narco-traffickers, i.e., combatting what’s keeping the Taliban flush; authorizing increasing number of drone missions into Pakistan, something about which I have mixed opinions; and the change in leadership from GEN McKiernan to GEN McChrystal. A lot of that, especially the increases in troop numbers, hasn’t gotten much of attention, particularly by the media. If one argues that Pres Obama can’t/won’t make a decision or change w/r/t Afghanistan, does one explain those authorizations and other decisions, including his decision to change leadership, as anomalies? Until mid-September or so, Pres Obama has, im-ever-ho, been making strategic decisions and forward-looking (rather than just reactionary) w/r/t Afghanistan and supportive of COIN approaches being brought to him by his military and national security advisors. Strategic decisions … not operational and not tactical. My first-order explanation, imo: decision-making and intra-agency coordination, much more so inter-agency coordination, takes time. There’s more to consider than just GEN McChrystal’s recommendations regarding military force structure for US foreign policy … especially if the intent is not to replicate earlier efforts -- to quote GEN Petraeus: “a whole of government approach is required, one that integrates all tools available international and interagency partners.” My speculation is that one factor is a strategic delay to put pressure initially on Afghan President Hamid Karzai, i.e., the single biggest obstacle to implementing a successful counterinsurgency strategy. If it's just a counterterrorism strategy, one can (more easily) ignore the head of a foreign state. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Was an official request ever made? Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

I'd heard of the book but haven't read it. Nor was I aware of the authors' hypothesis. I can play out an argument. Curious as to what the underlying data is. Thanks for the reply! /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Something purely-in-fun: I chuckled at the Onion’s Ultra-Realistic Modern Warfare Game Features Awaiting Orders, Repairing Trucks, which I’m guessing was intended to coincide with release the real game. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Most of the folks whom I have talked with/heard talk expect that reprocessing will satisfy the near- & mid-terms needs rather than spur search for new uranium deposits, which is a much more expensive way to go about it. Reprocessing through PUREX process is much easier. That was what India did to get the plutonium they wanted in 1974 using the fuel from a Canadian reactor. The DPRK used a modified Purex process to obtain its estimated ~30kgs of Pu. (It takes 4-8kg for a Pu-based nuclear weapon.) The MOX fuel cycle has led to ~200 tons of separated plutonium accumulated in France & UK. Not sure the figures for Canada off the top of my head. But that's the proliferation side ... not the purely commercial side. Nonaqueous “dry” methods, such pyrometallurgical reprocessing, don’t have the same proliferation risks. Resistance, imo, is largely based on current dominance of PUREX or modified PUREX methods commercially and people not liking the idea of molten salts. And I think -- purely speculative on my part -- that there is an expectation within the commercial industry that the government will pick up the tab. It's more complicated than that obviously, but I do think that is a significant factor. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

I don't remember exactly, but I know that leading up to Gen. Patraeus' recommendations, he was speaking about the "book" he'd written regarding the strategy that was to be used in the "surge". I saw him speak about it in October of 2006, long before his recommendation to President Bush. President Bush, IIRC made the case of the surge in January of 2007. It was in December when he had his "policy" meetings on the subject. So, if I had to guess, it was three to four weeks. Yes, the official announcement was January 2007. You're right the ground work was being laid while Petraeus, Crane, Nagl, and others were working on the revision to FM 3-24 in October 2005 when Petraeus took command of the Combined Arms Center (CAC) at Fort Leavenworth. Does anything in the interagency get done in 3-4 weeks? (Nevermind coordination between Sec of Army, Sec of Navy [for the USMC], and OSD.) /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Hey, I got compared to Sarah Palin ... or told I had been the other day. I'm not sure whether to be proud, disappointed, or what ... but that story is a post for Women's Forum. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Hey, I’m interested in hearing what you and others think … and why. Long-term – my opinion the biggest threat to American security is the decline in the value of education. It seems that for some it’s become “cool” to be dumb or anti-education and something of which to be proud. As much as one might hold dear the Jeffersonian farmer ideal (& he was neither dumb, anti-education, nor did avoid spending time abroad in places like France, so that’s mythologized as well), that ideal as source of power left us over a century ago. Other nations will surpass us. Our investment in public education in the late 1800s and early 1900s may be the most significant reason why the US became the wealthy superpower in the latter half of the 20th Century. (One can argue whether destruction of Europe in WWII was necessary but not sufficient, I would argue that without the investment in education, we would not have been able to take advantage that the state of Europe at the end of WWII offered the US.) And altho' it is still something of a specialist novelty and *not* a deterministic indicator at this time, the first Americans are starting to get PhDs at Chinese Universities, e.g., Lora Saalman. Lack of investment in domestic infrastrcuture, as well. Short-term – US domestic economy. The only thing that I think can threaten the Republic in the next decade are multiple, multi-kiloton nuclear explosions. At this point, no terrorist group has access or even imagined capability to access that kind of weaponry. I do worry about Pakistan’s stability and its nuclear arsenal. I worry about regional instability in the Middle East. I worry about degraded/degrading command and control infrastructure within Russia’s nuclear weapons. I don’t worry that much *relatively* about DPRK. I’m coming to think of gangs, which you likely know have national and international reach in a few cases, as insurgencies. Although it’s not well-thought out, i.e., something I’m just tossing out there, I wonder what would have been the result if the ~$50B that has been invested since 2001 in combating potential biological agents, e.g., anthrax, would have been invested in local communities anti-gang initiatives that included policing and education. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

I saw that story too. Thought about posting it under the “Does this qualify as a hate crime?” thread. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Comments from the SecDef regarding the leaking of information related to Afghanistan, as well as the Fort Hood shooting. As cited on Defenselink.mil (i.e., the DoD’s own website) from Armed Forces Press “Gates Lashes Out at Leakers” “Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates today condemned a spate of leaks regarding both the Afghanistan strategy deliberations and last week's shootings at Fort Hood, Texas, threatening to fire anyone in the Defense Department he finds is involved. “‘I am appalled by the amount of leaking that has been going on,’ Gates told reporters traveling with him today in the wake of media reports following yesterday's national security session on Afghanistan, President Barack Obama's eighth in the past two months. “Gates said he has little doubt that some of those leaks have come from within the Defense Department. ‘If I found out who’ was involved, he said, ‘it would probably be a career ender.’ “Leaking information as Obama is weighing critical factors serves neither the interest of the country nor the military, the secretary said. He refrained from sharing his own views about the best option, but said Obama appears to be leaning toward one that combines parts of various alternatives presented so far.” Throughout the budget process, Gates put in place a processes to try to limit leaks, like requiring federal employees, military officers, and contractors working in OSD to keep diaries of what they thought were going to be his decisions. Does anyone remember how long the process for the change in strategy in Iraq, i.e., “the Surge,” took? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

The steep rise was a bubble of sorts. Hit ~$130 per lb in July 07, iirc, and is less than $50 per lb these days. But yes, there is a finite amount currently available on the commercial market. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

That’s a great point! Iirc from some of your posts, you probably know that on average 1 of 10 light bulbs in the US is powered using nuclear fuel that was obtained and down-blended from former Soviet nuclear weapons. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Which treaties led to the closing of the Hanford PUREX facility? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

On a more serious note....walls that stand in the way of what? I think that a good question. When I wrote the OP I was thinking of political and electronic freedom. But one could imagine other possibilities. Beyond your neighbor's fence, do you have anything in mind? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Inspired by [jgoose71]'s thread: As no commercial entity has pursued building or operating a domestic reprocessing facility over the last 28 years & I'm not aware that any is even thinking about it, should the US federal government subsidize the construction of one? What do you think? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying