Reply With Quote
"Saudi government"
Just like in the USA, the citizens aren't unanimously in agreement with the govt. OBL and his guys obviously didn't "agree" to US military occupation of SA.
This goes against the Pape theory.
"Saudi government"
Just like in the USA, the citizens aren't unanimously in agreement with the govt. OBL and his guys obviously didn't "agree" to US military occupation of SA.
How? It actually would show that OBL himself was a subscriber to a form of Pape's theory.
Pape theory is that US military presence in the Mideast = Suicide Bombers
OBL, utilizing suicide bombers would apparently NOT want US troops in the ME; the argument presented was that OBL carried out 9/11 specifically TO get US boots into the Mideast.
Well if the end of the fourth quarter is now then OBL certainly did not get what he wanted as far as long term goals are concerned. But from what I've read of the man I don't think he ever saw the way to eventual victory through 9/11 type attacks or the a simple terrorist organization such as the original AQ.
What Osama has wanted ever since the ousting of the Russians from Afghanistan is to have a strong Muslim army to project power with. He took this goal to the Saudi royal family in an effort to fight Saddam with such an army upon the invasion of Kuwait. The rebuke he felt was stinging and very much personal when they instead turned to the United States. In many ways I think its hard to think that OBL ever got over that and his hatred of the United States undoubtedly grew from that moment. So all in all his personal goals might be quite different from organizational and operational goals of his organization and the motivations for his long term goals are probably separate from AQ's actions.
My whole point with that is that its well do ented that Osama was seeking out a grand war with the United States. His vision was one of a world in which Muslim's rose up against the United States and Israel. He understood the way to do that was to defeat them on his terms as he did in Afghanistan against the USSR. The idea wasn't to cross the ocean and invade the United States but rather invite the United States to the homes of Muslims and there deal them a blow they would feel for a very long time.
It will be interesting to look back in 40 years and see how history views the situation.
Pape's theory is that occupation overall increases the rates of suicide bombers. No where does Pape state that the unequivocal cause of all suicide terror can be traced to occupation.
I would argue that OBL's original AQ and the suicide attacks they carried out would not fall neatly under Pape's theory but also that they shouldn't. Originally prior to 9/11 AQ was an organization that had a large amount of operational prowess. They were able to design and carry out some fairly impressive attacks and they were a very small and compact unit. Now, after the invasion of Afghanistan this organization ceased to exist and instead the ideology of what that organization stood for spread to smaller groups around the world and for various (mostly political reasons) those groups became known as AQ. AQ post 9/11 and AQ pre 9/11 are two completely different animals. That in and of itself - IMO - is the primary reason you've not had an attack of that nature since. The organization was crushed when we invaded Afghanistan and there was no other group out there who could do what they did.
Instead, the invasions - as Pape points out - have caused an increase in suicide terror because they've given a target and motivation to people who would never have picked up the AQ mantle before. Where prior to 9/11 you had a capable and concentrated group of people carrying out these suicide attacks you've now seen the pool of potential suicide terrorists grow as a direct result of foreign occupation.
The Price of 9/11
President George W. Bush’s response to the attacks compromised America’s basic principles, undermined its economy, and weakened its security.
The attack on Afghanistan that followed the 9/11 attacks was understandable, but the subsequent invasion of Iraq was entirely unconnected to Al Qaeda – as much as Bush tried to establish a link. That war of choice quickly became very expensive – orders of magnitude beyond the $60 billion claimed at the beginning – as colossal incompetence met dishonest misrepresentation.
Indeed, when Linda Bilmes and I calculated America’s war costs three years ago, the conservative tally was $3-5 trillion. Since then, the costs have mounted further. With almost 50% of returning troops eligible to receive some level of disability payment, and more than 600,000 treated so far in veterans’ medical facilities, we now estimate that future disability payments and health-care costs will total $600-900 billion. But the social costs, reflected in veteran suicides (which have topped 18 per day in recent years) and family breakups, are incalculable.
Al Qaeda, while not conquered, no longer appears to be the threat that loomed so large in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. But the price paid in getting to this point, in the US and elsewhere, has been enormous – and mostly avoidable. The legacy will be with us for a long time. It pays to think before acting.
http://www.truth-out.org/print/6072
The US defines itself in religious terms?
If the end game is to remove AQ from the face of the earth then we will never win. AQ is no operational group but rather an ideology and methodology of terror. Thats never going back into the bottle.
Not really. Pape is right that the 'natural' reaction to occupation there is suicide bombers. That predates even AQ. AQ simply wanted to use that tool against America, but without occupation, that was not going to happen.
And BTW, mixing suicide bombers and AQ and thinking they're both the same is mistaken. There were suicide bombers way before AQ was even a blimp on the monitor.
Bingo. I'm not sure they envisioned a large campaign of suicide terror or the way it played out but after the lessons many of them learned if Afghanistan I think its fairly undeniable that they wanted to fight the US in the Middle East.
Exactly. I also don't think Pape has ever argued that if you could theoretically eliminate all foreign occupations int he world that the level of suicide terror would drop to zero.
I also disagree with some takes from Pape though. When he says:
"it was easy to presume that Islamic fundamentalism was the central motivating force driving the 19 hijackers to kill themselves in order to kill us"
one can argue that if it wasn't the central motivating force, Islamic fundamentalism was at least a central tool to carry out the attacks.
What I found reading his prior book (which I really recommend) was that he discounts fundamentalism as the direct cause of suicide terror but not as a partial facilitator. It has been some time since I read it, however.
I agree we will not see an airline strike that will cause such devastation. That doesn't mean something else may not happen in the future.
I think we should loosen airport security back to pre 911 levels, just keeping the secure pits in place.
As for what can happen in the future, it seems the government does have good but has somewhat excessive measures in place. We will never be 100% safe. Time to scale back on security a little.
How many terror cells has Obama found in Libya? Were the missing weapons there? If not, why are we involved?
I see...
Are you an insider of terrorist organizations to know this?
I agree.
You have egomaniacs who use religion to gain power. I think it's no more difficult than that. Of course they use such ideas to motivate others, but I doubt they actually believe such things.
he could be. just like you knew where all the nukes were. lol
I knew where they were in the late 80's. They do change locations you know.
so, you lied? go ahead, you can tell them, they know.
I have no idea how your logic operates.
yet, you know this:
You make that as if its a statement of fact, so how do you know it to be true?That book blows away so many of the myths surrounding suicide terrorism.
"OBL carried out 9/11 specifically TO get US boots into the Mideast"
no, to sucker the US into Afghanistan, where the Taleban and friends and earlier generations of Afghanis had success in beating (and bankrupting, St Ronnie didn't do it) the USSR and every other invader. USA is just the latest version of the beaten invader of Afghanistan.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 09-08-2011 at 03:24 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions