Replies

PING

"One reason for the neglect of works in this genre is that they are written in Arabic and they are often quite lengthy. Moreover, they are much more difficult to translate than the usual diatribes by Bin Ladin and other prominent jihadi leaders. Unlike the latter, which are meant for popular consumption, jihadi strategic texts require translators to have a familiarity with Western strategic studies (from which they draw heavily), medieval Islamic history and theology, and contemporary developments in the jihadi movement. The reward for overcoming these obstacles is immeasurable—these works are brilliant (if diabolical) studies of global insurgency written by its most intellectually-gifted participants. While it is still an open question as to whether these texts guide the actions of foot soldiers, they are certainly read by the jihadi intelligentsia and they remain the best source for understanding the nature of the jihadi movement."

Never underestimate the enemy. The fact that these guys are intelligently, rationally approaching the conflict from their perspective (beheadings, killings, and bombings as part of a grand strategy including directed propaganda, and worldwide strategic studies), implies one and only thing to me - these people are monsters that must be eradicated, by any and all means available. We are at war for our very survival. When will the western world realize this ? But then - most of us here have known this for a while. Seems to me the more pressing enemy is liberalism, socialism, communism and associated PC among our own ranks. Take that away, and the rest of us will muster the will to do what must be done, just as the WWII generation did, without question. The enemy is counting on elements within our own societies to constrain us from using the full capability at our disposal. That is the only way they have a chance of winning. Unsheath the sword, show them the true face and meaning of war as western world invented and perfected over the centuries, and I am willing to say that within 6 months we would not have this problem anymore.

I am bit mystified by some of the authors' conclusions in the handbook. For instance, they acknowledge that the jihadis' ultimate goal is to re-establish the caliphate. But then they argue that it is a mistake for the United States to attempt to use direct action to prevent this from happening -- ignoring the fact that if our actions in Iraq are successful then it will be impossible for the caliphate to be re-established.

They also argue that direct action in Iraq and Afghanistan has been good for the jihadi movement. But they don't base this conclusion on anything other than the word of certain jihadist scribblers. And in positing such a conclusion, they completely ignore the fact that bin Laden himself traced the growing potency of the jihadi movement to our failure to respond to their earlier attacks on us. Scholars such as McCants and Brachman can't have it both ways. If they are to maintain their credibility, they can't point to jihadi theories when they support the authors' conclusions and then completely ignore the chief jihadist's theory that Muslims will back the strong horse over the weak horse everytime.

If that theory were applied by the authors to the current reality, one wonders what conclusion they would reach? Would they really say that the more jihadi leaders we kill or capture, the stronger the movement grows? Would they really conclude that the growth in potency of a military force can be directly attributed to how many of its leaders are living the lives of wanted bank robbers?

Finally, after 9/11, I just don't understand how any thinking American can argue that the best approach to take with people who are attempting to kill us is to attempt to use proxies to go after them. That didn't work for the Israelis when they tried to use Arafat to keep a lid on Hamas and it hasn't worked for us in attempting to use Mussharef to keep a lid on the jihadists in Wazirstan. Simply put, using an enemy to kill an another enemy that is already attacking you, is a fool's suicide pact.

The lessons of history are clear. When you are in a fight with the devil, you don't have the luxury of farming out the fight to the devil's acolyte

Here's Al Qaeda's two-pronged global strategy:

#1. Maintain pinprick military contact (i.e. 1 or 2 deaths per day in as many parts of the world as possible) while massaging the news media into convincing the West to surrender and retreat, and

#2. Widen the global terror war by tricking Western Powers into attacking Neutral Islamic nations (e.g. India attacking Pakistan, U.S. attacking Iran, Israel attacking Syria, etc.).