| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front Economy | |
| Global economic crisis 'greatest security threat to US' | |
| 2009-02-13 | |
| The nation's new intelligence chief warned Thursday that the global economic crisis is the most serious security peril facing the United States, threatening to topple governments, trigger waves of refugees and undermine the ability of America's allies to help in Afghanistan and elsewhere. The economic collapse "already looms as the most serious one in decades, if not in centuries," said Dennis C. Blair, director of national intelligence, in his first appearance before Congress as the top intelligence official in the Obama administration.
Blair's conclusions are likely to bolster President Obama's case for swift action on a nearly $800-billion stimulus package nearing final approval in Congress. "Time is probably our greatest threat," Blair said. "The longer it takes for the recovery to begin, the greater the likelihood of serious damage to U.S. strategic interests." He said that one-quarter of the world's nations had already experienced low-level instability attributed to the economic downturn, including shifts in power. He cited anti-government demonstrations in Europe and Russia, and he warned that much of Latin America and the former Soviet satellite states lacked sufficient cash to cope with the spreading crisis. "The most likely potential fallout for U.S. interests will involve allies and friends not being able to fully meet their defense and humanitarian obligations," Blair said. "Potential refugee flows from the Caribbean could also impact homeland security." The decline in oil prices in recent months might benefit consumers in the short term and "put the squeeze on the adventurism of producers like Iran and Venezuela," Blair said, but he warned that prolonged price drops could result in a supply crunch if they lead to cuts or delays in investment in oil development and infrastructure. Economic crises in recent decades have tended to be confined to specific regions -- such as the Asian financial meltdown of the 1990s -- meaning affected countries could rebuild by focusing on exporting more of their goods. But "countries will not be able to export their way out of this one because of the global nature" of the crisis, Blair said. U.S. intelligence analysts fear there could be a backlash against American efforts to promote free markets because the crisis was triggered by the United States. "We're generally held to be responsible," Blair said. Blair's written testimony also looks at other security threats. The United States' most dangerous enemy remains Al Qaeda, he said, but he noted that the terrorist network "is less capable and effective than it was a year ago" because of the toll U.S. missile strikes and other measures have taken on the militants' sanctuary in Pakistan. Some of Blair's most pessimistic language was reserved for Afghanistan, where the security situation has deteriorated substantially because of rampant government corruption and a resurgent Taliban, which carried out fresh attacks in the nation's capital this week. As a result, Blair said, the upcoming Afghan presidential election "will present a greater security challenge" than the most recent campaign, in 2004, and he added that "insurgents probably will make a concerted effort to disrupt it." Blair's comments came as the Obama administration is close to a decision on sending tens of thousands of additional troops to Afghanistan. On Iran, Blair said that the Islamic nation "is clearly developing all the components of a deliverable nuclear weapons program" and that only an internal political decision might prevent the country from crossing the weapons threshold. Otherwise, he said, "they could have a weapon as early as 2010, but it might take them until 2015." | |
| Posted by: |
| #7 RUMORMILLNEWS > PRISONPLANET - THE COMING DEPRESSION/ THIS "DEPRESSION" WILL LAST 23-26 YEARS. Also on RMN > BENJAMIN WOLFORD: AMERICA "BLACK OPS" IN JAPAN IS BEING EXPOSED [Pro- MAFIA? USGovt-orchestrated/controlled Covert Opers and crimes agz Nippon]. ** COUGH ** ** COUGH **... [loosen suddenly tight neck collar here]. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2009-02-13 22:52 |
| #6 CNN NEWS > QUEST-knows-Bizz Show > QUESTIE's GUEST PERT claims that the US-GLOBAL ECON IS GOING TO BE BAD OR SERIOUSLY PROBLEMATIC OER THE NEXT TWO TEARS [circa 2011-2012 r.o.] versus ASIAN BLOGGERS/NETTERS > SAME BUT FOR QUESTIE's PERT'S "TWO YEARS" TIMES TEN PLUS 10-20 YEARS ADDITIONAL [Year 2029-2049/2050 r.o.]??? D *** NG IT, can mainstream America = Amerika stretch that JUST-ENUFF-FOR-COFFEE-N-DOUGHNUT-PER-AMERIKAN REBATE FROM PORKULUS to 2012 0r 2050??? |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2009-02-13 22:22 |
| #5 A U.S. Army officer who saw the video observed: "You just watched a full battalion, supported by tanks, break contact after an attack by a supposedly undisciplined, 'rag-tag' force of Taliban fighters. For the Taliban to drive off that unit, it has to be organized, disciplined, well-armed, and competent." This video shows either that the Taliban are strong, or the Pakistani army is weak. Either way, it's a little disconcerting that the Paks are having so much difficulty holding off the Taliban. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2009-02-13 16:04 |
| #4 Blair is apparently fluent in Double Speak, a prerequisite in Washington. Which is it, Al Qaeda is degraded and less a threat than a year ago or they have formed an effective Shadow Army with the Taliban? From the previous article: The effectiveness of the Shadow Army is clearly visible in a video taken by an Al Jazeera reporter during an operation in Bajaur in the fall of 2008. The Taliban forces repel a battalion-sized assault from Pakistani Army troops that are supported by at least a platoon of tanks. The Pakistani tanks race away from the fighting, followed quickly by the Pakistani infantry after taking fire. The Pakistani tank commander calls for air strikes, but the infantry and tanks go into full retreat and return to base. A U.S. Army officer who saw the video observed: "You just watched a full battalion, supported by tanks, break contact after an attack by a supposedly undisciplined, 'rag-tag' force of Taliban fighters. For the Taliban to drive off that unit, it has to be organized, disciplined, well-armed, and competent." |
| Posted by: Thealing Borgia 122 2009-02-13 15:49 |
| #3 Blair also thought there was no China threat. Back in May 2001: A confidential Pentagon strategy review has cast the Pacific as the most important region for military planners and calls for the development of new long-range arms to counter China's military power. The review concludes that American bases in the Pacific are likely to become increasingly vulnerable as China and other potential adversaries develop more accurate missiles. So it urges that the American military become less dependent on military bases and put more emphasis on fighting from a distance. The review is part of a broad effort by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to transform the military after the cold war, a shift that would redirect the focus of American military planning from Europe to Asia. It is directed by Andrew W. Marshall, a 79-year-old civilian analyst at the Pentagon and a close adviser to Mr. Rumsfeld, who has long pressed for a radical overhaul of America's armed forces. But in the Pacific, the review has drawn a skeptical response from Adm. Dennis C. Blair, the head of the United States Pacific Command and the top American military man in the region. While supporting the call for change, Admiral Blair believes China will present less of a military threat to American military bases and naval forces in the region. Military officers in the region are also concerned that the diminished importance of bases close to the action in a new Pentagon strategy could also make it harder for the United States to maintain political support in Japan and South Korea for a continued American presence there. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2009-02-13 14:22 |
| #2 Yes, spending trillions to bail out spendthrift states, insolvent banks, bankrupt countries and delinquent homeowners means we will be less secure. |
| Posted by: DoDo 2009-02-13 11:48 |
| #1 Agreed; the democrats' Gleiwitz. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2009-02-13 11:12 |