9/11 en de Quadrennial Defense Review
De Quadrennial Defensie Review van 2001 is een onderwerp dat volgens mij zeer de moeite waard is om verder te onderzoeken. Ik hoop dan ook dat meer mensen hier daar eens verder naar willen kijken.
Het gaat hierbij om de 4-jaarlijkse defensieplannen van de VS, de zogenaamde Quadrennial Defense Review, en daarbij behorende stukken zoals de Defense Planning Guidance.
Men was in 2001, in de maanden voorafgaande aan de aanslagen, bezig met het voorbereiden van deze strategie; hierover staat aardig wat materiaal online. Deze strategie bevatte onderdelen als de preventieve oorlogsvoeringsdoctrine van Bush, homeland defense en meer van dat soort zaken.
Wettelijk gezien moest deze strategie uiterlijk op 30 September 2001 in werking treden.
Quadrennial Defense Review of 2001
Project for Defense Alternatives
http://www.comw.org/qdr/01qdr.html
http://www.comw.org/qdr/stratdebates.html
Why the Pentagon Fears Rumsfeld’s Review
Philip Gold
The Seattle Times
June 13, 2001
http://web.archive.org/web/20010720175145/http://www.discovery.org/viewDB/index.php3?program=Defense&command=view&id=652
The Rumsfeld initiatives point toward transformation based on need. The Pentagon, although not always wrong, responds to the two fundamental imperatives of any bureaucracy: protect your budget and your bureaucrats. The confrontation between statesmanship and bureaucracy is already ugly and intense. It’s going to get worse.
The American people need to listen. The issues may be complex, but it should be clear, soon enough, who’s talking horseshoes and who’s talking needs.
Senator Warner, Testimony Before the Senate Armed Services Committee
Thursday, June 28, 2001.
http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/2001/s20010628-secdef3.html
I certainly commend our president when he was a candidate and indeed now that he’s president, has recognized that we have a situation here at home where perhaps only in the times of World War II did we consider “homeland defense.” And this committee, I’m proud, under the leadership of our former Chairman Roberts, and now our new Chairman Landrieu, the committee that looks at the future, the threats to this nation, are bearing down again on homeland defense. And I’ll be scrutinizing your budget submissions to make sure that it’s adequate, because we’ve got to prepare for an attack here at home of a terrorist nature in some form right in the cities here in the United States, and how best this nation responds.
The Accidental Strategy
Philip Gold, The Washington Times
July 6, 2001
http://web.archive.org/web/20030309100508/http://www.discovery.org/viewDB/index.php3?program=Defense&command=view&id=662
Would the American people tolerate two major wars, especially if they grow long and bloody and endanger the homeland? In this Age of CNN, would they tolerate forces victorious on one front immediately dispatched to another?
It’s possible, perhaps even comforting, to believe that the American people would never accept one or two major defeats, and that a strike at the homeland might steel us to teach somebody a lesson the world will never forget. But in truth, no one knows.
Defend Against the Shadow Enemy
US Senate Hearing, 5 September 2001
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=107_senate_hearings&docid=f:75040.wais
To this end, we recommend that:- Policy direction be clarified at the White House level by a committee chaired by the Vice President.
- Interagency and interdepartmental coordination and integration be handled by deputies of the involved organization.
- The program be supported by a long-term funding strategy.
- The program be managed by a single director and supported by a technical and systems planning staff.
- An independent advisory board of outside experts be appointed by the President to monitor and advise the program.
A joint legislative oversight committee be appointed.
The very nature of U.S. society makes it difficult to prepare for this security problem. Within recent memory, we have not had to battle a foreign invading force on U.S. soil.
Because of our “Pearl Harbor’’ mind-set, we are unlikely to mount an adequate defense until we suffer an attack.
Rumsfeld: Every Nickel Important in 2002 DoD Budget Request
WASHINGTON, Sept. 6, 2001
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Sep2001/n09062001_200109064.html
Rumsfeld told the senators DoD’s priorities in the budget. “As we prepare for the new challenges … certainly U.S. homeland defense takes on an increasing importance. We will face new threats. Today we’re vulnerable to missile attack. That’s a fact. And as has been suggested by the chairman, weakness is provocative. It invites people into doing things that they otherwise would avoid.”
Zie ook :
http://zapruder.nl/forums/viewthread/5327/
http://www.team8plus.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1200.post
http://www.team8plus.org/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?2405.0