High-Level Target? High-Level Ruse?

Okay. Tin hat time. Yes, pure bs speculation time!

*This is not hard news*

Let's go back to the latter part of last week. Pakistan believes that there is a "high-level target" being defended in the nefarious border regions between Afghanistan and Pakistan. They send troops and aircraft in to assist the U.S. with "Operation Mountain Storm."

I don't think that any of that is in question.

However, the picture now appearing is that the rumored al-Qaeda No. 2 guy, and the named dropped as the "high-level target," Ayman al-Zawahiri may have been an error. (this is where I install Rumsfeld's* 'knowns' bit of epic prose :) )

As of posting time, the level of the target is now completely unknown. It is now rumored to be a highly skilled fighting force comprised of all manner of militia types. A fighting force sans a "high-level target."

What does the U.S. do after Pakistan, a dubious ally at best - the primary nuclear proliforater in the world today - immediately do for Pakistan's assistance?

Correct. Washington marches good soldier Sec. Powell out to announce that the U.S. has granted Pakistan "major non-Nato ally" status. MNNA status now gives Pakistan a whole bag of perks.

Pakistan is now able to, for instance purchase military equipment and other defense items left behind in the region by the U.S. This can be anything from Abrams tanks to uranium penetrators(the ugly "DU" heavy metal armor piercers).

Normally, I'd let this pass without comment, but since Pakistan and India still have a dispute over the Kashmir region, the new U.S. policy could reignite tensions that have been abating as of late.

I warned you that I was going to speculate.

Did Pakistan ever believe that there was a high-level target in the mix? I think that while we'll never know the true answer, it is likely that they indeed did believe so. But, we'll most likely never know.

I don't know enough about Pakistan's governing principles to say whether or not they would intenationaaly mislead the international community. I think we all have our own opinions about that(Of course - EVERYBODY DOES IT!)

Why did the U.S. grant MNNA status to Pakistan so quickly, particularly in light of recent revelations about their nuclear program? I think it is because we have so alienated much of the world, that we need to make deals with some of the most of the worst regimes on the planet in order to fight terror.

I think a case for the reasons for U.S. - world alienation can be made that it is almost entirely of W's doing, but I'll leave that for my dear reader to ponder.

I really hate to say this, but it just shows how little we learn from our past mistakes. Now we have struck a deal with another potential "Hussein." But this is a Hussein with a nuclear arsenal at its disposal.

Musharraf came into power via military coup. As recently as a few months ago, Director of the US Defence Intelligence Agency, Vice-Admiral Lowell E Jacoby, said, "Popular hostility to the US is growing and Islamist opponents of the current government could try to instigate a political crisis through violent means."

Is this the kind of tenuous regime that we are finding ourselves having to deal with in the fight against terrorism, due to the alienation that W's willful international belligerence, and unpopular war hath wrought?

Will we never learn?

Our history in this area is not laudable.

Duped or not, we may have just made our next Saddam.

*****************************************

* : Rumsfeld's famous bit of prose re. knowns: "There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know."

That still cracks me up.