Al Queda is Losing

The War on Terror is looking better - at least on the al Queda front. The rhetoric is still highly problematic (“legitimate” jihad, one would assume, would be against the West, Israel and other non-Muslims…), but the results are good.

EXCERPT:

[i]Al Qaeda is losing

Last week, we sawquantitative evidence that terrorist tactics in general – and Al Qaeda in partcular – appears to be on the wane ( danieldrezner.com :: Daniel W. Drezner :: May the United States continue to be blessed with incompetent and stupid adversaries ).

This week, there’s some qualitative evidence that Al Qaeda is losing, and losing badly, among its core constituency – Muslims sympathetic to the cause of jihad.

Peter Bergen and Paul Cruickshank make this point in The New Republic ( http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=702bf6d5-a37a-4e3e-a491-fd72bf6a9da1 ):

[quote]After September 11, there was considerable fear in the West that we were headed for a clash of civilizations with the Muslim world led by bin Laden, who would entice masses of young Muslims into his jihadist movement. But the religious leaders and former militants who are now critiquing Al Qaeda's terrorist campaign--both in the Middle East and in Muslim enclaves in the West-- make that less likely. The potential repercussions for Al Qaeda cannot be underestimated because, unlike most mainstream Muslim leaders, Al Qaeda's new critics have the jihadist credentials to make their criticisms bite. "The starting point has to be that jihad is legitimate, otherwise no one will listen, " says Benotman, who sees the Iraqi insurgency as a legitimate jihad. "The reaction [to my criticism of Al Qaeda] has been beyond imagination. It has made the radicals very angry. They are very shaky about it."

Why have clerics and militants once considered allies by Al Qaeda's leaders turned against them? To a large extent, it is because Al Qaeda and its affiliates have increasingly adopted the doctrine of takfir, by which they claim the right to decide who is a "true" Muslim. Al Qaeda's Muslim critics know what results from this takfiri view: First, the radicals deem some Muslims apostates; after that, the radicals start killing them. This fatal progression happened in both Algeria and Egypt in the 1990s. It is now taking place even more dramatically in Iraq, where Al Qaeda's suicide bombers have killed more than 10,000 Iraqis, most of them targeted simply for being Shia. Recently, Al Qaeda in Iraq has turned its fire on Sunnis who oppose its diktats, a fact not lost on the Islamic world's Sunni majority.

Additionally, Al Qaeda and its affiliates have killed thousands of Muslim civilians elsewhere since September 11: hundreds of ordinary Afghans killed every year by the Taliban, dozens of Saudis killed by terrorists since 2003, scores of Jordanians massacred at a wedding at a U.S. hotel in Amman in November 2005. Even those sympathetic to Al Qaeda have started to notice. "Excuse me Mr. Zawahiri but who is it who is killing with Your Excellency's blessing, the innocents in Baghdad, Morocco and Algeria?" one supporter asked in an online Q&A with Al Qaeda's deputy leader in April that was posted widely on jihadist websites. All this has created a dawning recognition among Muslims that the ideological virus that unleashed September 11 and the terrorist attacks in London and Madrid is the same virus now wreaking havoc in the Muslim world.[/quote]

Lawrence Wright makes a similar argument in The New Yorker ( The Rebellion Within | The New Yorker ):

[quote]Zawahiri has watched Al Qaeda's popularity decline in places where it formerly enjoyed great support. In Pakistan, where hundreds have been killed recently by Al Qaeda suicide bombers-including, perhaps, former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto-public opinion has turned against bin Laden and his companions. An Algerian terror organization, the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat, formally affiliated itself with Al Qaeda in September, 2006, and began a series of suicide bombings that have alienated the Algerian people, long weary of the horrors that Islamist radicals have inflicted on their country. Even members of Al Qaeda admit that their cause has been harmed by indiscriminate violence. In February of this year, Abu Turab al-Jazairi, an Al Qaeda commander in northern Iraq, whose nom de guerre suggests that he is Algerian, gave an interview to Al Arab, a Qatari daily. "The attacks in Algeria sparked animated debate here in Iraq," he said. "By God, had they told me they were planning to harm the Algerian President and his family, I would say, 'Blessings be upon them!' But explosions in the street, blood knee-deep, the killing of soldiers whose wages are not even enough for them to eat at third-rate restaurants . . . and calling this jihad? By God, it's sheer idiocy!" Abu Turab admitted that he and his colleagues were suffering a similar public-relations problem in Iraq, because "Al Qaeda has been infiltrated by people who have harmed its reputation." He said that only about a third of the nine thousand fighters who call themselves members of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia can be relied upon. "The rest are unreliable, since they keep harming the good name of Al Qaeda." He concludes, "Our position is very difficult."

In Saudi Arabia, where the government has been trying to tame its radical clerics, Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah Aal al-Sheikh, the Grand Mufti, issued a fatwa in October, 2007, forbidding Saudi youth to join the jihad outside the country. Two months later, Saudi authorities arrested members of a suspected Al Qaeda cell who allegedly planned to assassinate the Grand Mufti. That same fall, Sheikh Salman al-Oadah, a cleric whom bin Laden has praised in the past, appeared on an Arabic television network and read an open letter to the Al Qaeda leader. He asked, "Brother Osama, how much blood has been spilled? How many innocent children, women, and old people have been killed, maimed, and expelled from their homes in the name of Al Qaeda?" These critiques echoed some of the concerns of the Palestinian cleric Sheikh Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi, who is considered by some to be the most influential jihadi theorist. In 2004, Maqdisi, then in a Jordanian prison, castigated his former protégé Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the now dead leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, for his unproductive violence, particularly the wholesale slaughter of Shiites and the use of suicide bombers. "Mujahideen should refrain from acts that target civilians, churches, or other places of worship, including Shiite sites," Maqdisi wrote. "The hands of the jihad warriors must remain clean."[/quote]

Finally, the Strategy Page reports on the abject collapse of Al Qaeda in Iraq ( Information Warfare: Al Qaeda Discusses Losing Iraq ):

On a related note, I’ve been hearing very good things about Michael Yon’s new book, Moment of Truth

So what?! How was it ever possible for them to win? This is no real victory.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
So what?! How was it ever possible for them to win? This is no real victory.[/quote]

Maybe you have been in a coma for the past 5 years please allow me to tell you why this is important. You see for the past 5 years all we where told is this is an unwinnable war.

[quote]John S. wrote:
You see for the past 5 years all we where told is this is an unwinnable war.[/quote]

That is what I meant by “no real victory”.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
John S. wrote:
You see for the past 5 years all we where told is this is an unwinnable war.

That is what I meant by “no real victory”.[/quote]

Is a victory over Al queda somehow worthless? What is happening now is the exact opposite of what we were told would happen. This is a great victory how you fail to see that is beyond me.

Where’s the part about these militants not wanting to see Americans die under the hands of Al Qaeda?

[quote]John S. wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
John S. wrote:
You see for the past 5 years all we where told is this is an unwinnable war.

That is what I meant by “no real victory”.

Is a victory over Al queda somehow worthless? What is happening now is the exact opposite of what we were told would happen. This is a great victory how you fail to see that is beyond me.[/quote]

Do you really think terrorism is going away? Do you really think militant groups in the ME are no longer angry at the US for invading their land?

This entire mindset smacks in the face of common sense.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
John S. wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
John S. wrote:
You see for the past 5 years all we where told is this is an unwinnable war.

That is what I meant by “no real victory”.

Is a victory over Al queda somehow worthless? What is happening now is the exact opposite of what we were told would happen. This is a great victory how you fail to see that is beyond me.

Do you really think terrorism is going away? Do you really think militant groups in the ME are no longer angry at the US for invading their land?

This entire mindset smacks in the face of common sense.[/quote]

Am I talking about the other groups right now? I didn’t think so, I am not going to chase you around as you pull up arguments that have nothing to do with this, If you can’t keep up thats fine but stop trying to turn this into something it is not. The fact that the most powerful terrorist organization in the ME is crumbling is a victory.

[quote]John S. wrote:
The fact that the most powerful terrorist organization in the ME is crumbling is a victory. [/quote]

Just because terrorist attacks are down doesn’t mean al Qaeda is “crumbling”. There will be no victory.

Al-Qaeda is losing huh? That must mean the jihad will stop, right?

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Al-Qaeda is losing huh? That must mean the jihad will stop, right?[/quote]

No, that means that a group that learned from al-Quaedas mistakes will pop up.

[quote]orion wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Al-Qaeda is losing huh? That must mean the jihad will stop, right?

No, that means that a group that learned from al-Quaedas mistakes will pop up.

[/quote]

Exactly. The jihad will continue, just as it did upon the death of Mohammed.

Muslim extremism and terrorist movements ebb and flow in cycles. It doesn’t go away because the targets give up or appease the agressor. It goes away when folks have had enough and take action.

Al-Queda is in shambles because the leaders have been taken out in large numbers. The B team has suffered heavy losses as well. The rising radicals are identified and tracked and when prudent are also killed. In that way they fail to gain traction and large operations are foiled. Lone wolves will always be around but the damage they can inflict is minimal in comparison and the reprisals have generally detered all but the most foolish.

Al-Queda in Iraq is a shell. Fighting the US in Iraq was a big draw for new members. It drew thousands of Jihadi’s like a honey pot. Now they are dead. Al-Queda lost a lot of credibility and the number of places they can hide are limited.

The attacks of 9-11 have proven to be one of the biggest fuck ups ever carried out. That is the lesson they have learned.

What is this? Kindergarten?

Al-Qaeda is the greatest winner of the Bush Doctrine and arguable the main beneficiary of the war on Iraq (some say it’s Iran).

In case nobody is paying attention, allow me to tell you what these terrorists are after. They’re out to instill fear in people and eventually lose their life. On the first task, they have undeniably succeeded. People are still hysterical at the mentioning of 9/11, and we all saw what irrationalities that fear facilitated. A country was bombed and invaded and support behind those actions was firm in the USA. Air travel has become a chance one takes. Between the insane number of people on no-fly lists, and the regulations whereby you’re forbidden to take toothpaste onto the plane, the fear is very palpable. Another evidence is the existence of Gitmo, where people are held indeterminately without charges, and which earned the US a place with the most infamous regimes in the world.

Then we have the fact that terrorists are out to die. And just how do you “win” over a terrorist organization that has been recruiting hand over fist ever since the first bomb hit Baghdad. It is beyond naive to think that, with the current policy the US has, their supplies will dry out. Radicalism has rarely been healthier.

P.S: I am not sure about the extent to which the war on Iraq has pulled the dollar down, but you can be quite certain that Al-Qaeda is claiming credit for it. But don’t look for that story in The New Yorker…

[quote]lixy wrote:
What is this? Kindergarten?

Al-Qaeda is the greatest winner of the Bush Doctrine and arguable the main beneficiary of the war on Iraq (some say it’s Iran).

In case nobody is paying attention, allow me to tell you what these terrorists are after. They’re out to instill fear in people and eventually lose their life. On the first task, they have undeniably succeeded. People are still hysterical at the mentioning of 9/11, and we all saw what irrationalities that fear facilitated. A country was bombed and invaded and support behind those actions was firm in the USA. Air travel has become a chance one takes. Between the insane number of people on no-fly lists, and the regulations whereby you’re forbidden to take toothpaste onto the plane, the fear is very palpable. Another evidence is the existence of Gitmo, where people are held indeterminately without charges, and which earned the US a place with the most infamous regimes in the world.

Then we have the fact that terrorists are out to die. And just how do you “win” over a terrorist organization that has been recruiting hand over fist ever since the first bomb hit Baghdad. It is beyond naive to think that, with the current policy the US has, their supplies will dry out. Radicalism has rarely been healthier.

P.S: I am not sure about the extent to which the war on Iraq has pulled the dollar down, but you can be quite certain that Al-Qaeda is claiming credit for it. But don’t look for that story in The New Yorker…[/quote]

If it was kindergarten the other kids would buy your analysis.

You know less about this issue then you do about weight training.

You guys lost. Get over it. Nobody is afraid except the holdouts waiting for a JDAM to drop in on them.

[quote]hedo wrote:
lixy wrote:
What is this? Kindergarten?

Al-Qaeda is the greatest winner of the Bush Doctrine and arguable the main beneficiary of the war on Iraq (some say it’s Iran).

In case nobody is paying attention, allow me to tell you what these terrorists are after. They’re out to instill fear in people and eventually lose their life. On the first task, they have undeniably succeeded. People are still hysterical at the mentioning of 9/11, and we all saw what irrationalities that fear facilitated. A country was bombed and invaded and support behind those actions was firm in the USA. Air travel has become a chance one takes. Between the insane number of people on no-fly lists, and the regulations whereby you’re forbidden to take toothpaste onto the plane, the fear is very palpable. Another evidence is the existence of Gitmo, where people are held indeterminately without charges, and which earned the US a place with the most infamous regimes in the world.

Then we have the fact that terrorists are out to die. And just how do you “win” over a terrorist organization that has been recruiting hand over fist ever since the first bomb hit Baghdad. It is beyond naive to think that, with the current policy the US has, their supplies will dry out. Radicalism has rarely been healthier.

P.S: I am not sure about the extent to which the war on Iraq has pulled the dollar down, but you can be quite certain that Al-Qaeda is claiming credit for it. But don’t look for that story in The New Yorker…

If it was kindergarten the other kids would buy your analysis.

You know less about this issue then you do about weight training.

You guys lost. Get over it. Nobody is afraid except the holdouts waiting for a JDAM to drop in on them.

[/quote]

You do not get it, do you?

They cannot lose. No one expects them to “win” against the US.

As long as they exist and keep on fighting, they defy the Great Satan.

And they will continue to do that for a long time, both in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The US on the other side must win in order not to lose face in the ME and does not have the military or the will to do so.

[quote]orion wrote:
hedo wrote:
lixy wrote:
What is this? Kindergarten?

Al-Qaeda is the greatest winner of the Bush Doctrine and arguable the main beneficiary of the war on Iraq (some say it’s Iran).

In case nobody is paying attention, allow me to tell you what these terrorists are after. They’re out to instill fear in people and eventually lose their life. On the first task, they have undeniably succeeded. People are still hysterical at the mentioning of 9/11, and we all saw what irrationalities that fear facilitated. A country was bombed and invaded and support behind those actions was firm in the USA. Air travel has become a chance one takes. Between the insane number of people on no-fly lists, and the regulations whereby you’re forbidden to take toothpaste onto the plane, the fear is very palpable. Another evidence is the existence of Gitmo, where people are held indeterminately without charges, and which earned the US a place with the most infamous regimes in the world.

Then we have the fact that terrorists are out to die. And just how do you “win” over a terrorist organization that has been recruiting hand over fist ever since the first bomb hit Baghdad. It is beyond naive to think that, with the current policy the US has, their supplies will dry out. Radicalism has rarely been healthier.

P.S: I am not sure about the extent to which the war on Iraq has pulled the dollar down, but you can be quite certain that Al-Qaeda is claiming credit for it. But don’t look for that story in The New Yorker…

If it was kindergarten the other kids would buy your analysis.

You know less about this issue then you do about weight training.

You guys lost. Get over it. Nobody is afraid except the holdouts waiting for a JDAM to drop in on them.

You do not get it, do you?

They cannot lose. No one expects them to “win” against the US.

As long as they exist and keep on fighting, they defy the Great Satan.

And they will continue to do that for a long time, both in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The US on the other side must win in order not to lose face in the ME and does not have the military or the will to do so.

[/quote]

Read a non European Newspaper. You are about two years behind.

I get it. You don’t have the ability to process information you don’t agree with. (see the BB supp thread you got smacked around on)

[quote]hedo wrote:
Read a non European Newspaper. You are about two years behind.

I get it. You don’t have the ability to process information you don’t agree with. (see the BB supp thread you got smacked around on)
[/quote]

You definitely don’t get it. There is no “winner” here. If there were. It wouldn’t be us.

Oh look, we managed to blow up and other worthless sandbox with a couple brown-skinned people in it…

V. I. C. T. O. R. Y. Yea, Victory

[quote]hedo wrote:
orion wrote:
hedo wrote:
lixy wrote:
What is this? Kindergarten?

Al-Qaeda is the greatest winner of the Bush Doctrine and arguable the main beneficiary of the war on Iraq (some say it’s Iran).

In case nobody is paying attention, allow me to tell you what these terrorists are after. They’re out to instill fear in people and eventually lose their life. On the first task, they have undeniably succeeded. People are still hysterical at the mentioning of 9/11, and we all saw what irrationalities that fear facilitated. A country was bombed and invaded and support behind those actions was firm in the USA. Air travel has become a chance one takes. Between the insane number of people on no-fly lists, and the regulations whereby you’re forbidden to take toothpaste onto the plane, the fear is very palpable. Another evidence is the existence of Gitmo, where people are held indeterminately without charges, and which earned the US a place with the most infamous regimes in the world.

Then we have the fact that terrorists are out to die. And just how do you “win” over a terrorist organization that has been recruiting hand over fist ever since the first bomb hit Baghdad. It is beyond naive to think that, with the current policy the US has, their supplies will dry out. Radicalism has rarely been healthier.

P.S: I am not sure about the extent to which the war on Iraq has pulled the dollar down, but you can be quite certain that Al-Qaeda is claiming credit for it. But don’t look for that story in The New Yorker…

If it was kindergarten the other kids would buy your analysis.

You know less about this issue then you do about weight training.

You guys lost. Get over it. Nobody is afraid except the holdouts waiting for a JDAM to drop in on them.

You do not get it, do you?

They cannot lose. No one expects them to “win” against the US.

As long as they exist and keep on fighting, they defy the Great Satan.

And they will continue to do that for a long time, both in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The US on the other side must win in order not to lose face in the ME and does not have the military or the will to do so.

Read a non European Newspaper. You are about two years behind.

I get it. You don’t have the ability to process information you don’t agree with. (see the BB supp thread you got smacked around on)
[/quote]

I thought it was the US military claiming that they needed 400000 soldiers to take care of Afghanistan?

Do you have those?

Are you willing to draft as many as it takes and send them over there?

I think my point still stands.

I mean, we would have 3000000 troops or so, but having read European newspapers, I know that they will never ever be sent to Afghanistan.