|
Study questions US strategy against al-Qaida
|
View this Thread in Original format
| LatinLover |
WASHINGTON - The United States can defeat al-Qaida if it relies less on force and more on policing and intelligence to root out the terror group's leaders, a new study contends.
"Keep in mind that terrorist groups are not eradicated overnight," said the study by the federally funded Rand research center, an organization that counsels the Pentagon.
Its report said that the use of military force by the United States or other countries should be reserved for quelling large, well-armed and well-organized insurgencies, and that American officials should stop using the term "war on terror" and replace it with "counterterrorism."
"Terrorists should be perceived and described as criminals, not holy warriors, and our analysis suggests there is no battlefield solution to terrorism," said Seth Jones, the lead author of the study and a Rand political scientist.
"The United States has the necessary instruments to defeat al-Qaida, it just needs to shift its strategy," Jones said.
Nearly every ally, including Britain and Australia, has stopped using "war on terror" to describe strategy against the group headed by Osama bin Laden and considered responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001 suicide attacks at the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon.
Based on an analysis of 648 terrorist groups that existed between 1968 and 2006, the report concluded that a transition to the political process is the most common way such groups end. But the process, found in 43 percent cases examined, is unlikely with al-Qaida, which has a broad, sweeping agenda, the report said.
The second most common way that terrorist groups end, seen in about 40 percent of the cases, is through police and intelligence services apprehending or killing key leaders, Jones said. Police are particularly effective because their permanent presence in cities helps them gather information, he said.
By contrast, the report said, military force was effective in only 7 percent of the cases.
Jones, in an interview, said, "Even where we found some success against al-Qaida, in Pakistan and Iraq, the military played a background or surrogate role. The bulk of the action was taken by intelligence, police and, in some cases, local forces."
"We are not saying the military should not play a role," he said. "But unless you are talking about large insurgencies, military force should not be the tip of the spear."
Among the report's conclusions:
_Religious terrorist groups take longer to eliminate than other groups but none has achieved victory in the 38 years covered by the study.
_Terrorist groups from upper-income countries are more likely to be left-wing or nationalist, and much less likely to be motivated by religion.
_Large groups of more than 10,000 have been victorious more than 25 percent of the time, while victory is rare for groups with 1,000 or fewer members.
The report described al-Qaida as a "strong and competent organization," both before and after 9-11. Its goals, the report said, are uniting Muslims to fight the United States and its allies, overthrowing regimes in the Middle East friendly to the West and establishing a pan-Islamic state, or caliphate.
SOURCE |
|
|
| LatinLover |
| This is an interesting study. It just reinforces the measure I sometime ago posted in this board, on how to successfully eliminate these radical groups. |
|
|
| Capitalizt |
This is the first article you posted that makes sense Latin. Imagine how much damage we could have done to Al-Queda if the $1 trillion wasted in Iraq and Afghanistan had been poured into intelligence operations..covert missions...infiltration, disruption, etc.
Rather than destroying these groups from within, we mounted Normandy-esque invasions of two muslim countries...and gave Al-Queda all the recruiting ammo they could dream of. |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by LatinLover
This is an interesting study. It just reinforces the measure I sometime ago posted in this board, on how to successfully eliminate these radical groups. |
And contradictory to the other 95% of things that you've posted on Iraq & Afghanistan.
I hate to tell you this, but those awful liberals have been promoting this sort of activity for at least the last 5 years. |
|
|
| LazFX |
| quote: | Originally posted by Groundhog Boy
I hate to tell you this, but those awful liberals have been promoting this sort of activity for at least the last 5 years. |
this is true. |
|
|
| Kinezi |
I think its already too late to defeat the radical groups, which was only a single group before the invasion of Iraq. Now Al-Qaida is no more a radical group but an idea.. and this idea has given birth many groups.
As I said its already too late now.. since the idea has spread and it needs lots of years of damage control.. their is no quick-fix now..
Only quick fix - I say surrender and give Middle East to them. |
|
|
| LatinLover |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kinezi
Only quick fix - I say surrender and give Middle East to them. |
Yeah let the region be a save haven for terrorist so they can come to us.. real good idea :rolleyes: |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by LatinLover
Yeah let the region be a save haven for terrorist so they can come to us.. real good idea :rolleyes: |
By all accounts, there were no terrorist groups in Iraq BEFORE we invaded in 2003. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by LatinLover
Yeah let the region be a save haven for terrorist so they can come to us.. real good idea :rolleyes: |
wow you really think the reason why there hasnt been any attack on US soil is because you are fighting them in their own backyeard right?:rolleyes: |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
By all accounts, there were no terrorist groups in Iraq BEFORE we invaded in 2003. |
What makes you think that wasn't a deliberate intention to begin with? |
|
|
| LatinLover |
| quote: | Originally posted by hardcore trancer
wow you really think the reason why there hasnt been any attack on US soil is because you are fighting them in their own backyeard right?:rolleyes: |
No, many things have contributed for this administration to successfully prevent another attack on our soil. You seem not to get that the US is playing offense and not defense when it comes to hunting down these thugs. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by LatinLover
No, many things have contributed for this administration to successfully prevent another attack on our soil. You seem not to get that the US is playing offense and not defense when it comes to hunting down these thugs. |
Offense as in invading a country which never attacked us? And this offense...still hasn't found Osama...some offense THAT is...:o |
|
|
|
|
