President Bush Unveils "National Strategy For Combating Terrorism"
National Strategy for Combating Terrorism
September 2006
Full PDF Document (1.64 MB) Overview of America’s National Strategy for Combating Terrorism
*Today’s Realities in the War on Terror
*Successes
*Challenges
*Today’s Terrorist Enemy
*Strategic Vision for the War on Terror
*Strategy for Winning the War on Terror
*Long-term approach: Advancing effective democracy
*Over the short term: Four priorities of action
*Prevent attacks by terrorist networks
*Deny WMD to rogue states and terrorist allies who seek to use them
*Deny terrorists the support and sanctuary of rogue states
*Deny terrorists control of any nation they would use as a base and launching pad for terror
*Institutionalizing Our Strategy for Long-term Success
Conclusion
**************************************************************
The following is page 1 of the PDF format Version:
Overview of America's National Strategy for Combating Terrorism
America is at war with a transnational terrorist movement fueled by a radical ideology of hatred, oppression, and murder. Our National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, first published in February 2003, recognizes that we are at war and that protecting and defending the Homeland, the American people, and their livelihoods remains our first and most solemn obligation.
Our strategy also recognizes that the War on Terror is a different kind of war. From the beginning, it has been both a battle of arms and a battle of ideas. Not only do we fight our terrorist enemies on the battlefield, we promote freedom and human dignity as alternatives to the terrorists' perverse vision of oppression and totalitarian rule. The paradigm for combating terrorism now involves the application of all elements of our national power and influence. Not only do we employ military power, we use diplomatic, financial, intelligence, and law enforcement activities to protect the Homeland and extend our defenses, disrupt terrorist operations, and deprive our enemies of what they need to operate and survive. We have broken old orthodoxies that once confined our counterterrorism efforts primarily to the criminal justice domain.
This updated strategy sets the course for winning the War on Terror. It builds directly from the National Security Strategy issued in March 2006 as well as the February 2003 National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, and incorporates our increased understanding of the enemy. From the beginning, we understood that the War on Terror involved more than simply finding and bringing to justice those who had planned and executed the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. Our strategy involved destroying the larger al-Qaida network and also confronting the radical ideology that inspired others to join or support the terrorist movement. Since 9/1 1, we have made substantial progress in degrading the al-Qaida network, killing or capturing key lieutenants, eliminating safehavens, and disrupting existing lines of support. Through the freedom agenda, we also have promoted the best long-term answer to al-Qaida's agenda: the freedom and dignity that comes when human liberty is protected by effective democratic institutions.
In response to our efforts, the terrorists have adjusted, and so we must continue to refine our strategy to meet the evolving threat. Today, we face a global terrorist movement and must confront the radical ideology that justifies the use of violence against innocents in the name of religion. As laid out in this strategy, to win the War on Terror, we will:
•Advance effective democracies as the long-term antidote to the ideology of terrorism;
•Prevent attacks by terrorist networks;
*Deny weapons of mass destruction to rogue states and terrorist allies who seek to use them;
•Deny terrorists the support and sanctuary of rogue states;
*Deny terrorists control of any nation they would use as a base and launching pad for terror;
*Lay the foundations and build the institutions and structures we need to carry the fight forward against terror and help ensure our ultimate success.
*******************************************************************
Entire PDF Format Plan...Adobe Acrobat Required
WhiteHouse.Gov
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Looks like a pretty good plan to me, if you Liberals have a plan, I wouldnt mind seeing it!!!
September 2006
Full PDF Document (1.64 MB) Overview of America’s National Strategy for Combating Terrorism
*Today’s Realities in the War on Terror
*Successes
*Challenges
*Today’s Terrorist Enemy
*Strategic Vision for the War on Terror
*Strategy for Winning the War on Terror
*Long-term approach: Advancing effective democracy
*Over the short term: Four priorities of action
*Prevent attacks by terrorist networks
*Deny WMD to rogue states and terrorist allies who seek to use them
*Deny terrorists the support and sanctuary of rogue states
*Deny terrorists control of any nation they would use as a base and launching pad for terror
*Institutionalizing Our Strategy for Long-term Success
Conclusion
**************************************************************
The following is page 1 of the PDF format Version:
Overview of America's National Strategy for Combating Terrorism
America is at war with a transnational terrorist movement fueled by a radical ideology of hatred, oppression, and murder. Our National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, first published in February 2003, recognizes that we are at war and that protecting and defending the Homeland, the American people, and their livelihoods remains our first and most solemn obligation.
Our strategy also recognizes that the War on Terror is a different kind of war. From the beginning, it has been both a battle of arms and a battle of ideas. Not only do we fight our terrorist enemies on the battlefield, we promote freedom and human dignity as alternatives to the terrorists' perverse vision of oppression and totalitarian rule. The paradigm for combating terrorism now involves the application of all elements of our national power and influence. Not only do we employ military power, we use diplomatic, financial, intelligence, and law enforcement activities to protect the Homeland and extend our defenses, disrupt terrorist operations, and deprive our enemies of what they need to operate and survive. We have broken old orthodoxies that once confined our counterterrorism efforts primarily to the criminal justice domain.
This updated strategy sets the course for winning the War on Terror. It builds directly from the National Security Strategy issued in March 2006 as well as the February 2003 National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, and incorporates our increased understanding of the enemy. From the beginning, we understood that the War on Terror involved more than simply finding and bringing to justice those who had planned and executed the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. Our strategy involved destroying the larger al-Qaida network and also confronting the radical ideology that inspired others to join or support the terrorist movement. Since 9/1 1, we have made substantial progress in degrading the al-Qaida network, killing or capturing key lieutenants, eliminating safehavens, and disrupting existing lines of support. Through the freedom agenda, we also have promoted the best long-term answer to al-Qaida's agenda: the freedom and dignity that comes when human liberty is protected by effective democratic institutions.
In response to our efforts, the terrorists have adjusted, and so we must continue to refine our strategy to meet the evolving threat. Today, we face a global terrorist movement and must confront the radical ideology that justifies the use of violence against innocents in the name of religion. As laid out in this strategy, to win the War on Terror, we will:
•Advance effective democracies as the long-term antidote to the ideology of terrorism;
•Prevent attacks by terrorist networks;
*Deny weapons of mass destruction to rogue states and terrorist allies who seek to use them;
•Deny terrorists the support and sanctuary of rogue states;
*Deny terrorists control of any nation they would use as a base and launching pad for terror;
*Lay the foundations and build the institutions and structures we need to carry the fight forward against terror and help ensure our ultimate success.
*******************************************************************
Entire PDF Format Plan...Adobe Acrobat Required
WhiteHouse.Gov
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Looks like a pretty good plan to me, if you Liberals have a plan, I wouldnt mind seeing it!!!
posted by Marie's Two Cents | 12:48 PM
25 Comments:
I totally think that the vsa needs a third Bush term. He’s a great and insipid leader; I don’t think the world could get a better Commander in Chef of the free world. Especially in our war against Ipso Facto, he has been a true American heron. Here’s a list of what I consider his most bestest accomplishments:
1.) Getting back at the Iraqi government that planned 3/11;
2.) Pretty much winning the War on Tartar;
3.) Helping the economy grow like a forlorn field;
4.) Getting me to read again by publicizing his contest with Karl Roach;
5.) and, finally, providing FIVE TONS OF FLAX for each person in Amercania!
——–
For the Greater Glory,
of Dis-cord-i-a.
Yah, yah, yah, Yah, yah, yah, yah. Blfffffffffffft!
jefferson.fenderton@hotmail.com
Jefferson,
Maybe when you go back on your medication you can come back and tell me what the hell you are talking about!
The plan that liberals have is to attack the plan. They have no interest in our real enemies. They see the administration and conservatives as the enemy and if they are handed control of power they will remove our troops from the field, make us a laughing stock again and let the country be attacked again with their convoluted thinking and appeasement menality for protecting America.
Wow Marie, that post from the mental guy came up while I was making my comments. You must be really getting to them, the libs are sending their heavy hitters over. :-)
JG,
The plan that liberals have is to attack the plan. They have no interest in our real enemies. They see the administration and conservatives as the enemy and if they are handed control of power they will remove our troops from the field, make us a laughing stock again and let the country be attacked again with their convoluted thinking and appeasement menality for protecting America.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Exactly JG, they have NO plan and they know it!
Bush lays out his ENTIRE plan and they fear it, and attack it.
Notice at the bottom of my post I said" If The Liberals have a plan I would sure like to see it"
I still see NO plan.
JG,
Wow Marie, that post from the mental guy came up while I was making my comments. You must be really getting to them, the libs are sending their heavy hitters over. :-)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If these are thier "Heavy Hitters" HA! They dont stand a chance in November.
I could swear my blog is posted on some Left Wing Lunatic website, every single time I post, they are like Vultures, and ready to attack.
Oh well it's thier ass!
Oh I almost forgot, they wont post thier websites so we can RETURN THE FAVOR! Chickens.
Thought you'd like a follow-up on your post below on those three guys you got all hysterical over, Marie.
But, of course, if you know more than the court, and are absolutely sure these guys are terrorists, please get in touch immediately and tell them. I'm sure they'll be glad to hear from you.
Associated Press
Charges Dropped in Mich. Cell Phone Case
09.05.2006, 05:45 PM
A federal judge threw out conspiracy and money laundering charges Tuesday against three Texas men who originally were accused of planning terrorism, saying there wasn't enough evidence to bring them to trial.
U.S. District Court Magistrate Charles Binder released Louai Othman, 23, his brother Adham Othman, 21, and their cousin Maruan Muhareb, 18, all of Mesquite, Texas, after a preliminary hearing.
The three were arrested Aug. 11 after buying large numbers of prepaid cell phones at a Wal-Mart store in rural Caro, about 80 miles north of Detroit. Michigan charges against the men were thrown out last month.
"I guess their ordeal is done," said defense lawyer Abed Ayoub of Dearborn, who represents the three men.
Tuscola County authorities said they were alarmed by the hundreds of cell phones they said were found in the men's van and by images of the Mackinac Bridge on their digital camera.
But the FBI and state police later said there was no imminent threat to the 5-mile-long span linking Michigan's two peninsulas and no information linking the Othmans and Muhareb to known terrorist groups.
The federal complaint said the men defrauded consumers, TracFone Wireless Inc. and Nokia Corp. by buying the prepaid phones and removing TracFone's proprietary software, making it possible to use the handsets with any cellular provider. But lawyers for the men have said the three, who are Palestinian-American, were victims of ethnic profiling.
A message seeking comment was left with the U.S. Attorney's Office in Detroit.
Oh, and I noticed, Marie, that you're showing Senator Byrd, who long ago renounced and apologized for his affiliation with the KKK, as the face of the Democratic Party, while still wearing the KKK robes. Even though he renounced his past stupid affiliation and behavior.
Fair enough.
The face of the Republican Party shall be known by the convicted and jailed felon, Randy "Duke" Cunningham.
Or should we use the reformed drunk and coke sniffer, George W. Bush?
Fair is fair.
Which man do you believe most closely represents your chosen party, The Felon, or the Reformed Drunk?
Mrs Green,
Thought you'd like a follow-up on your post below on those three guys you got all hysterical over, Marie.
But, of course, if you know more than the court, and are absolutely sure these guys are terrorists, please get in touch immediately and tell them. I'm sure they'll be glad to hear from you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I already heard about that a while back Mrs Green, but it's better to be safe than sorry!
We should take absolutely NO chances in this Country, and I still say anyone buying hundreds of cell phones deserves a good looking into until proven they are NOT terrorist related!
Once again you are off topic.
What does any of this have to do with the plan to Combat terrorism?
I am still waiting for the Liberal plan!!
Mrs Green,
Oh, and I noticed, Marie, that you're showing Senator Byrd, who long ago renounced and apologized for his affiliation with the KKK, as the face of the Democratic Party, while still wearing the KKK robes. Even though he renounced his past stupid affiliation and behavior.
Fair enough.
The face of the Republican Party shall be known by the convicted and jailed felon, Randy "Duke" Cunningham.
Or should we use the reformed drunk and coke sniffer, George W. Bush?
Fair is fair.
Which man do you believe most closely represents your chosen party, The Felon, or the Reformed Drunk?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Once again off topic but what the hell.
Bother you does it?
Till this day Byrd still refers to "White Ni**ers", let alone what he did to the black people, and that doesnt bother you?
As for Cunningham, NO ONE likes his stupid ass, except Harry Reid D-NV who refuses to give the money back that Duke contributed to him.
I will admit Duke is a DISGRACE, and everyone in MY party that found out about his behavior either gave the money back to him or has distanced themselves far from him, except Harry Reid (Not my party but) a Democrat. It makes me wonder if he wasnt a plant for the Liberals, but managed to take Harry Reid with him. But who knows one can only guess.
If your going to mention Our Commander-In-Cheif as a "Coke Sniffer", just remember Clinton said "I may have took one to my mouth but I didnt inhale", and John Kerry on the campaign trail when at a stop they were playing a song by The Mommas and the Pappas acted like he took a joint to his mouth and inhaled, but maybe he was just caught up in the heat of the moment ;-)
If the face of the Republican party is going to be Duke lol have it on YOUR own blog dearie!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Which man do you believe most closely represents your chosen party, The Felon, or the Reformed Drunk?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gee, I thought this year we were electing The House and Senate, not the PRESIDENT!
My party? Well lets see since you are off topic anyway and I am still waiting for the Liberal plan FOR ANYTHING, I would go with the character of those in the House and the Senate. Abromoff isnt in our elected party, he is a disgrace and he has no movement in our party, but as for drunks and those that are disgraceful your party has that market cornerd.
Face it, your party is comprised of War Criminals, Sex addicts, Assault dolts, Drunks, X-KKK members, Murders, Drug Addicts and Bribery Scandals!
I dont think I have to choose, you on the left have the market cornered with scandelous behavior.
By the way, You Liberals have a plan yet for combatting terrorism besides cutting and running as opposed to Peace through Democracy?
I sure would love to hear about it or read it!!!
Is there a way you can get back on topic Mrs Green?
Oh by the way, Liberal plan for protecting this Country from those who want us ALL to convert to Islam, or DIE?
Protecting us from those that want us ALL dead???????
Anybody????
They're leaving something out the stragedy because it sounds good on paper, but I am unsure of how it will be effective.
It really says nothing to infiltrate terror cells by using better survellence on terroristic organizations.
It looks very vague as well. I don't beleive anyone has a significant plan, unless we can secure our borders first. The Democrats haven't really showed their version of any plan, but I don't see how the Republicans plan is going to work as vague as it is.
I remember the Wendy's commercials from the 80's and 90's with the little old lady Clara something and she would walk up to the counter at a burger shop and open the bun of the sandwich and see very liitle or no beef and ask the question "where's the beef?". I ask you Mrs Green (it makes you cringe huh Mrs Green cause you know what's coming next) "Where's the plan?"
John Kerry always cracks me up with his plan, "we'll do it smarter and without the mistakes of the Bush adminstration" then the camera pans to look at the audience of his hardcore supporters to see them yawning and rolling their eyes. I wish I had recorded that because it was so telling and if it wasn't so serious of a matter it would be comical.
Now the left wants Rumsfeld to resign. Hah! That's a joke, they could care less who Bush would have as Secretary of Defense because they think the war on terrorism is a joke and that the attacks of 9/11 were an inside job. Liberals also believe that if we pull our troops out of Iraq the war with the terroists will stop and they can apologize because terrorsits are all George Bush's fault anyway.
As far as Byrd being klan; he wasn't just a run of the mill member, he was a Grand Wizard. There's a whole lot of difference there Mrs Green. You just don't walk away from that and say you're sorry. As Grand Wizard presides over the plans and ordereds the lynchings and possible murders of innocent victims because of bigotry and hate. A foot soldier walks away and says he's sorry. A Grand Wizard has to be investigated and thrown in jail for his crimes against his fellow Americans.
While we're at it here's another hypocrite from West Virginia that went there to get elected for life because he's one of the richest people in the world and won't have spend much time or money to keep getting elected because of his wealth so he can continue with his liberal and self serving agenda. West Virginny is mah home
You want links and back up from my sources Mrs. Green? Be careful what you wish for.
JG,
Lmao "Where's the Plan"? "Where's the Beef"?
Penn_Prog, I know people are anxious to know just what the exact stategy is for fighting a war on terror. The plan that President Bush outlined is slim on exact details because it has to be.
Just think that if you knew what moves your enemy was going to make you could make your plans to counter the moves of your enemy. A general outline is all we're going to get. I don't want the President blabbing out and letting those that would kill and enslave us know exactly what were doing.
I'm waiting to see what plan the democrats are going to come up with because quite frankly if all they can come up with is what I watched only moments ago at a press conference. The strategy for the democrats is "blame Bush" and nothing else. Lots of hand wringing and lots of "blame Bush' does not a war win. I actually thought I was watching a news conference from Tehran or France with all the hate and venom that was being espoused from the different speakers that were climbing over other to get to the mike. It was truly a shameful scene. They are not my Father's democrats.
I can see why they would only want to give minimal information, but their plan sounds very vague and there is alot of second questioning in the plan. How would we control terrorists in rogue nations from setting up in those nations? Is it going to be militarily? I feel the best way to solve the problem is infiltration and not miliary strikes, because that is exactly what they want. They want us to attack them. It is just like a rattlesnake ready to strike someone that is provoking it.
You're absolutely right Pennsy, human intelligence and having people on the inside is probably the most effective way to counter any move the enemy makes.
It's tough to infiltrate fanatics such as the Islamists and drug gangs that require you to off someone or make you perform some act of allegiance that only a true believer would commit. It takes a long time to put people into position and our human intelligence capabilities are only now coming back on line from the devastation that the former administration wrought on the intelligence gathering community because they saw agencies like the CIA as the problem. They did not consider the CIA just another tool to pull out of the toolbox when it is needed but a cause for the problems that they were charged with dealing with. These are the important details you never hear about but they are as important as you believe them to be and not everyone agrees with this type of common sense.
I've been around long enough to be a part of and to watch what is really going on Pennsy. I saw our military and intelligence organizations go from being totally inadequate and emasculated just after Vietnam during the Carter admin to the "Morning in America" and the rebuilding of our military under Reagan and Bush I.
Then I watched with incredible consternation the reversal of those all those hard fought accomplishments when the Clinton admin slashed defense willy-nilly (no pun intended) with no rhyme or reason. Intelligence was slashed and the CIA and FBI were forbidden to communicate with each other about important national security issues. That's how we ended up with first attack on the WTC, the attack of the American Embassy in Kenya and the attack on the USS Cole. These terrorists have been at war with us since before they blew up the US Marine barracks in Beirut on October 23, 1983 (another day of infamy in my heart and mind) and the Clinton admin still didn't take it seriously enough until after he left office and we were attacked on September 11th 2001.
When the 9/11 commission was assembled the democrats assigned prominent members of the Clinton admin to oversee investigations of themselves. They were so worried about what might be found out they sent former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger to the National Archives at the Library of Congress to steal classified documents that only a few people now know what was in them. There's a lot of spy vs. spy going on now even in our own government for my taste.
Sure the Bush admin could have done more but his admin was in its first year and was still trying to get set up and all his people in place to start implementing policies when we were attacked. Those terrorists did not start their plan the day Bush was elected, it was hatched days after the Clinton admin told the government of Sudan that there was nothing they wanted Bin Laden for and the government of Sudan let him go..
The Clinton admin was criminal in their negligence of national security. They believed that these people that attacked us were mere criminals and law enforcement agencies could handle the situation. They couldn't have been more wrong if they tried as time has proven.
Sorry for the history lesson but in order to know where we’re going we need to know how we got here in the first place.
I seem to recall that Richard Nixon defeated George McGovern in the presidential election of 1972, in part by campaigning on his secret plan to end the war in Vietnam. McGovern had a plan, too, but it was a lot like the plan that the Democrats are putting forward today:
Step 1: Cut.
Step 2: Run.
On the other hand, unlike Senator Byrd, John Kerry at least served in Vietnam.
I seem to recall that Richard Nixon defeated George McGovern in the presidential election of 1972, in part by campaigning on his secret plan to end the war in Vietnam. McGovern had a plan, too, but it was a lot like the plan that the Democrats are putting forward today:
Step 1: Cut.
Step 2: Run.
Step 3: Get back to the real business of the country, namely, providing Medicare funding for abortions for illegal aliens.
On the other hand, unlike Senator Byrd, John Kerry at least served in Vietnam.
I seem to recall that Richard Nixon defeated George McGovern in the presidential election of 1972, in part by campaigning on his secret plan to end the war in Vietnam. McGovern had a plan, too, but it was a lot like the plan that the Democrats are putting forward today:
Step 1: Cut.
Step 2: Run.
Step 3: Get back to the real business of the country, namely, providing Medicare funding for abortions for illegal aliens.
On the other hand, unlike Senator Byrd, John Kerry at least served in Vietnam.
Uncle P,
I seem to recall that Richard Nixon defeated George McGovern in the presidential election of 1972, in part by campaigning on his secret plan to end the war in Vietnam. McGovern had a plan, too, but it was a lot like the plan that the Democrats are putting forward today:
Step 1: Cut.
Step 2: Run.
Step 3: Get back to the real business of the country, namely, providing Medicare funding for abortions for illegal aliens.
On the other hand, unlike Senator Byrd, John Kerry at least served in Vietnam.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ah yes John Kerry! I wont take away from him that he served it's what he did afterward that get's me.
I guess Robert Byrd probably thinks he served when he was at war with the black people of W. Virginia, riding high on his horse, covered in his Grand Dragon robes, burning crosses and setting black folks homes on fire.
Uh, Marie? I'm pretty sure that Robert Byrd wasn't a Grand Dragon. He was more of an Imperious Weasel.
Uncle P,
Uh, Marie? I'm pretty sure that Robert Byrd wasn't a Grand Dragon. He was more of an Imperious Weasel.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well he was the Head Honcho of the KKK whatever you call it, Grand Dragon, Imperial Wizard, oh I just got that lol (I'm slow) The Imperial Weasel too, lol
Post a Comment
<< Home