Started By
Message
locked post

Khalid Sheik Mohammed in his own words update book review

Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:03 am
Posted by Jbird
In Bidenville with EthanL
Member since Oct 2012
73414 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:03 am
Marc Thiessen has a new piece out in today’s Washington Post on the new memoir by Khalid Sheik Mohammed interrogator James E. Mitchell (“Enhanced Interrogation: Inside the Minds and Motives of the Islamic Terrorists Trying To Destroy America”) that sheds some light on exactly how al-Qaeda thought America would react to the 9/11 attacks.

Spoiler: George W. Bush did the opposite of what the terrorists thought he would do and according to KSM, the invasion of Afghanistan prevented “a second wave of attacks” on America:


But KSM said something else that was prophetic. In the end, he told Mitchell, “We will win because Americans don’t realize .?.?. we do not need to defeat you militarily; we only need to fight long enough for you to defeat yourself by quitting.”

LINK
This post was edited on 12/28/16 at 12:17 pm
Posted by Scruffy
Kansas City
Member since Jul 2011
72004 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:19 am to
quote:

We will win because Americans don’t realize .?.?. we do not need to defeat you militarily; we only need to fight long enough for you to defeat yourself by quitting.”
That is the actual goal of all wars. The purpose is to outlast the enemy from a morale standpoint, both with the soldiers and citizens at home.

We have failed in our implementation of war for decades.

If the purpose was retaliatory, as was the "stated" case in the ME, we should have bombed them and left.

Nation building is a failed component of our current strategy, and that man understood that.

We have squandered the currency of national support on moronic ME incursions, and that is apparent in the current sentiment of our society.
Posted by MrCarton
Paradise Valley, MT
Member since Dec 2009
20231 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:20 am to
Upvote.
Posted by Jbird
In Bidenville with EthanL
Member since Oct 2012
73414 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:21 am to
Agree
Posted by MrCarton
Paradise Valley, MT
Member since Dec 2009
20231 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:24 am to
This admission makes little sense. Did KSM think they would just continue to fly airplanes into buildings until America went away? That was the genius of AQ?

Bush's "surprise plan" of bombing Afghanistan wasn't surprising to anyone. The surprise was when the main effort in Afghanistan was to install a new regime at the expense of finding OBL. Which is how KSM said it would end.

It seems like there is a ton on after the fact and picking and choosing going on to craft this story.
This post was edited on 11/29/16 at 11:26 am
Posted by Jbird
In Bidenville with EthanL
Member since Oct 2012
73414 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:27 am to
They assumed we would lob some Tomahawk's into an aspirin factory or empty tents. Consider it a crime and call it a day. They didn't expect the U.S. to topple the Taliban and hunt their asses down in the mountains.

Posted by bencoleman
RIP 7/19
Member since Feb 2009
37887 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:28 am to
If he's talking about our endeavors in the middle east he has a point. Attacks on our soil will eventually cause a backlash that could cause the muslim community here to pay a heavy price.
Posted by Homesick Tiger
Greenbrier, AR
Member since Nov 2006
54202 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:31 am to
quote:

We have failed in our implementation of war for decades.


Negative feedback of collateral damage is the excuse here.

quote:

If the purpose was retaliatory, as was the "stated" case in the ME, we should have bombed them and left.


Negative feedback of collateral damage is the excuse here also.
Posted by MrCarton
Paradise Valley, MT
Member since Dec 2009
20231 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:31 am to
quote:

They assumed we would lob some Tomahawk's into an aspirin factory or empty tents. Consider it a crime and call it a day. They didn't expect the U.S. to topple the Taliban and hunt their asses down in the mountains.



I don't see that as being a plausible assumption. It's actually quite absurd. aside from the USS liberty attack, the United States has a history crushing those who attack it. all the way back to the very beginning.


Edit: great post though man. I will be sharing this one

This post was edited on 11/29/16 at 11:33 am
Posted by Jbird
In Bidenville with EthanL
Member since Oct 2012
73414 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:32 am to
But perhaps the most riveting part of the book is what KSM told Mitchell about what inspired al-Qaeda to attack the United States — and the U.S. response he expected. Today, some on both the left and the right argue that al-Qaeda wanted to draw us into a quagmire in Afghanistan — and now the Islamic State wants to do the same in Iraq and Syria. KSM said this is dead wrong. Far from trying to draw us in, KSM said that al-Qaeda expected the United States to respond to 9/11 as we had the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut — when, KSM told Mitchell, the United States “turned tail and ran.” He also said he thought we would treat 9/11 as a law enforcement matter, just as we had the bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and the USS Cole in Yemen — arresting some operatives and firing a few missiles into empty tents, but otherwise leaving him free to plan the next attack.

“Then he looked at me and said, ‘How was I supposed to know that cowboy George Bush would announce he wanted us ‘dead or alive’ and then invade Afghanistan to hunt us down?’” Mitchell writes. “KSM explained that if the United States had treated 9/11 like a law enforcement matter, he would have had time to launch a second wave of attacks.” He was not able to do so because al-Qaeda was stunned “by the ferocity and swiftness of George W. Bush’s response.”
Posted by Jbird
In Bidenville with EthanL
Member since Oct 2012
73414 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:33 am to
KSM “said jihadi-minded brothers would immigrate into the United States” and “wrap themselves in America’s rights and laws” until they were strong enough to rise up and attack us. “He said the brothers would relentlessly continue their attacks and the American people would eventually become so tired, so frightened, and so weary of war that they would just want it to end.”

“Eventually,” KSM said, “America will expose her neck for us to slaughter.”

But quitting will not bring us peace, KSM told Mitchell. He explained that “it does not matter that we do not want to fight them,” Mitchell writes, adding that KSM explained “America may not be in a religious war with him, but he and other True Muslims are in a religious war with America” and “he and his brothers will not stop until the entire world lives under Sharia law.”
This post was edited on 11/29/16 at 11:36 am
Posted by WhiskeyPapa
Member since Aug 2016
9277 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:40 am to
quote:

we do not need to defeat you militarily; we only need to fight long enough for you to defeat yourself by quitting.”


How does he define quitting? The U.S. just pulling our forces out of Muslim areas and accepting that we will have some civilian losses to the home grown hadjis?
Posted by SippyCup
Gulf Coast
Member since Sep 2008
6138 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:41 am to
quote:

wrap themselves in America’s rights and laws” until they were strong enough to rise up and attack us



Huma?
Posted by MrCarton
Paradise Valley, MT
Member since Dec 2009
20231 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:44 am to
quote:

KSM said this is dead wrong. Far from trying to draw us in, KSM said that al-Qaeda expected the United States to respond to 9/11 as we had the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut — when, KSM told Mitchell, the United States “turned tail and ran.” He also said he thought we would treat 9/11 as a law enforcement matter, just as we had the bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and the USS Cole in Yemen — arresting some operatives and firing a few missiles into empty tents, but otherwise leaving him free to plan the next attack.


Surely KSM can see the difference between hitting the wtc on US soil vice bombing US embassies and Marine barracks abroad.

quote:

“Eventually,” KSM said, “America will expose her neck for us to slaughter.”


so wait... is he saying that the WTC attacks worked better than he thought? I fail to see the picture that KSM is painting here.
This post was edited on 11/29/16 at 11:48 am
Posted by Y.A. Tittle
Member since Sep 2003
101267 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:46 am to
quote:

Surely KSM can see the difference between hitting the wtc on US soil vice bombing US embassies and Marine barracks abroad.




Maybe you're attributing too much sophistication to his historical understanding.
Posted by Jbird
In Bidenville with EthanL
Member since Oct 2012
73414 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:46 am to
quote:

How does he define quitting?
No idea.
Posted by Jbird
In Bidenville with EthanL
Member since Oct 2012
73414 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:48 am to
quote:

Surely KSM can see the difference between hitting the wtc on US soil vice bombing US embassies and Marine barracks abroad.
Apparently the goat herder didn't, I think they underestimated Bush/s resolve more than anything.
Posted by MrCarton
Paradise Valley, MT
Member since Dec 2009
20231 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:49 am to
quote:

Maybe you're attributing too much sophistication to his historical understanding


No, I am actually attributing zero understanding to his understanding. What he is saying doesn't make any sense. Granted, we don't know the full text or context of the interrogations.
Posted by Jbird
In Bidenville with EthanL
Member since Oct 2012
73414 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:49 am to
quote:

so wait... is he saying that the WTC attacks worked better than he thought? I fail to see the picture that KSM is painting here.
I think just the opposite, he was caught off guard by the swift actions, having said that I think he is suggesting the long game versus a short term loss.

Odd ball way of claiming lose the battle win the war?
Posted by Y.A. Tittle
Member since Sep 2003
101267 posts
Posted on 11/29/16 at 11:51 am to
I guess, I don't understand what you're arguing then. I thought you were saying it was not plausible that KSM said/thought such things. It wouldn't be implausible to someone who lacks a nuanced understanding of history, I'd think.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram