silly questions I know.
The technical term for these is "Democrats." :)
Looks like they'll be needing 18,000 coffins.
Well, now we know why Kerry is so high in the polls, of late.
And not necessarily in that order.
PROBABLY? Unfortunately it's probably going to take some of those attacks for more of the world to get serious about this.
It's WWIII, no less.
The International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) is the world’s leading authority on political-military conflict.
The IISS, based in London, is both a limited company in UK law and a registered charity. It has offices in the US and in Singapore with charitable status in each jurisdiction.
The IISS was founded in 1958 in the UK by a number of individuals interested in how to maintain civilised international relations in the nuclear age. Much of the Institute’s early work focused on nuclear deterrence and arms control and was hugely influential in setting the intellectual structures for managing the Cold War.
The Institute grew dramatically during the 1980s and 1990s, expanding both because of the nature of its work and its geographical scope. Its mandate became to look at the problems of conflict, however caused, that might have an important military content. This gave fresh impetus to the Institute as it began to cover more comprehensively political and military issues in all continents. As this mandate developed, the Institute worked hard both to provide the best information and analysis on strategic trends, and to facilitate contacts between government leaders, business people and analysts that would lead to the development of better public policy in the fields of international relations and international security.
The IISS is the primary source of accurate, objective information on international strategic issues for politicians and diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business, economists, the military, defence commentators, journalists, academics and the informed public. The Institute owes no allegiance to any government, or to any political or other organisation.
The Institute’s high- profile publications are both timely and authoritative. They are universally regarded as providing the best independent, internationally sourced information and commentary on the main conference activities are considered to be at the forefront of public policy development, especially given that its convening power is such that it can often bring government officials and others together in formats and circumstances that they could not easily manage for themselves.
The Institute’s staff and governing boards are international and its network of some 3,000 Individual Members and 500 Corporate and Institutional Members is drawn from more than 100 countries. The IISS, through its various activities, seeks to provide excellent information and analysis that can improve wider public understanding of international security problems and through its network, influence the development of sounder public policy.
Adds a whole new meaning to the concept of franchising.
I looked at the web site for the International Institute of Strategic Studies and the only name that I recognized was Fareed Zacaria - the anti-Bush butt boy on Stephie's Sunday morning program.
I'll wait for more resonsible reporting.
silly questions I know.
Looks like we're going to need to outsource some jobs.
Bottom line me- what is the bag limit?
All the more reason to STEP UP the war on terrorism and reelect the world's #1 leader in this war, George Bush.
Unless of course one agrees with the immoral "appeasement" crowd.
Wow...Al Qaeda wants to kill us. Imagine that. It only took the liberal press what, 32 months since 9/11 to figure that out.
Wonder if all 18,000 will be at the democrat convention?
Lets see....18,000 times 72...equals....WOW...thats going to take a butt load of virgins....better call ahead.
Fascinating. I wonder what was the methodology of this "report". Indeed I wonder what possible methodology there could be, which could produce or even estimate a number like "change in Al Qaeda ranks" that wouldn't be total BS.
Al-Qaida is probably working on plans for major attacks on the United States and Europe
They are?? What a brilliant finding! Increase these geniuses' research funding. This is valuable stuff.
it may be seeking weapons of mass destruction in its desire to inflict as many casualties as possible, the International Institute of Strategic Studies said in its annual survey of world affairs.
It may be seeking weapons of mass destruction??? WHO KNEW?? Cutting-edge research, this.
Osama bin Laden's network appears to be operating in more than 60 nations, often in concert with local allies, the study by the independent think tank said.
Or you could just read the writings of college undergraduate and soon-to-be AEI intern Dan Darling....
it has an effective leadership, with bin Laden apparently still playing a key role, it said.
"said" = "guessed"
The report suggested that the two military centerpieces of the U.S.-led war on terror _ the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq _ may have boosted al-Qaida.
Wow, Afghanistan too? I guess we just can't ever fight these people. They only become more numerous. Like Tribbles!
Driving the terror network out of Afghanistan in late 2001 appears to have benefited the group, which dispersed to many countries, making it almost invisible and hard to combat, the story said.
Yup, it really benefitted them to lose many of their secure bases. /lefty_logic
And the Iraq conflict "has arguably focused the energies and resources of al-Qaida and its followers
Hopefully. Hopefully it's focused their energies on attacking our armed forces in Iraq rather than unarmed civilians in America!
while diluting those of the global counterterrorism coalition that appeared so formidable" after the Afghan intervention, the survey said.
What the hell are they smoking? What "global counterterrorism coalition that appeared so formidable"??
The U.S. occupation of Iraq brought al-Qaida recruits from across Islamic nations, the study said. Up to 1,000 foreign Islamic fighters have infiltrated Iraqi territory...
"Up to 1,000", eh? Another highly accurate research datum, that. Probably the same methodology by which they got "18000".
Anyway, tell this to all the lefties who keep insisting that Iraq has "nothing to do with" the war against Al Qaeda and is "distracting" us from the war against Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda doesn't seem to have gotten the memo!
No fair, Al Qaeda recruits! You're not supposed to be in Iraq at all! All the lefties have said so.
Efforts to defeat al-Qaida will take time and might accelerate only if there are political developments that now seem elusive, such as the democratization of Iraq and the resolution of conflict in Israel, it said.
Israel? What's funny is that if you look at bin Laden's early stuff there's practically nothing about the Palestinian situation.
No, there's no agenda in this study. Nope, none at all.
It could take up to 500,000 U.S. and allied troops to effectively police Iraq and restore political stability, IISS researcher Christopher Langton told the news conference.
Of course it could. It could also take fewer. Or more. Who's to say in this topsy-turvy world of ours?
The United States is al-Qaida's prime target in a war it sees as a death struggle between civilizations, the report said.
Again, who knew??
An al-Qaida leader has said 4 million Americans will have to be killed "as a prerequisite to any Islamic victory," the survey said.
The "survey" said that? Didn't we all hear this quote long before? We needed a "survey" to tell us about what some Al Qaeda leader said in a quote you could have read almost two years ago?
The IISS said its estimate of 18,000 al-Qaida fighters was based on intelligence estimates that the group trained at least 20,000 fighters in its camps in Afghanistan before the United States and its allies ousted the Taliban regime. In the ensuing war on terror, some 2,000 al-Qaida fighters have been killed or captured, the survey said.
LOL
So in other words we've reduced Al Qaeda ranks by 10% (according to their own silly methodology) and yet this is being reported as "al-Qaida Ranks Swelling Worldwide"????
and they are announcing their report with "conclusions" (i.e. wild-a** guesses) like "the war in Iraq is swelling its ranks", "may have boosted al-Qaida", "Driving the terror network out of Afghanistan in late 2001 appears to have benefited the group", etc.?????
I think the only question at this point is whether we have here a case of (a) the report's authors/sponsors being overzealous in their press release or (b) gullible and/or propagandistic news writers eager to spin the report as much as possible.
Please, read this sentence again. The report's "methodology" took the number of people (20000) estimated to have been trained for Al Qaeda before the Afghanistan war, and then subtracted from that the known dead, to get 18000. That number "18000" is best described as: Number of Al Qaeda-trained folk who escaped being killed by us.
We've killed 2000 and left 18000 - LITERALLY DECIMATED AL QAEDA - that's what the report actually "found".
Where the hell do they (the authors, and/or the news-writer) get this "al-Qaida Ranks Swelling Worldwide" stuff from, then? Out of thin air, that's where.
Al-Qaida appears to have successfully reconstituted its operations by dispersing its forces into small groups and through working with local allies, such as the Great Eastern Islamic Raiders' Front in Turkey, the report said.
Yup, they've "successfully" dispersed into small, local groups without secure bases and a complicit state sponsor. LOL.
This is almost like saying, "sailors who survived the destruction of their aircraft carrier have successfully reconstituted into small groups of 2-5 guys hanging onto floating debris".
Well played, Qaeda! Well played. Check and mate!
18,000 terrorists who can barely manage one or two attacks total per year. Those idiots make union municipal street repairmen look efficient in contrast...and yet whoever wrote this screed above thinks that they aren't crippled.
Whatever.
