InvestorsHub Logo

Alex G

07/29/08 12:45 AM

#65193 RE: hap0206 #65187

ol' hap, forever stuck on stupid


Study questions US strategy against al-Qaida

WASHINGTON - The United States can defeat al-Qaida if it relies less on force and more on policing and intelligence to root out the terror group's leaders, a new study contends.

"Keep in mind that terrorist groups are not eradicated overnight," said the study by the federally funded Rand research center, an organization that counsels the Pentagon.

Its report said that the use of military force by the United States or other countries should be reserved for quelling large, well-armed and well-organized insurgencies, and that American officials should stop using the term "war on terror" and replace it with "counterterrorism."

"Terrorists should be perceived and described as criminals, not holy warriors, and our analysis suggests there is no battlefield solution to terrorism," said Seth Jones, the lead author of the study and a Rand political scientist.

"The United States has the necessary instruments to defeat al-Qaida, it just needs to shift its strategy," Jones said.

Nearly every ally, including Britain and Australia, has stopped using "war on terror" to describe strategy against the group headed by Osama bin Laden and considered responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001 suicide attacks at the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon.

Based on an analysis of 648 terrorist groups that existed between 1968 and 2006, the report concluded that a transition to the political process is the most common way such groups end. But the process, found in 43 percent cases examined, is unlikely with al-Qaida, which has a broad, sweeping agenda, the report said.

The second most common way that terrorist groups end, seen in about 40 percent of the cases, is through police and intelligence services apprehending or killing key leaders, Jones said. Police are particularly effective because their permanent presence in cities helps them gather information, he said.

By contrast, the report said, military force was effective in only 7 percent of the cases.

Jones, in an interview, said, "Even where we found some success against al-Qaida, in Pakistan and Iraq, the military played a background or surrogate role. The bulk of the action was taken by intelligence, police and, in some cases, local forces."

"We are not saying the military should not play a role," he said. "But unless you are talking about large insurgencies, military force should not be the tip of the spear."

Among the report's conclusions:

_Religious terrorist groups take longer to eliminate than other groups but none has achieved victory in the 38 years covered by the study.

_Terrorist groups from upper-income countries are more likely to be left-wing or nationalist, and much less likely to be motivated by religion.

_Large groups of more than 10,000 have been victorious more than 25 percent of the time, while victory is rare for groups with 1,000 or fewer members.

The report described al-Qaida as a "strong and competent organization," both before and after 9-11. Its goals, the report said, are uniting Muslims to fight the United States and its allies, overthrowing regimes in the Middle East friendly to the West and establishing a pan-Islamic state, or caliphate.

F6

07/29/08 5:18 AM

#65199 RE: hap0206 #65187

hap0206 -- wow -- you not only guzzled every last drop of the proverbial Kool-Aid, you swallowed the damn punch bowl

ludicrous big lie hoo-haa bearing, as big lies generally do, only an inverse relationship to reality

for starters, see http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=31041419 , including the items linked

before we went in, Iraq was a secular country, by far the most secular in that neck of the woods, in which Sunni and Shia Muslims lived in peace with each other and with Iraq's Christians -- with our help, it is now by its Constitution officially an Islamic Republic, there has been massive sectarian cleansing displacing and making refugees of 5 million or more Iraqis (approaching if not exceeding a quarter of their entire population), and sectarian violence (obviously) continues -- and the Iraqi Christians? -- still waiting to hear back from you how happy you are with how their situation has so improved since we went in

our invasion and occupation of Iraq has been a huge boon to bin Laden (oh, he's still on the loose, coming up on 7 years later? really?) and al Qaeda, both financially and in terms of recruiting -- and of course, there was no al Qaeda in Iraq before we went in, and it has never amounted to more than something like 5% or maybe at points at most 10% of the 'insurgents', who all along have overwhelmingly been just native Iraqis pissed at us (for some reason or other) -- our invasion and the destruction and choas it brought are what turned Iraq into a new recruiting, training and killing ground for the 'insurgents', the sectarians, and by the way some al Qaeda -- as it remains today -- oh, and since we went into Iraq, terrorism worldwide has actually skyrocketed, and al Qaeda and the Taliban have in fact grown significantly stronger on their home turf (again, at least significantly precisely because of our continued presence and activities in that area, and certainly not hampered by our continuing occupation of Iraq)

our invasion and occupation of Iraq has also been a huge boon to Iran -- both removing Iraq as a hostile bulwark against Iran -- one that in terms of any intelligent realpolitik we should have (re-)made our client and used to continue to keep Iran boxed in (oh, but's that's right, he insisted on not just giving their oil to our big oil companies on the terms we wanted, silly me) -- and installing a Shia Islamic regime that by now is on better terms with Shia Iran than it is with us -- and then there's the war's impact on the price of oil to factor into that calculus -- has greatly increased the price that Iran (not to mention Venezuela, and Russia, and . . .) is getting for its oil -- and then the costs of the war and of the oil we buy, and what those costs have done to the value of the dollar

so now, of course, we come to what from its start back in the 90s has been the planned end game, the planned ultimate goal, of the current dubya&co neocon/PNAC Middle East/South Asia oil project (aka GWOT) -- by their lights, now we just HAVE to go blow up Iran and install a puppet regime there too, and then we'll be all set and sitting pretty to rule the entire world by fiat for the rest of the century (e.g. [items linked in] http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=30365629 and preceding and following)

oh, and never mind that little war behind the curtain (the one where, you know, bin Laden was, and oh, still is) that is getting more and more out of hand over there in Afghanistan and now openly spilling over into CURRENTLY nuclear-armed Pakistan (where our preferred little dictator is pretty much on the skids and the tenuous government there is becoming less driven by our demands as it tries to survive its own Islamist insurgency [which, of course, we have done nothing, NOTHING, to provoke] [. . .]) -- not to worry, no biggie, heck Our Leader just again declared Pakistan our 'great ally' in the 'fight against terror' (e.g. [items linked in] http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=28086769 and preceding and following) -- . . .

and so it goes

just a nit here -- when you state the on the facts laughably preposterous 'the Isllamofacists will continue their war, no matter what', you of course directly contradict your equally on the facts laughably preposterous 'Iraq, as a democratic Islamic country, with rights guaranteed for all / is the keystone to prosperity for our children and grandchildren and even great grandchildren / Lose Iraq, and they have war with Islam throughout their lives'

and finally, as for the great existential threat of 'the Isllamofacists' -- without which to cower shaking in fear of many with views such as yours apparently just can't stand to live -- see (items linked in):

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=27690299 and preceding

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=26543956

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=21826312 and preceding and following

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=23994076 and preceding

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=13127539 and preceding and following

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=27739595

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=24084529 and preceding

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=26772965

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=29857577 and preceding and following

and again, http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=22503898 and http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=22511066

in sum -- you have been sold a complete bill of goods -- I would think that ought to piss you off -- though of course, that assumes you don't already know it's all a big lie and, for whatever reason, just don't care




Greensburg, KS - 5/4/07

"Eternal vigilance is the price of Liberty."
from John Philpot Curran, Speech
upon the Right of Election, 1790


F6