Posted on 05/26/2004 12:43:21 AM PDT by churchillbuff
LONDON : The US-led war on Iraq, far from countering terrorism, has helped revitalise the Al-Qaeda terror network, the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) think-tank warned.
The London-based body said in its annual Strategic Survey 2003/2004 that the deadly train bombings in Madrid in March, the worst terror strike in Europe for more than a decade, showed that Osama Bin Laden's terror network "had fully reconstituted".
It also predicted the Islamic group would step up its anti-Western attacks, possibly even resorting to weapons of mass destruction and targeting Americans, Europeans and Israelis while continuing to support insurgents opposing the US-led occupation of Iraq.
The IISS pointed to devastating blasts in Morocco, Saudi Arabia and Turkey in 2003 and 2004 as further evidence that anti-US sentiment had soared since the Iraq war.
"In counter-terrorism terms, the intervention has arguably focused the energies and resources of al-Qaeda and its followers while diluting those of the global counter-terrorism coalition that appeared so formidable following the Afghanistan intervention in late 2001," the report said.
However, since the war it said that arms proliferation and state-sponsored terrorism has dwindled, with Libya giving up its unconventional weapons programs and Syria becoming "less provocative."
Stalinist North Korea's secret nuclear programme was somehow contained thanks to a negotiating process while Iran agreed to cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency over its nuclear activities, the IISS said.
But another legacy of the war was what the IISS termed a highly questionable recourse to pre-emptive strikes as a means of counter-proliferation, as well as "the uses and abuses of intelligence as a basis for military action."
The IISS said the United States, which has dominated world affairs since the end of the Cold War, had failed to understand that Al-Qaeda's September 11, 2001 attacks were "a violent reaction to America's pre-eminence" and it urged the superpower to temper "the appearance of American unilateralism".
It warned that Washington would have a hard time restoring order in embattled Iraq and stressed that the conflict had brought a political split between the United States and its continental European allies, leaving Britain stuck in the middle.
The survey additionally forecast a possible attention shift away from terrorism, Middle Eastern problems and weapons proliferation should North Korea opt for a more aggressive stance, a humanitarian disaster hit Africa or undesirable regime-changes "produce abrupt and serious security challenges".
The United States will not manage to tackle all of the above single-handedly, warned the think-tank, raising a question mark over Europe's ability to break away from "strategic arthritis."
My policy goes something like this. "We're at war. Support it or get the ____ out!"
We're in this to win and talking about anything else, is defeatist.
It's not my decision to make here. That's how I feel about it.
FACT : It's our habit of RETREATING at the sight of bloodshed that bin Laden cited in his war on us:
"We say to the Defense Secretary [William Perry] that his talk can induce a grieving mother to laughter! . . . Where was this false courage of yours when the explosion in Beirut took place in 1983? . . . You turned into scattered pits and pieces at that time; 241 mainly marine soldiers were killed. And where was this courage of yours when two explosions made you leave Aden in less than twenty-four hours! But your most disgraceful case was in Somalia; where—after vigorous propaganda about the power of the USA and its post–Cold War leadership of the new world order—you moved tens of thousands of an international force, including twenty-eight thousand American soldiers, into Somalia. However, when tens of your soldiers were killed in minor battles and one American pilot was dragged in the streets of Mogadishu you left the area carrying disappointment, humiliation, defeat and your dead with you. . . . You have been disgraced by Allah and you withdrew. The extent of your impotence and weaknesses became very clear." -- Bin Laden, in response to SecDef William Perry's comments that the bombings of US installations in Saudi Arabia had “taught him one lesson: that is, not to withdraw when attacked by coward terrorists." -- See bin Laden Declaration of War, http://msanews.mynet.net/MSANEWS/ 199610/19961013.10.html
We did not have any news conferences warning of terror attacks before 911...therefore we were safer/sarcasm...
I am appalled that anyone in America would gloat over news of a terror warning in order to try and justify a viewpoint.
May I offer that as tonight's entree?
Gouda idea. But if I don't get to bed, it won't be easy to be up and edam this morning...
Sweet dreams..just arose and am reading the thread now,
Baddaloop: PISH!
Baddaloop=Baddaloomp....sorry.
"There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al-Qaida ties," the president said. But he also said, "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th." -- Bush: No Proof of Saddam Role in 9-11," Yahoo News, 9/17/03, TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent
Oh, wait- that one proves YOUR point, not hers... ;o)
I'll tell ya Howlin, Fallujah really tried my patience, but I kept my mouth shut. Now five to six weeks later and Iraqis are taking their anger out on Sadir, casualty rates are down and things are looking a whole lot better.
As you well know, there are areas where I stridently disagree with Bush, but the war is not one of them. Wars aren't easy to manage. The situation is always fluid. I'm more willing to give Bush a long leash within reason.
Carping about the idea of taking it to terrorists on their own soil is something I will not engage in. Do Churchill buff and the other idiots think fighting terrorism on our own soil is preferred to fighting it on their's?
That is is plain stupid.
We may not be making friends of terrorists. Frankly, I could care less. I guess Churchillbuff thinks we should throw a party for them, LOL.
Great quotes and information,Piasa..
See my 95 for the latest headlines/sarcasm alert.
"We've never been able to develop any more of that yet, either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it," Cheney said Sunday. -- Bush: No Proof of Saddam Role in 9-11," Yahoo News, 9/17/03, TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Tuesday, "I've not seen any indication that would lead me to believe that I could say that." -- Bush: No Proof of Saddam Role in 9-11," Yahoo News, 9/17/03, TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent
Rice... said, "We have never claimed that Saddam Hussein had either direction or control of 9-11." -- Bush: No Proof of Saddam Role in 9-11," Yahoo News, 9/17/03, TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent
She done R.U.N.N.O.F.T!
Oh well...I think I'll just trash the hotel room.
"LONDON : The US-led war on Iraq, far from countering terrorism, has helped revitalise the Al-Qaeda terror network, the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) think-tank warned."
Al-Qaeda helped the socialists in Spain take power, and the US lying crooked liberals are hoping for the same this November. These of the socialistic mind have said from the beginning protecting Saddam was about OIL.
So I suppose these of the "think-tank are correct, liberal/socialists/communists are in league with Al-Qaeda.
LOL! Count me in.
I always like the statement that by attacking we're only going to make them "mad"...
Like they could get any more mad - in both senses of the word.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.