Big Al Q prisoners tunnel out. Oops.

[alaricthegoth]

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Interpol-Yemen-Escape.html?hp&ex=1139202000&en=1b9f9adff3bc9482&ei=5094&partner=homepage

"at least 13 of the 23 escapees were convicted al-Qaida fighters, who escaped via a 140-yard-long tunnel ‘‘dug by the prisoners and co-conspirators outside.’’

Yemeni officials confirmed to Interpol that a man considered a mastermind of the Cole attack, identified as Jamal al-Badawi, was among those who escaped."
Let us take at face value (for the nonce) the characterizations of culpability and high Al Q status set forth in the cite.

Does this incident not underline the perils of a foreign policy that promotes nominally compliant goverments (eg, pakistan) which are unable (or unwilling?) to bring the full cooperation of their people along in the effort to advance our interests.

Do we believe that this escape was consummated with no “inside” help?

If so, these guys deserve a movie.

(Steve McQueen, get your baseball ready…)

If there was jailor complicity in the escape, does this mean we must insist on the extradition to the US of any Al Q suspect?

Why didn’t we do so in this case of the Cole bombers?

With 500+ guys at Gitmo (including at least several already cleared for release…) shouldn’t these men (some already tried and convicted) have been there instead of a Yemeni prison?(Disclaimer:No one “should” be at Gitmo, but if anyone is there, why not these guys?)

How are we going to handle the problem of insufficient zeal in the security forces of our nominal allies? In other words, even if we impose “regime change” on the unfriendly, (or force attitude change on the same regime, vide Musarraf) , how do we persuade/compel “the bureaucracy”, as it were, to come along?

Assume, arguendo, that the success of the Yemeni escape represents such a case of diluted enthusiasm for our interests as viewed by the populace. Consider that draconian responses are as likely as not to produce further alienation amongst populations that we desperately need on “our side”.

Presumably we are not going to vaporize Yemen. That said, we clearly cannot succeed in defending our interests without seriously considering the public opinion impact of each and every action we undertake; Some (indeed, many) tactics will prove to be self-defeating when subjected to this analysis.

For debate:

How much restraint MUST we exercise if we are not to fall victim to increasing alienation of the personnel of allied governments, even where the heads of state are nominally compliant. Does a formula “If you are not with us, you are against us” really enhance the prospects of success in this enterprise? I has the virtue of clarity, but it does invite the fence-sitter to choose to be against us, if sufficiently displeased by our behaviour.

[David_God_of_Frogs]

Well forget that, why was this guy let off of American soil in the first place?

Okay don’t answer that.

[alaricthegoth]

@David

Well forget that, why was this guy let off of American soil in the first place?

Okay don’t answer that.

I was puzzled by that myself–It’s counterintuitive, especially since the article mentions another guy who is in one of those “secure undisclosed locations…”

[bizzwire]

I’m pretty shocked, myself. I expected more from the Yemeni penal system.

[alaricthegoth]

The senior Pentagon official said a major challenge the military faced was finding ways to fight terrorist networks operating in nations with which the United States was not at war. That job, the document states, requires the American military to help other nations improve their own counterterrorism abilities.

Pentagon Hones Its Strategy on Terrorism (Published 2006)

coincidentally, the pentagon raises a similar question today…

query:with what nations are we currently at war.

I thought we were at war within Iraq and Afhghanistan, not with

[Squink]

@alaricthegoth

Does this incident not underline the perils of a foreign policy that promotes nominally compliant goverments (eg, pakistan) which are unable (or unwilling?) to bring the full cooperation of their people along in the effort to advance our interests.

Do we believe that this escape was consummated with no “inside” help?

Presumably we are not going to vaporize Yemen…

We’d look like asshats if we held the Yemenis to a higher standard than we do ourselves:
Key Asia militant ‘escaped jail’

Nov, 2005
South East Asian officials have voiced concern at the escape of a suspected regional militant leader from US military custody in Afghanistan.
US prosecutors admitted on Tuesday that Omar al-Faruq was one of four detainees to escape from the Bagram base in July, all of whom are still on the run.

US admits al-Qaida figure escaped

Omar al-Faruq, one of al-Qaida’s most senior global operatives, escaped from an American military prison in Afghanistan in July, US defense officials have said.

The Kuwaiti man, who was captured in Indonesia in 2002 and turned over to the United States, was among four prisoners who fled heavily fortified Bagram Air Base prison on 10 July

There were reports that this was an inside job, but I don’t think anyone’s suggested vaporizing the air base.

[alaricthegoth]

We’d look like asshats if we held the Yemenis to a higher standard than we do ourselves:

I was not proposing a “retaliatory” strike. What I meant was that in *countries where the population, perhaps alienated from the leadership, or perhaps reflecting the sincere attitudes of the leadership who fake it to us, proves uncooperative in our adventures, we are presented with a problem perhaps short of the kill one terrorist create 20 more rubric, but still critical when we rely (as we must in many situations) on other states to be our jailors.

(a description which could fit maybe 20-30 countries around the world)

[cerberus]

Why does this invoke in me highly inappropriate Hogan’s Heroes flashbacks?

[alaricthegoth]

"I know Nozing