Heightened UnAlert Volume 1

After careful consideration, I have come to the unmistakable conclusion that most conservatives are afraid of the wrong things. So this week, I am starting a new series, to be continued from time to time similar to Grab Bag and Profiles in Courage, that highlight this silliness.

Strike up a conversation with a conservative friend and you will find him or her principally worried about terrorism, immigration, and poor people thieving from their wallets. Notice that the subtext here is "the other" or the strange, different person from the far away land of....wherever...taking something from them or invading their space.

Liberals, however, seemed concerned mostly about health care, education, and the environment...all things that will help people live better lives and ultimately improve our country.

Even within each category that conservatives value as being top concerns they are way off base. Poor people thieving from your wallet? This is actually known as belief perseverance or confirmation bias. The same could be said for their views on immigration, which are so unrealistic and child-like that it's hard for me to listen to them seriously. Nothing, however, is more silly than a conservative's view on terrorism and national security.

At this point, I think it's obvious to most people that Iraq was never really a serious threat and that we probably should have kept our focus on Afghanistan. I admit that, back in the fall of 2001, we really looked we were going to head in the right direction, policy wise. Then Tora Bora happened, the administration turned almost immediately to Iraq, and I realized, to my horror, that President Bush and Vice President Cheney honestly do not give a rat's ass about the people that attacked us on 9-11. If they did, we would not have the situation we currently have in Pakistan.

To put it bluntly, Pakistan is a powder keg with a quarter of a centimeter long fuse. Large portions of the country have been taken over by radicals. President Musharaf, leader of Pakistan, has more or less suspended democracy in favor of a dictatorship. According to all of the latest National Intelligence Assessments, Al Qaeda has reconstituted itself in the various tribal areas of Pakistan and is at pre-9/11 strength.

Oh, and Pakistan has somewhere in the neighborhood of three dozen nuclear warheads.

Great.

And people in this country are worried about Iraq falling into the wrong hands?

Folks, Pakistan IS in the wrong hands and it's getting worse everyday. Don't believe me? Check out the Oct 29, 2007 edition of Newsweek. Here is the money quote:

Today no other country on earth is arguably more dangerous than Pakistan. It has everything Osama bin Laden could ask for: political instability, a trusted network of radical Islamists, an abundance of angry young anti-Western recruits, secluded training areas, access to state-of-the-art electronic technology, regular air service to the West and security services that don't always do what they're supposed to do. Then there's the country's large and growing nuclear program. "If you were to look around the world for where Al Qaeda is going to find its bomb, it's right in their backyard," says Bruce Riedel, the former senior director for South Asia on the National Security Council.

The whole article is stunning and yet another shining example of how sub moronic the Bush Administration's policy on terrorism is devoid of priorities. One would think that the man who once said, "bin Laden, Dead or Alive" would actually live up to his word and do something about Pakistan, other than what he is currently doing which is offering a bunch of lip service to the media and sending low level diplomats to talk to Musharaf.

Mention Pakistan to a conservative (please do sometime...it's really a hoot) and you will get a surprisingly laissez faire response. Here are some that I have heard recently.

"Bomb Pakistan? Aren't they are allies. To do so would be colossally stupid."

"Musharaf is doing the best he can. Those folks over there can't handle democracy. They need to be ruled with an iron hand."

"Things are just fine over there. We need to stay focused on Iraq, building democracy there so it will spread to Pakistan and other countries in the region at a later date."

Huh?

Talk about hypocrisy. So....what....they are the only ones allowed to be tough and if anyone else, like say...Barack Obama talks about military action in Pakistan then it's time to stomp their feet and throw an eight year old temper tantrum, yelling, "No! No! You can't do that! No!"

Or they will revert to the old "It's all Bill Clinton's fault" mantra. Perhaps they haven't read this article, recently sent to me be a loyal reader, which details how it was Musharraf, after seizing power in 1999, who refused to complete a joint US-Pakistani operation (started with ousted Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif) that would've possibly taken out bin Laden. It was President Clinton and his staff that had been working on this operation since the failed 1998 bombing.

We need to get serious about Pakistan now. I would suggest an operation in Pakistan that cleans out the tribal regions once and for all. Right now, the Bush Administration, in a shit eatingly stupid maneuver, is sending around 15o million dollars to the region to "win hearts and minds."

I'll give all of you one guess as to where that money is really going.