Obama's Terrorist Kill List

by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright June 2, 2012
All Rights Reserved.                                         

             Transitioning from conventional warfare into today’s sophisticated war on terror, President Barack Obama has the final say on who’s on the terrorist “kill list.”  When former President George W. Bush started Operation Enduring Freedom Oct. 7, 2001, no one knew the shape of things to come in 21st century warfare.  After committing troops to Afghanistan in the wake of Sept. 11, Bush couldn’t anticipate the many twists-and-turns of counter-terrorism operations needed to finally, some 10 years later, kill Osama bin Laden May 1, 2011, the mastermind of Sept. 11.  When the long arm of American justice reached Bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan May 1, 2001, Obama had already given the kill order.   Navy Seals—coordinated with the CIA—wasted no time opening fire on the 54-year-old multimillionaire Saudi-born terrorist.  Bin Laden’s bullet-pocked body was dumped somewhere in the Arabian Sea, in what White House officials called a “proper Islamic burial.”

             Since taking office Jan. 20, 2009, Obama has ordered numerous predator drone strikes against high-value terrorist targets.  While al-Qaeda’s Ayman al-Zawahri, Bin Laden’s personal physician and right-hand-man and Taliban’s one-eyed Mullah Mohammed Omar, remain at large, Barack has ordered the CIA and U.S. Special Operations to relentlessly pursue terrorist targets.  Calling Obama the “final moral calculator” in kill-or-capture debate, Obama has given Special Ops and the CIA the green light to go after high-value terrorist targets.  As Obama fulfilled his campaign promise to end wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, he simultaneously ramped up remote location terror attacks with predator drone operations.  Though criticized by the GOP for being too soft on terrorists, Obama has killed over 20 key al-Qaeda operatives, including Osama bin Laden.

             Obama’s critics on the left and right criticize him for his predator drone hit on Chicago-born-turned Yemen-based al-Qaeda terrorist Anwar al-Alawki Sept. 20, 2011.  Alawki’s death triggered Constitutional issues about targeting U.S. citizens, no matter how they’ve gone astray.  Pursuing a fierce, relentless, offensive-minded CIA-driven predator drone attack on al-Qaeda operatives replaces former President George W. Bush’s strategy of mobilizing the military to pursue terrorist targets.  Much of the criticism from the counter-terrorism community stems from fighting guerrilla wars with a conventional military strategy.  Obama’s approach makes use of sophisticated electronic surveillance and remote-controlled kill vehicles.  Most counter-terrorism officials believe that deploying the conventional military to fight terrorist operations is cumbersome, costly and inefficient.

             Now embroiled in a bitter re-election fight, Obama finds himself responding to his GOP critics, attacking him for being overly-aggressive and passive at the same time.  “The president was very sharp on the thing, and said, ‘I want to know how this happened,’” said a top White House official about collateral damage from predator drone attacks inside Pakistan.  “The care that Mr. Obama and his counter-terrorism chief take in choosing targets,” said the New York Times.  “and reliance on a precision weapon, the drone, reflect his pledge at the outset of his presidency to reject what he called the Bush administration’s ‘false choice between our safety and our ideals.’”  Whatever kill list Obama and his chief counter-terrorism chief make, it takes into account the cost-benefit analysis of mobilizing the U.S. military.  Sticking to precise counter-terrorism operations save the country lives and tax dollars.

              Limiting collateral damage is the reason why the White House has evolved a more effective counter-terrorism strategy.  Ending wars in Iraq and Afghanistan doesn’t mean the war on terror ends.  It means exactly the opposite.  Refocusing efforts away from massive deployments to precise, cost-effective counter-terrorism operations keep terrorist on the run, while, at the same time, saving foreign and U.S. lives.  Syrian President Bashar al-Assad finds himself caught between a rock and a hard place, fighting insurgents with a conventional military, heaping unspeakable casualties on civilians in Houla, Syria.  Fight terrorists embedded in civilian populations centers is no easy matter.  Even with precision munitions at Obama’s disposal, collateral damage makes counter-terrorism operations messy work.  Whatever Obama’s specific kill list, there’s always collateral damage.

             Obama’s Republican critics can fault him for many things, just not relentlessly pursuing al-Qaeda terrorists.  U.S. counter-terrorism operations promise to stretch U.S. resources into the foreseeable future.  Obama’s been a quick-study, figuring out that precise drone attacks are preferred over mobilizing the U.S. military to fight shadowy terror groups.  White House officials must help the public get up to speed on new developments in fighting terrorists.  Certain members of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees haven’t yet caught up with new counter-terrorism strategies.  Fighting shadowy terrorist groups with conventional military capability has proved costly in terms of lives and tax dollars.  Putting U.S. Special Operations on the same page as the CIA has been a proven strategy.  Less emphasis on war and more on counter-terrorism operations has paid rich dividends.

©1999-2012 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.