 |
Al Qaeda is "considerably operationally stronger than a year ago'' and has "regrouped to an extent not seen since 2001,'' the official said, paraphrasing the report's conclusions. "They are showing greater and greater ability to plan attacks in Europe and the United States.''
Scary isn't it, what I don't understand is why some people seem to be so smugly happy about it… of course many of them have been obstacles in the war on terrorism.
CTV.ca | Al Qaeda has rebuilt itself: intelligence report
You make a good point. I don't think people should be "smugly happy" about this either. As citizens of the U.S. we need not look at this as a Republican failure or Democratic fortune for the next election. Our attention should be on Al Qaeda because they draw from a network of other terrorist recruits that help in their activity and their stronghold is the ability to reload from their own buddy neighbors (see: Syria).Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_crow
Bobby
The real obstacle in the war on Jihadists has been from the beginning, Bush/Cheney Neocon total ignorance of the nature of the problem of Jihadism and their total ignorance of the reality of the complexities of Islam.
Bush/Cheney totally misunderstood how to deal with Jihadism...
Choux
There are no happy endings.
DC ; yeah I heard that all night long during the recent defeat-a-thon held in the Senate .
NIE: Al-Qaida Planning U.S. Attack
There's a surprise.
They had a chance to regroup because they were temporarily given safe haven in N Waziristan. If I judge by the public chatter of their leader Zawahiri then I would be inclined to agree with the conclusion of the NIE that they have the strength that they had pre-Sept. 11 . He has made no less than 10 messages since January on events such as Hamas's takeover of Gaza to the recent siege on a Pakistani mosque. Even that recently released OBL tape looks dated ,and I have read some pretty credible information that it is in fact a 2001 rehash .
I find it difficult to believe that they can run the same type of operation from remote areas of Pakistan that they did when they had state sponsorship .I personally think they lack the central planning that they are given credit for .
They are in Iraq and getting whipped there. Perhaps if I believe that the recent attempts in London were al-Qaeda then I could possibly believe that they had some coordination and control. But I think a lot of what happens in the name of al-Qaeda is at most inspired by the mystique. It's sort of like a thug putting on a Che Guevara tee shirt becomes a revolutionary .
I think it 's a mistake by either Republicans or Democrats to overplay the report .Michael Chertoff should take some Tums and pipe down a little . He sounds ridiculous. His gut feeling is a burrito he ate when he was the chief stooge for President Bush during the immigration debate.
Guys if you want to hear about some scary terrorists living right at home please watch this movie. The beginning is a little boring but I swear it will change your life a bit Zeitgeist - The Movie, 2007 It's zeitgeist the movie, and its all free online because people are trying to spread the word.
Frankly I find it lacks credibility, first the report is classified, and we don't know the context of the statement, “operating capability.” Then there is the 'Propaganda' angle that very often accompanies these kinds of information releases. When I add to that the number of Al Qaeda leaders that have been killed or captured, and the money channels that have been closed down…I have my doubts.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
My issue is with the people who seem to relish the idea because they are anti- Bush
Crow, "My country right or wrong"??
That's what the Germans said in the 1930-1940's.
Choux
There are no happy endings.
I don’t know what to make of your comments; given that I don’t trust any government and especially bureaucrats :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Choux
Guys there are tons more non-terrorists than terrorists so why aren't we doing anything? We need to ban together but it seems like the people who ban together and get organized are the haters (like whitesupremict groups) or people in caves that are crazy enough to make plenty of homevideos with everything we want to hear about their confessions concerning 9/11. : ) wow we hardly needed to investigate! Case closed!
Here are some lines I used to hear in the old days when it looked like the enemy was regrouping...
"I hate it when there are so many enemies. I never know who to shoot first."
"Don't think of it as there being too many enemies... think of it as a target-rich environment."
"Lot's of enemies, a Robar .50, and a six pack... it's happy making."
"Uh, oh, the enemy is regrouping and calling in reinforcements. We should call in the other Marine so they can both take care of it."
Do I sound worried?
Look, the enemy is in hiding. They are underfunded and outgunned. If they try to take us in a straight fight, we win and they die. If they hide, we find them and they die. If they manage to attack us with a terrorist attack, we get pissed and they die.
The enemy cannot hold any land. They have neither the manpower nor the equipment to hold any territory against the US military. Unless they can hold land, the only thing they can do is piss people off. They can kill government leaders. More will be appointed. They can kill soldiers. More will take their place. They can destroy cars and buildings and kill civillians. That only turns the people against them. They cannot win a military victory against us. Therefore, the only way for them to win is for us to give up. So the solution is, don't give up.
Are the enemy regrouping? Possibly. Even probably. But that just makes a bigger target to look for. That many people, most of which will be undertrained, have poor spycraft skills, and will make mistakes, will be easier to find and deal with than the old al Qaeda was. All their most experienced guys are either dead or captured. The rest aren't going to be half the problem the old timers were.
My mom was very active in the 60s. At one point, women were considered the enemy and a lot of conservative groups said similar things to what you are saying.
Did the CIA notify Bill Clinton that they have detected and spotted Osama Bin-Laden before Clinton moved out of the office?
Those are funny lines, Eliot!
It's the election year rabble. These people know how to influence an election. Of course they often aren't just blowing smoke, such as in the Spain train bombings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_crow
Things could go similar to that when it comes right down to the elections. No use worrying - it's not going to change anything.
Bill, the people who act smug about it are so busy doing the "I told you so's" that's all that matters to them. The new reporters are right up there on their high horses since that's been their stance through the whole mess.
Sometimes I wonder if they even recognize through their bitterness, that this is our country and we could all become slaves or die if we don't show strength.
FYI this is a dated posting from a year ago.
Here is a more recent and more accurate op-ed on AQ from Ralph Peters.
AL QAEDA'S MARKET CRASH - New York PostQuote:
IF you think the US markets have problems, look at the value of al Qaeda shares throughout the Muslim world: A high-flying political equity just a few years ago, its stock has tanked. It made the wrong strategic investments and squandered its moral capital.
In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, Osama bin Laden was the darling of the Arab street, seen as the most successful Muslim in centuries. The Saudi royal family paid him protection money, while individual princes handed over cash willingly: Al Qaeda seemed like the greatest thing since the right to abuse multiple wives.
Osama appeared on T-shirts and his taped utterances were awaited with fervent excitement. Recruits flocked to al Qaeda not because of "American aggression," but because, after countless failures, it looked like the Arabs had finally produced a winner.
What a difference a war makes.
Yes, al Qaeda had little or no connection to Saddam Hussein's Iraq - but the terrorists chose to declare that country the main front in their struggle with the Great Satan. Bad investment: Their behavior there was so breathtakingly brutal that they alienated their fellow Muslims in record time.
Fighting enthusiastically beside the once-hated Americans, Iraq's Sunni Muslims turned on the terrorists with a vengeance. Al Qaeda's response? It kept on butchering innocent Muslims, Sunni and Shia alike. Iraq exposed al Qaeda as a fraud.
Where do Osama & Co. stand today? They're not welcome in a single Arab country. The Saudi royals not only cut off their funding, but cracked down hard within the kingdom. A few countries, such as Yemen, tolerate radicals out in the boonies - but they won't let al Qaeda in. Osama's reps couldn't even get extended-stay rooms in Somalia, beyond the borders of the Arab world.
And the Arab in the (dirty) street is chastened. Instead of delivering a triumph, al Qaeda brought disaster, killing far more Arabs through violence and strife than Israel has killed in all its wars. Nobody in the Arab world's buying al Qaeda shares at yesterday's premium - and only a last few suckers are buying at all.
Guess what? We won.
The partisan hacks who insisted that Iraq was a distraction from fighting al Qaeda have missed the situation's irony: Things are getting worse in Afghanistan and Pakistan not because our attention was elsewhere, but because al Qaeda has been driven from the Arab world, with nowhere else to go.
Al Qaeda isn't fighting to revive the Caliphate these days. It's fighting for its life.
Unwelcome even in Sudan or Syria, the Islamist fanatics have retreated to remote mountain villages and compounds on the Pakistani side of the Afghan border. That means Afghanistan's going to remain a difficult challenge for years to come - not a mission-impossible, but an aggravating one.
But we all need to stand back and consider how much we've achieved: A terrorist organization that less than a decade ago had global appeal and reach has been discredited in the eyes of most of the world's billion-plus Muslims.
No one of consequence in the Arab world sees al Qaeda as a winner anymore. Even fundamentalist clerics denounce it. For all of our missteps, Iraq's been worth it.
How is it that the media missed this stunning victory? Will they start to admit it after Nov. 4?
Yes, al Qaeda remains dangerous. It's a wounded hog still grunting down in the canebrake: More innocent people will be gored - and it's going to take a lot of pig-sticking to finish it off.
But I'm proud of one call I made last year: The prediction that the "Sunni flip" in Iraq's Anbar Province marked the high-water mark for al Qaeda. Increasingly, that call looks correct.
Democrats make a great fuss over the Bush administration's failure to capture Osama (although they themselves have no idea how to do so). But it now looks like the judgment of history - after the political rancor has settled into the graves of today's demagogues - will be that the administration of George W. Bush defeated al Qaeda.
Unfortunately Intelligence threat assessments too often are inaccurate or paint a picture for too short a time table . I doubt that the conclusion from a year ago is the same today.
What they probably would say today is that AQ's area of influence has shrunk considerably . But ;there could be an equal threat to mainland US from smaller jihadist cells operating independently... especially from Europe.
Homeland Security chief Chertoff says European terrorists trying to enter US a top concern
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:33 AM. |