Growing, or Dying?
August 26, 2008 by Adam Hailstone · 5 Comments
Al-Qaida’s Post-Iraq Strength
Make no mistake — the “surge” is working. US combat deaths are at their lowest levels since the beginning of the occupation. Political steps are being made. Iraqi police and military forces are improving. Locals are rising up against terrorists.
Although I was against the war in the first place, in part for the same reasons Dick Cheney was against going into Baghdad during Desert Storm, I feel that leaving, after stirring up the hornet’s nest, would make the Iraqi people victims of not only Saddam’s regime, but another. We should not walk away now.
However the long term goal is not just a politically free and prosperous Iraq, as good as that may be, but winning the war on terror. Despite US gains, a major debate in political and military circles is whether or not al-Qaida is becoming stronger or weaker.
A Shift in Focus
The subgroup al-Qaida in Iraq (AQI) has definitely seen its setbacks, with increased coalition troop levels and a backlash from Sunni populations that used to support the terrorist organization. However disturbing trends and parallels have arisen recently that make us question our real progress.
Many leaders and recruits of AQI have been leaving the Iraq war zone for Afghanistan and the mountainous/tribal regions of Pakistan. This sounds like a retreat. However they have not stopped fighting. They have taken it to another place where US troops are stationed. There, they are making new gains.
AQI trained fighters are the most experienced of al-Qaida’s forces. They have designed more powerful IED’s and more lethal suicide-bombing than ever seen before. They are the most ruthless and pitiless fighters in the world. Most of all they have experience fighting the best military on the planet, US troops.
Now that they are regrouping in a relative “safe haven,” tribal Pakistan, they can continue testing their arsenal against us. This is not good in terms of the Afghanistan front, even if NATO leadership can convince member nations to commit troops for an Afghan version of the surge. With the added benefit of a retreat into a politically volatile Pakistan, and with the experience of Iraq behind them, al-Qaida will have their best in Afghanistan to fight NATO at every turn.
Jihad Parallels
According to the Koran a Jihad is justified in two circumstances. One, a “defensive Jihad” when a Muslim country is being attacked, then all “believers” must seek to defend it. The second can be read, and is by most extremists, as the justification of un-provoked attacks against non-Muslims. However the first is seen, by most Muslims, as more acceptable.
In 1978 the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. Many Muslims, believing in the principle of Jihad, left their homelands and joined the effort to repel the Russian occupation. One of these was Asama bin Laden. By the time this war was over in 1988, bin Laden and many of his fellow fighters formed al-Qaida with the vision of overthrowing all Muslim nations that did not have a “Taliban style” theocratic government. The strategy was to attack the west and then Muslim nations with pro-western governments would slowly fall apart as the west retreated from their support.
Although we have seen the opposite response from many western nations, the US invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan has inspired a new Jihad with thousands of recruits coming from around the world. Just like bin Laden and his comrades once did. However this time there is a complex and well funded organization to welcome them.
On August 12 of this year a US National Intelligence Officer (NIO), Ted Gistaro, reported:
“…al-Qaida is identifying, training, and positioning operatives for attacks in the West, likely including in the United States. These operatives include North American and European citizens and legal residents with passports that allow them to travel to the United States without a U.S. visa.
“Al-Qaida’s ability to establish and manage links to other affiliated terrorist groups and facilitation networks is a key indicator of its organizational health. These links help bolster its operational and propaganda reach”.
The adage “if we fight them over there, they will be less likely to fight us here” may be true for now, but that very fight is creating a new group of fighters. Once we leave, like the Soviets did, even with a free and prospering Iraq, a new group of 9-11 type terrorists will be plotting further attacks against the United States and its allies.
Losing in Iraq, Consolidating Elsewhere
Ted Gistaro also reported:
In September 2006, al-Qaida consolidated jihadist forces in North Africa under its banner by merging Algerian and later Libyan terrorist groups into al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). AQIM has continued to focus on Algerian government targets…since the merger, AQIM has conducted at least eight attacks against Western interests in the region, including two simultaneous suicide car bomb attacks in Algiers in December — including one against the UN building that killed nearly seventy people. AQIM is training growing numbers of operatives from every country in the Maghreb and the Sahel.
In Saudi Arabia, authorities continue to detain al-Qaida linked extremists…Yemen is rapidly reemerging as a jihadist battleground and potential base of operations. A March mortar attack against the U.S. embassy and two attacks against the president’s compound in late-April underscore the al-Qaeda threat there.
These reports, and many more like them that stretch from Morocco to Indonesia, show that al-Qaida is organizing and becoming more powerful. I do not believe we can, or should, invade each of these nation-states.
My Question for You
Though we are seeing success in Iraq and have not had a Jihadist terrorist attack in the United States since September 11, 2001, we are seeing the terrorist organization responsible for that attack spreading. In future posts I will go into more detail on what I think the US strategy should be. However, please give us your thoughts below on what you think the US strategy should be in the war on terror. Let’s get a conversation going.
Join the Liberty Community now by subscribing to the Sentinel, a free weekly newsletter.
Copyright © 2008 by The Cause of Liberty. All rights reserved.
Drawing the Line in the Sand
August 20, 2008 by Adam Hailstone · 7 Comments
How the West Should Respond to the Russian/Georgian Conflict
The recent aggressions and inflammatory language from Russia may have come as a surprise to you, as it did for President Bush. He and Vladimir Putin were sitting together in the same stands watching the Olympics when hostilities broke out. This clash has sent analysts, diplomats and both presidential campaigns scrambling on what to do about it and an array of suggestions has come from all over the political landscape.
I believe we should make our response simple, non-nuanced, and bold. We must stand up to Russia and make the proclamation that all peaceful, freedom loving nations have the right to defend themselves, and be defended, when another nation, unprovoked, seeks to get gain by conquest.
By drawing this line in the sand, in no uncertain terms, I believe the West will once again be clear and unwavering in its position in the world. No one will have to guess what we will do. No nation will want to, or need to, test us because they will know where we stand.
Now let’s dig a little deeper. Read more
Join the Liberty Community now by subscribing to the Sentinel, a free weekly newsletter.
Copyright © 2008 by The Cause of Liberty. All rights reserved.
-
Free Newsletter Subscription
Subscribe to The Sentinel, a free weekly newsletter boldly illuminating the principles of freedom in a darkening nation, and receive two free gifts. Your personal information will never be shared.
Polls
Loading ... Loading ... Loading ...