Eric Holder: U.S. must ready now for Syria threat

[bemildred]

Attorney General Eric Holder warned Tuesday that the U.S. and its allies must get to work now preparing for the potential terrorist threat growing out of the Syrian civil war — before it’s too late.

Holder used a speech in Oslo, Norway, to call for Washington and governments around the world to adopt a “comprehensive strategy” to deal with the thousands of foreign fighters gaining dangerous experience in Syria as they battle the regime of President Bashar Assad.

Holder and counter-terrorism officials worry that a wave of Syria-trained fighters returning to their home countries could create a security nightmare, slipping through national borders with their own legitimate passports and then launching attacks or spreading extremist messages.

“This is a global crisis in need of a global solution,” Holder planned to say, according to his prepared remarks. “The Syrian conflict has turned that region into a cradle of violent extremism. But the world cannot simply sit back and let it become a training ground from which our nationals can return and launch attacks.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/eric-holder-syria-threat-oslo-speech-108650.html

[elehhhhna]

1. Oh, he's a foreign policy guy now? Good, b/c he sucks as AG.

[geek tragedy]

2. "some of them even pose for photographs with John McCain"

he could have added.

[GeorgeGist]

3. Eric flunks history ...

if he thinks the Syrian conflict is responsible for turning the ME into a cradle of violent extremism.

[clarice]

9. Correct. It has been going on since the year 623 . nt

[Maedhros]

4. This might have some weight, if the American response to terrorism was the proper one:

i.e. to treat terrorism as a crime and to fight it using law enforcement methods.

However, Bush, Cheney et. al insisted that we must fight a "war" against terrorism, and legions of dupes have since bought into that nonsense, so now Holder's opinions have little impact.

[bemildred]

5. We told these fools that over and over after 9/11. They don't listen. nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

6. For the most part ...

isn't that President Obama's approach to terrorism, i.e., as a crime to be fought using law enforcement methods?

[Maedhros]

7. I don't believe that his actions reflect that approach.

cf. Obama's expansion of military operations in Africa by 217% since taking office.

http://www.thenation.com/article/179050/why-us-military-averaging-more-mission-day-africa

cf. Obama's reliance on drone strikes as the primary anti-terrorism strategy

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eugene-robinson-president-obamas-immoral-drone-war/2013/12/02/f25cc0aa-5b82-11e3-a49b-90a0e156254b_story.html

http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/05/opinion/bergen-obama-drone/

[1StrongBlackMan]

8. And isn't that assertion a bit disingenuous ...

seeing as:

(From the first link)

US troops carry out a wide range of operations in Africa, including airstrikes targeting suspected militants, night raids aimed at kidnapping terror suspects, airlifts of French and African troops onto the battlefields of proxy wars, and evacuation operations in destabilized countries. Above all, however, the US military conducts training missions, mentors allies, and funds, equips and advises its local surrogates.

Of the 10 functions/activities listed, 8 are, arguably, law enforcement functions/activities? Granted ... The drone attacks go beyond the realm of law enforcement activities; but this administration has been clear, drones are used when there is a credible threat AND the actors are in a region where the host nation is either unable or unwilling to capture the actor And/or will not allow the U.S. government/military to do so.

I know this is the minority opinion, but I think this is a reasonable balance ... especially in light of recent captures of terrorism suspects.