Posted on 05/15/2007 8:21:39 AM PDT by jdm
LONDON (Reuters) - A U.S. troop pullout from Iraq would leave the country as a potent launchpad for international terrorism and Washington would be forced to go back in within a couple of years, a leading al Qaeda expert said on Tuesday.Rohan Gunaratna told a security conference at Lloyd's of London insurance market that Iraq, like Afghanistan in the 1990s, would become a "terrorist Disneyland" where al Qaeda could build up its strength unchallenged.
If U.S., British and other coalition troops withdrew from Iraq in the next year, he said, "certainly the scale of attacks that would be mounted inside Iraq, and using Iraq as a launching pad to strike other Western countries -- countries in Europe, North America - would become such that after two or three years, the U.S. forces will have to go back to Iraq."
The Singapore-based academic and writer said the epicenter of international terrorism had already switched from Afghanistan to Iraq. "In many ways, the terrorist threat has now shifted 1,500 miles closer to Europe."
Republican President George W. Bush is locked in a standoff with a Democratic-led Congress over funding for the war in Iraq, now in its fifth year, in which more than 3,400 American troops have been killed.
Democrats are pushing for a time frame for withdrawal, something the White House opposes as sending the wrong message to U.S. forces, allies and enemies alike. Some Republicans are also questioning the war more publicly.
Britain, the leading U.S. partner in Iraq, is scaling back its troops there, although the idea of an immediate pullout was rejected this week by Gordon Brown, the man expected to succeed Bush's close ally Tony Blair as prime minister next month.
Addressing the same conference, a top British security official acknowledged home-grown Islamist militants had exploited the British troop presence in Afghanistan and Iraq for propaganda purposes.
But the official, Sir Richard Mottram, said any decision on withdrawal should be taken based on its impact on the two countries, not its effect on the views of radicals in Britain.
"I'd be very cautious about withdrawing from Afghanistan in circumstances where the field was left to the Taliban," said Mottram, Permanent Secretary for Intelligence, Security and Resilience at the Cabinet Office. He declined comment on Iraq.
A former head of Britain's foreign intelligence service MI6 described Gunaratna's analysis as convincing.
"Clearly al Qaeda are focusing on Iraq now, and focusing on some sort of propaganda victory over the United States," Sir Richard Dearlove told reporters.
"Whether that's an actual victory or not, if they can claim in the Muslim world that they've done well, then that puts us in a very difficult position. This is really an aspect of withdrawal that hasn't been properly considered. That's why I think we can't just let Iraq go its own way."
Unimaginable. Reid & Pelosi should rot.
If we leave Iraq now before we crush the terrorists there, not only we need to re-invade Iraq in 2 to 3 years but the other countries that the Al Qaeda terrorists and Iran would have controled by then, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, U.A.E, Lebanon, and of course Iran and Syria.
If we go we will promise to come back if needed. Ask the government of South Vietnam how useful that promise is when the Dems are in charge.
OH REALLY ?
” the U.S. forces will have to go back to Iraq.”
WHAT A SURPRISE !
Afghanistan, left in 1989, back in 2001
Iraq, left in 1991, back in 2003
Somalia : left in 1993, back in 2007
http://leblogdrzz.over-blog.com
Of course, the UK and the EU could always send troops.
My guess America will be still in Iraq in 2020.
And my other guess is America has better be in Iraq in 2020, or the free world will lose the War on Terror.
It would have been unthinkable to leave Germany during the war against communism, don’t think the US could leave Iraq during the war against radical islam.
I don’t know if you notice, but for the first time ever, the free world is really, really in danger to lose the fight.
Not on the battlefield of arms, but on the battlefield of resolve.
Yep. Heaven help us (and the civilized world) if we have a Democrat president in 2008...
Alarmist. When their neighbors India, Russia and China start to worry about Jihad taking over the world, it will time to take notice. Our Navy and Air Force can control any country in that area without future boots on the ground.
My advice if a Democrats gets the White House in 2008:
if you work in a tower, you better have to resign.
It really is crazy how the moonbats have taken over the party. It is equally crazy that more sane old-school Democrats are not fleeing the party...
But.....but.... but what about that "vast majority" of "moderate" muslims who are "peace loving people"? Won't they be able to handle the "tiny minority" of terrorists who have "hijacked the great religion of islam"?
Why do we pretend to be at peace with a "moderate islam" that does not exist? Exactly what islamic country on earth isn't already a "Disneyland of terrorists"?
You're confusing political expediency for policy. No matter who is elected in 2008, 2012, ad infinitum, the US will be in Iraq for the next 50+ years.
We still have bases in the UK, Germany, Turkey, Okinawa, Korea, et al. We'll be in Iraq as long as we're dependent on ME oil.
All three nations you mentioned have substantial islamic terror problems, especially India. But Russia has a big terrorist problem too, they just don't like to talk about it much while they try to crush Chechnya and keep their own muslim population appeased. Even China finds itself trying to keep the peace with its jihadi citizens. So what do you want to do, wait until it's too late and then face the problem?
If India, Russia and China were as worried as we are about world Jidad they would have troops in Iraq before it’s ‘too late’.
Yes, but UK, Germany, Turkey, Okinawa, etc. are not hostile territory, with roadside bombs planted here and there.
Of course, the UK and the EU could always send troops.:
___________________________
Hah, hah, hee, hee, ohhhh boy! Hee, hee, hee!
Here we go again. Getting egged into a silly “what if” scenario by the Euro-trash British MSM.
Iraq already is an “terrorist Disneyland” and so is the entire world if factual accounts are really added up.
We have deliberately kept the Coalition participation low key and minimized all along. Brits have had a valuable role, but since many of the EU nations are actually aiding terrorism in the Middle East, they are already part of our enemy in real defacto terms.
We must learn not to be “energized “ by the Euro-slime media and their propaganda.
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.