Diversion. It was John Kerry’s convenient excuse for opposing the invasion of Iraq. It allowed him to pander to the anti-American left while trying to convince the rational center that he wasn’t going to leave us wide open to more terrorist attacks.

Despite the fact that Kerry’s position was recognized by the majority of the voters to be an opportunistic dodge, it is now a well established matter of faith for the left that Iraq is a diversion from the Great War on Terror (GWOT). As such the fighting in Iraq "makes us less safe."

There are two glaring problems with the logic of the left’s argument: 1) there is no evidence that any resource (personal or organization attention, logistical supplies, etc.) has been denied to actions in Afghanistan as a result of actions in Iraq; and 2) it narrows the definition of the Great War on Terror (GWOT) to military action in Afghanistan directed at persons responsible for the 9/11 attacks.

In other words, the left believes that the War on Terror means hunting for Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan. Period. Anything else is a "diversion." Yankee go home.

A review of the attack on the U.S.S. Cole illustrates the flaws of the left’s argument. The U.S.S. Cole is a Navy destroyer that was anchored at Aden, Yemen on October 12, 2000 for refueling. During this stop, a small boat packed with explosives came up alongside and detonated – essentially a boating version of the suicide bomber. The explosion killed 17 sailors and injured many more. We later learned that it was planned and carried out by al-Qaeda operatives located in Yemen.

After the Cole attack we did nothing militarily – it was the Clinton administration after all. We sent FBI agents to help investigate what was considered to be a crime. No arrests were forthcoming.

Eleven months later on 9/11, al-Qaeda struck again, this time with airplanes and this time in the United States. Thousands died. We quickly determined that the people behind the 9/11 attacks were located in Afghanistan. The United States, with support from our allies, invaded Afghanistan in October 2001. The hunt for Osama was on.

More than a year later, On November 4, 2002, we were still hunting for Osama in the mountains of Afghanistan/Pakistan. The Taliban was forced from power and a civil government was being formed.

At that same time, the CIA was operating a Predator drone over Yemen's northern Province of Marib. The operators of the Predator located an al-Qaeda team travelling in their vehicle and fired a Hellfire anti-tank missile at them. The attack killed Ali Senyan al-Harthi – the mastermind of the USS Cole operation and a key al-Qaeda leader in the region. .

In my opinion, blasting these guys to bits was a clear victory for us and a clear step forward in the GWOT. If you apply the "diversion" test, however, this attack was wrong. Yemen is south of Saudi Arabia. It is considerably farther from Afghanistan than Iraq. Therefore it had nothing to do with the fighting in Afghanistan. Furthermore, there was never any demonstrated link between Ali Senyan al-Harthi and 9/11.

No Afghanistan? No Osama? Must be a "diversion."

Rational and intelligent people will agree that that the CIA was helping to win the GWOT on November 4, 2002 by sending Ali Senyan al-Harthi and his fellow travelers to their just reward. We call it a "victory." Leftists call it a "diversion." If so, we should all hope for more such diversions.
- posted by Thomas @ 2:18 PM