by Jack Hunter
Amongst the Republican presidential candidates (with the lone exception of Ron Paul), the notion of "blowback," a CIA term used to describe when U.S. action overseas produces unintended, negative consequences - does not exist. But speaking on the current instability in Pakistan, retired Army lieutenant general and current State Department counterterrorism chief Dell Dailey says in today's Post & Courier:
"We have to be careful conducting operations in a soveriegn country, particularly one that's a friend of ours and one that has given us a lot of support. The blowback would be serious."
Everytime Paul has brought up "blowback" as the primary cause of the current terrorist threat, and has mentioned that it was also the primary motivation for 9/11 (as Osama Bin Laden has stated explicitly and the 9/11 Commission Report confirms) Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, Fred Thompson and John McCain have denied the very existence of blowback. They continue to tell us that it is America's "freedom" that infuriates the terrorists, and accuse those who disagree of being naive.
It would seem that when it comes to having the right information concerning how to fight the War on Terror, the Republicans running for President (except Paul) aren't the strongest on national security at all, but the weakest. They are just as ignorant as Bush.
WTMA's Morning Buzz host Richard Todd had the opportunity to bring up "blowback" and the 9/11 Commission Report to Rudy Giuliani weeks ago. Rudy said it was a completely false "theory," an insult to the victims of 9/11, and said he had not read the 9/11 Commission Report.
South Carolina's own U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham had a similar response, when Todd asked him the same question.
Ignorance might be bliss, but in times like these, it is also dangerous.