home

Cheney Unhurt in Afghan Suicide Bomber Attack

By Jeralyn, Section War on Terror
Posted on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 08:45:30 AM EST
Tags: Dick Cheney, Taliban (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Vice President Dick Cheney was whisked off to a bunker Tuesday morning in Afghanistan after a suicide bomber attacked the main entrance to the U.S. military base he was visiting.

The Taliban has taken credit for the attack. At least 23 others were killed.

...a purported Taliban spokesman, Qari Yousef Ahmadi, said Cheney was the target of the attack.

< Ney-Abramoff Connection Yields Another Conviction | Tuesday Open Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Cheney Unhurt in Afghan Suicide Bomber Attack | 27 comments (27 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    yes, it could just be baloney and spin (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by scribe on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 11:43:24 AM EST
    or it could be that Karzai's government-security apparat has been penetrated by the Taliban.

    Given a twenty-five-year combo of civil war and war against the USSR and now NATO/USA to weed out the unfit, which do you think is more likely?

    I'm leaning toward the Taliban having penetrated Karzai's government.

    But that could no more happen than (none / 0) (#17)
    by Edger on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 12:10:58 PM EST
    Sunni and Shia liberals and insurgents penetrating Bush's... sorry, Maliki's... government in Iraq. Could it?

    Parent
    Meanwhile, just across the border ... (none / 0) (#18)
    by Sailor on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 12:11:16 PM EST
    September 6, 2006 at 12:50 p.m.
    Pakistan signs peace deal with pro-Taliban militants
    Critics say treaty, which calls for end to terrorist actions, seems 'a total capitulation' by Islamabad.

    By Arthur Bright  | csmonitor.com
    In a move that some say appears 'a total capitulation' to pro-Taliban forces, Pakistan signed a peace deal with tribal leaders in the North Waziristan region of Pakistan Tuesday, and is withdrawing military forces in exchange for promises that militant tribal groups there will not engage in terrorist activities.

    And that's an ally.
    Afghanistan is out of control because refused to finish the job and instaed attacked a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.

    Parent
    Seems like someone owes me a job (none / 0) (#23)
    by scribe on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 05:30:37 PM EST
    Here's a post from some TV station, pushing forward the wire service (looks like AFP) report:  
    Taliban 'knew of Cheney visit'
    27/02/2007 12:07  - (SA)  

    Islamabad - A suicide attack at an Afghan air base where US vice-president Dick Cheney was staying shows that the Taliban and al-Qaeda have penetrated local intelligence agencies, analysts and officials said.
    *
    "This shows how much the militants have penetrated the intelligence of the Afghan security forces. It is a most shocking attack," retired Pakistani general turned analyst Talat Masood told AFP
    *
    Visit unannounced
    Cheney's visits to Pakistan and Afghanistan were unannounced and shrouded in even tighter secrecy than when US President George W Bush travelled to the two countries in March 2006.
    *
    He added: "They must have had information (a) few days before that the US vice-president would be in town and stay at Bagram. This is not something you can plan with 12 hours notice."

    If someone like me, not a government employee by any stretch, can figure this out, then the USG may have a serious problem.

    Parent

    USG may have a serious problem (none / 0) (#26)
    by Edger on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 07:16:04 PM EST
    Hubris R' Us.

    Parent
    i am just askin'. . . (none / 0) (#1)
    by the rainnn on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 09:41:22 AM EST
    so -- are we to believe that
    the taliban's intel is sophisticated
    enough to know -- in advance, mind
    you -- the secret logistics for the
    travel of our vice president, and through
    contested regions of war-torn afganistan, to boot?

    said more plainly, i think this story
    is being "spun" by our administration.

    it seems likely that this facility has
    been attacked before, and it seems just
    an unfortunate coincidence that cheney
    happened to be on-premisis when the blast
    occured.  note that if the story isn't
    offered as a "whew! -- cheney's safe!" piece,
    it would clearly be viewed as a "man, we have
    NO idea what we're doin' in afganistan    " meme. . .  

    which is probably close to the truth.

    i detest that we, as citizens, are now forced to
    decode our own administration's agit-prop. . .

    but i am increasingly skeptical that the m.s.m.
    has the ability/perspective to ask these tougher
    questions whene fed a story off a base in
    afganistan. . .

    your mileage may vary.

    but to be clear -- the way to handle cheney, in
    my humble opinion, is to indict him.

    errata. . . (none / 0) (#4)
    by the rainnn on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 09:48:43 AM EST
    crap!

    i DO know how to spell
    afghanistan -- really.  i do.

    slaps forehead.

    out.

    Parent

    Then why... (none / 0) (#5)
    by Deconstructionist on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 09:51:25 AM EST
      Would our military be saying:

    Maj. William Mitchell said it did not appear the explosion was intended as a threat to the vice president.
    "He wasn't near the site of the explosion," Mitchell said. "He was safely within the base at the time of the explosion."

    While this was being said by someone else:

    However, a purported Taliban spokesman, Qari Yousef Ahmadi, said Cheney was the target of the attack.

    Taliban: 'Attacker was trying to reach Cheney'
    "We knew that Dick Cheney would be staying inside the base," Ahmadi told The Associated Press by telephone. "The attacker was trying to reach Cheney."

    Which OUR molitary rebuts by saying:

    Mitchell noted that Cheney's overnight stay occurred only after a meeting with Karzai on Monday was canceled because of bad weather.

    "I think it's a far-fetched allegation," he said, referring to the Taliban claim. "The vice president wasn't even supposed to be here overnight, so this would have been a surprise to everybody."

      Sometimes it helps to read carefully before deciding who is doing what spinning!

    Parent

    decon -- what do you make of cheney's quote? (none / 0) (#9)
    by the rainnn on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 10:33:52 AM EST
    if you are right, decon, what
    are we to make of cheney's OWN
    quotes?  i mean, why, if you
    are right, would he say this?

    per CNN:

    . . .Asked if the Taliban were trying to send a message with the attack, Cheney said: "I think they clearly try to find ways to question the authority of the central government."

    "Striking at Bagram with a suicide bomber, I suppose, is one way to do that," he said. "But it shouldn't affect our behavior at all.". . .

    some times, if it quacks like a duck. . .

    Parent

    There is nothing (none / 0) (#11)
    by Deconstructionist on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 10:54:52 AM EST
    in his quotes to suggest he views the bombing as directed AT HIM and it seems to mean that simply the bombing OF THE BASE is intended to send the message that the Afghan government is powerless.

    Parent
    Cheney's "spin" (none / 0) (#12)
    by Deconstructionist on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 11:18:29 AM EST
      is the implication it fails to send the intended message  and that there is no reason for us to alter our behavior because he won't admit the Afghan government is failing at the most basic levels.

    Parent
    oh -- i see. (none / 0) (#15)
    by the rainnn on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 11:44:55 AM EST
    so <edit>their</edit> your meme is:

    ". . .man, we have NO idea what we're doin' in afghanistan. . ."

    that is -- i think we are in violent agreement.

    Parent

    i don't think we disagree. . . (none / 0) (#16)
    by the rainnn on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 11:49:05 AM EST
    ". . .Striking at Bagram with a suicide bomber, I suppose, is one way to do that. . ."

    he is ridiculing the terrorist as ineffectual.

    so the story/spin is "i am safe -- they are
    incompetent -- we will prevail in afghanistan. . ."

    that last bit is what this "we won't be deterred"
    is intended to push forward. . .

    and, ps:  the spin our military offers, and
    you quote, is things aren't that dangerous
    here -- the taliban isn't that effective.

    Parent

    they can't protect the most heavily ... (none / 0) (#19)
    by Sailor on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 12:34:41 PM EST
    ... guarded base in afghanistan, and that proves were winning.

    killed at least nine people, including a U.S. soldier, and wounded 21 others.
    But cheney's OK, so everything is hunky dory.

    Obviously cheney embolden's the terrorists.

    Parent

    It's just... (none / 0) (#2)
    by desertswine on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 09:45:40 AM EST
    a sign of our success.

    Cheney validates al qaeda (none / 0) (#6)
    by MiddleOfTheRoad on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 09:55:37 AM EST
    This is tongue in cheek given what Cheney has been blabbing about recently.

    Hasn't Cheney been essentially validating the al qaeda strategy by showing that he did not have the stomach to fight and had to run off to an underground bunker?

    Where was Cheney's shotgun when he needed it?

    Serioulsy though, it was a huge mistake to leave Afghanistan unfinished and to divert money and resources away from Afghanistan to Iraq.

    Parent

    Unfinished (none / 0) (#13)
    by squeaky on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 11:25:35 AM EST
    Serioulsy though, it was a huge mistake to leave Afghanistan unfinished and to divert money and resources away from Afghanistan to Iraq.

    What would Afghanistan look like if we 'finished' it? Many have tried to conquor Afghanistan and failed miserably, I think that leaving was the best we could have done to support our troops. Someone got it right, and now there is plenty of opium to fund all sorts of dirty deals (think Iran-Contra)

    Parent

    Uhh, except (none / 0) (#24)
    by Sailor on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 05:52:35 PM EST
    I think that leaving was the best we could have done to support our troops.
    except we didn't leave.

    Parent
    Good point (none / 0) (#25)
    by squeaky on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 06:03:02 PM EST
    At least we did not try to take over the country, or should I say, at least we realized that we could not take over the country.

    Or we realized that drug money can fund a lot of stuff that Congress doesn't have to know about.

    Parent

    Other Priorities (none / 0) (#20)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 01:46:37 PM EST
    Hasn't Cheney been essentially validating the al qaeda strategy by showing that he did not have the stomach to fight and had to run off to an underground bunker?

    Clearly you don't understand how this works by now: "There are plenty of lives less valuable" than his to do the actual bleeding.

    Parent

    You've got to love (none / 0) (#3)
    by Edger on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 09:45:42 AM EST
    Cheney's way of trying to equate questioning authority with terrorism. Now we know for sure that if it wasn't for the left emboldening the terrists, the wot would have been over yeers ago.

    "I think [the Taliban] clearly try to find ways to question the authority of the central government," he said. "Striking at the Bagram [base] with a suicide bomber, I suppose, is one way to do that

    If he spins any faster he'll fly apart. Oh... I forgot - he is.

    Cheney Unhurt in Bombing: Receives Medal of Honor

    "'Is everyone okay, are we still alive?', These were the first words that came from the mouth of this self-sacrificing American patriot," stated President Bush. "After he made sure that he and everyone around him were okay, he insisted that the dead and wounded be taken care of immediately by the Afghan government." The suicide bombing apparently resulted in the deaths of 14 people including one American serviceman.
    Mercy me... (none / 0) (#7)
    by Electa on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 10:23:24 AM EST
    "are we still alive"?  Do dead people talk?  And, this is wot's leading the country.  Heaven help all.

    Parent
    I guess he hasn't got many (none / 0) (#8)
    by Edger on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 10:29:25 AM EST
    options left.

    Parent
    erh. . . (none / 0) (#10)
    by the rainnn on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 10:35:31 AM EST
    i think it was

    s a t i r e. . .

    electa. . .

    [but i am often wrong
    about such things -- just
    ask decon.  he he!]

    Parent

    Libby (none / 0) (#21)
    by squeaky on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 01:52:19 PM EST
    Cheney is just reminding us that some people still think he is a valuable asset, dead or alive.

     

    Just what is the going rate to buy an... (none / 0) (#22)
    by Bill Arnett on Tue Feb 27, 2007 at 03:58:13 PM EST
    ...Afghani Intelligence operative? And is there any doubt that the Taliban and others, flush with opium cash, can afford to buy such an operative, regardless of cost?

    We need to be doing a better job in Afghanistan (none / 0) (#27)
    by georgepolitics on Fri Jul 06, 2007 at 06:33:33 PM EST
    Attacks like these just go to show how unsafe Aghanistan is and how Bush should have done more to build that country up before rushing into Iraq.

    ---------------
    My political forum

    Cheney Unhurt in Afghan Suicide Bomber Attack | 27 comments (27 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment