Why has the President authorized special forces to cross the border from hard-pressed Afghanistan into Pakistan in pursuit of terrorists?
The new orders were issued after months of debate inside the Bush administration about whether to authorize a ground campaign inside Pakistan. The debate, first reported by The New York Times in late June, at times pitted some officials at the State Department against parts of the Pentagon that advocated aggressive action against Qaeda and Taliban targets inside the tribal areas.
Details about last week’s commando operation have emerged that indicate the mission was more intrusive than had previously been known.
According to two American officials briefed on the raid, it involved more than two dozen members of the Navy Seals (sic) who spent several hours on the ground and killed about two dozen suspected Qaeda fighters in what now appeared to have been a planned attack against militants who had been conducting attacks against an American forward operating base across the border in Afghanistan.
Because that’s where you find them.
Critics will state that these actions will “enrage public opinion” in the region. Like we’re popular there already, when al Qaeda terrorists and Taliban thugs operate openly among the people of Waziristan and the Federally Administrated Tribal Area. As though there were no practical limits to the rage of addle-pated fanatics, and each new act of ours elevated the needle to some new, and previously unanticipated height.
As though their sovereignty meant anything absent good will and reciprocity.
As though it ever made sense to allow a relentless enemy sufficient time and sanctuary space to gather his wits, recruit and train new forces, rest, re-arm and re-equip. Let them hate: We will wear their outrage as a badge of honor.
Pakistan’s top army officer said Wednesday that his forces would not tolerate American incursions like the one that took place last week and that the army would defend the country’s sovereignty “at all costs.”
They’d have to be boots on deck to make a difference, 24/7/365. Which would be a feature, rather than a bug. At least we’d know – really know – whose side they were on. And no more of the ISI’s nasty little games.
These men that our heroes hunt in the dark places that the Pakistani army dares not go, who defy civilization and its covenants – these are the remnants of those who sent those airplanes crashing into the New York and Washington skylines seven years ago today. Along with those who harbored and enabled them.
Today’s a good day to remind them that we haven’t forgotten them, nor what they did, nor what mischief they continue to do. That our reach is long and terrible, and that our righteous anger remains undimmed. That there will never again be a safe haven for them. That we will hound them to the ends of the earth.
Oderunt dum metuant.



[...] On September 11, 2008 (fortuitously), Neptunus Lex put up an interesting post on President Bush’s authorization of such raids, in his post “Gloves Off“. [...]
Perhaps the population of Pakistan would be a little less interested in raising h*ll about our incursions into their country if they knew that we don’t mind taking on all comers.
Former ally or not, anything that happens at this point they’ve brought on themselves. We’ve no doubt told them that we intend on seeing these jihadi bast*rds dead no matter where they are, and they can see by our efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq that we don’t mind hitting an entire country to do it. One would think that a reasonably intelligent person could put 2 and 2 together and understand that we won’t mind bombing Karachi if it comes down to it.
Do we want to bomb an ally (a reluctant one apparently)? No, we don’t. But far better that than another 9-11 if you ask me.
Jim C