{"id":66076,"date":"2004-09-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-09-08T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2004\/09\/08\/danse-electorale-autour-de-la-prochaine-et-inevitable-attaque-terroriste-contre-les-usa\/"},"modified":"2004-09-08T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2004-09-08T00:00:00","slug":"danse-electorale-autour-de-la-prochaine-et-inevitable-attaque-terroriste-contre-les-usa","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2004\/09\/08\/danse-electorale-autour-de-la-prochaine-et-inevitable-attaque-terroriste-contre-les-usa\/","title":{"rendered":"Danse \u00e9lectorale autour de la prochaine et in\u00e9vitable attaque terroriste contre les USA<\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

Danse \u00e9lectorale autour de la prochaine et in\u00e9vitable attaque terroriste contre les USA<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t8 septembre 2004 Cheney sort du bois, ou disons qu’il en sort de plus en plus nettement, mais en donnant une dimension nouvelle \u00e0 la campagne \u00e9lectorale des pr\u00e9sidentielles. Dans son discours du 7 septembre dans l’Iowa<\/a>, il lie tr\u00e8s nettement le vote pour Kerry \u00e0 une attaque terroriste contre les USA. Il le lie d’ailleurs d’une fa\u00e7on originale, nouvelle par rapport aux hypoth\u00e8ses d\u00e9velopp\u00e9es jusqu’ici : non pas une attaque avant l’\u00e9lection, mais une attaque apr\u00e8s l’\u00e9lection, si Kerry est \u00e9lu, pour punir les Am\u00e9ricains d’avoir \u00e9lu Kerry.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tC’est une curieuse dialectique, presque religieuse, comme si Cheney disait implicitement aux Am\u00e9ricains : si vous votez Kerry, les terroristes deviendront l’outil de la vengeance divine pour vous punir d’avoir vot\u00e9 Kerry. Il est bien possible que nombre d’Am\u00e9ricains ressentent ce discours de cette fa\u00e7on, et alors le discours sera d’autant plus efficace. Quant aux d\u00e9mocrates, ils fulminent, notamment parce qu’on les ram\u00e8ne sur le terrain de l’Irak et du terrorisme alors qu’ils voudraient d\u00e9velopper d’autres arguments, notamment sur l’\u00e9conomie, sur le conseil de Clinton, qui se croit toujours en 1992<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab Kerry has been under pressure from fellow Democrats to shift the focus of the campaign away from security and terrorism. On those issues, Republicans have scored gains among voters with attacks including Cheney’s harsh comments about Kerry at last week’s Republican National Convention on the Massachusetts senator’s consistency and credibility.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Still, it seemed highly unusual for the vice president to suggest so directly that a vote for Kerry would be tantamount to a vote for a disastrously weaker defense against terror.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb It’s absolutely essential that eight weeks from today, on Nov. 2, we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we’ll get hit again and we’ll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States,\u00a0\u00bb Cheney told supporters in Des Moines, Iowa.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb If Kerry were elected, Cheney said, the country might return to a pre-9\/11 mind-set\u00a0\u00bb that relied on a reactive approach, rather than Bush’s preemptive approach to attacking terrorists where they plan and train, and pressuring those countries that harbor them.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Senator John Edwards, the Democratic vice presidential candidate, immediately issued a statement saying, Dick Cheney’s scare tactics crossed the line today, showing once again that he and George Bush will do anything and say anything to save their jobs. Protecting America from vicious terrorists is not a Democratic or Republican issue and Dick Cheney and George Bush should know that.\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tL’attaque de Cheney est tr\u00e8s vigoureuse et c’est la premi\u00e8re du genre, sans aucun doute, et la premi\u00e8re liant directement Kerry \u00e0 une attaque terroriste. Si l’on veut, elle marque l’entr\u00e9e officielle, dans la campagne \u00e9lectorale, du facteur que constitue la possibilit\u00e9 d’une attaque terroriste dans la mesure o\u00f9 cette attaque est li\u00e9e au sens du vote des Am\u00e9ricains. C’est un peu la situation des attentats de Madrid invers\u00e9e : dans ce cas, l’attaque terroriste fut per\u00e7ue comme changeant le sens du vote, dans le cas de Cheney elle est per\u00e7ue comme r\u00e9sultant du sens du vote.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tL’analyse qui faisait de la possibilit\u00e9 d’une attaque terroriste un acteur potentiel de l’\u00e9lection<\/a> est d\u00e9sormais r\u00e9alis\u00e9e et concr\u00e9tis\u00e9e. Il sera difficile d’emp\u00eacher qu’elle joue son r\u00f4le, qui sera consid\u00e9rable, insaisissable et d\u00e9stabilisant. La r\u00e9action furieuse des d\u00e9mocrates ne devrait pas emp\u00eacher les r\u00e9publicains de revenir \u00e0 la charge, bien au contraire.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCette perspective est d’autant plus probable que les analyses op\u00e9rationnelles contribuent elles aussi \u00e0 renforcer actuellement, alors que la situation s’aggrave en Irak, la th\u00e8se de la possibilit\u00e9 d’une attaque terroriste contre les USA. L’id\u00e9e implicite est que l’aggravation de cette situation des forces US en Irak implique une dynamique qui doit pousser les islamistes \u00e0 \u00e9largir leur attaque directement sur le territoire de l’occupant.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLa derni\u00e8re en date de ces analyses est la plus remarquable parce qu’elle vient d’un adversaire de la politique Bush, de l’intervention en Irak et, par cons\u00e9quent, de la manipulation de la possibilit\u00e9 d’une attaque terroriste dans la campagne pr\u00e9sidentielle. Il s’agit du texte d’analyse de Ivan Eland, de l’Independent Institute, qui sugg\u00e8re que les attaques terroristes en Isra\u00ebl et les attaques terroristes en Russie sont une possible pr\u00e9figuration d’une attaque terroriste contre les USA<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab Islam requires that all Moslems do what they can to defend Islamic lands when under attack from non-Moslems. To defeat profiling techniques by security forces, even Islamic women have become involved in jihadist attacks against the Russians and Israelis.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Thus, it should be no surprise that radical Islamists have flocked to Iraq and Afghanistan to fight the American occupation of those nations. In Iraq, U.S. forces have lost control of the Sunni cities of Falluja, Ramadi, and Samarra to the Islamists. Although for the time being, the U.S. military caused the withdrawal of Shiite radical forces from the southern cities of Najaf and Karbala, it also had to withdraw. Many of the Shiite radicals kept their weapons and lived to fight another day perhaps in the Baghdad slum of Sadr City, which is also at risk of being lost by U.S. forces.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb There is no question that the most powerful military in the world could take these cities back. If the tradition of U.S. warfare since Ulysses S. Grant were followed, the massive U.S. advantage in firepower would be used to blast those towns back into the stone age, kill their jihadist occupiers, and occupy them in total victory. Unfortunately, the Vietnam War showed that those tactics do not work in a guerrilla war in which the enemy uses the civilian population for cover and support. Retaking the towns would likely kill many civilians and turn the all-important Iraqi popular opinion decisively against the United States. The U.S. military is trying to avoid a Vietnam-like outcome in which the massive use of U.S. firepower turned the population against U.S. forces. On the other hand, allowing the Islamic insurgents to control some Iraqi towns appears to show U.S. weakness. Like Vietnam, the U.S. is in but doesn’t know how to win.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Since the Iraq War began, August was the worst month for the wounding of U.S. soldiers a better indicator of the increasing ferocity of the fighting than the number killed. But the tragedy of almost 1,000 U.S. service people dead and another 7,000 wounded to date in the conflict may not be the worst outcome from the invasion and occupation of an Islamic nation.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The continued occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan has inflamed radical Islamic passions all over the world bringing in money and recruits and could lead Islamists to further attack the U.S. homeland. Al Qaeda has been more active since September 11 than it was beforehand. Al Qaeda could very well try to inflict as much pain on the United States as the Chechens recently did on the Russians. What happened in Russia should be a warning to the United States.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb In sum, although savage attacks against civilians should never be condoned, the harsh reality is that Russia, Israel, and the United States must expect further attempts by Islamist terrorists to attack their soil until the underlying cause of the terrorism is removed. That underlying cause is infidel meddling in and occupation of Islamic lands.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Danse \u00e9lectorale autour de la prochaine et in\u00e9vitable attaque terroriste contre les USA 8 septembre 2004 Cheney sort du bois, ou disons qu’il en sort de plus en plus nettement, mais en donnant une dimension nouvelle \u00e0 la campagne \u00e9lectorale des pr\u00e9sidentielles. Dans son discours du 7 septembre dans l’Iowa, il lie tr\u00e8s nettement le… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-66076","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66076","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=66076"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66076\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66076"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66076"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66076"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}