Our Children's Children's War

[jfuh]

Last night on the Discovery Channel this program aired.
Here're the take home messages
Terrorism is a tactic - not an entity.
When they attacked and provoked us, they achieved exactly what they wanted to, by getting us into their war. Through our own fears and insecurities we started to become the very enemy they wanted us to be when we threw out the book on who we were and what we stood for.

Did anyone else watch this? For anyone that didn't I highly recommend it.

 

[jfuh]

Here's a direct quote from the film (sorry if there are inaccuracies as I'm doing it from listening to the replay)

"Suppose we knew exactly what terrorists want us to do, how they want us to respond to their attacks. Would we still do it? Well, to a large extent we know, and yet we do it anyway.
Sometimes the objective of terrorism is, provocation, pure and simple. Over reaction is exactly what terrorism is intended to produce."

Did we over-react? I think we did, and I think we've lost the trust of the world as the leader and representation of who we are.

 

[Iriemon]

I think it is spot on.

The terrorists represent a group of religious radical fundamentalists that most folks wouldn't want running their country.

The best way the radicals can get support for their extreme causes is to create an environment where their religion/culture is perceived as being threatened or violated by an external force. When folks feel threatened/violated they tend to support more extreme leaders. The best way to do that is create war, jihad. That has been Al-Queda's goal for years. They figured if they could goad the US into a war or jihad, Muslims would react in anger and support the radicals and their causes.

So Al-Queda tried for years to provoke the US into a war with their attacks, and score big on 9-11. The US not only invaded Afganistan, but then invaded Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with 9-11, and in fact was headed by a man (Hussein) who represented an obstacle in the radicals' objectives. The result may not have been as grandoise as the radicals hoped, but must have been beyond their dreams. Tens of thousands more have joined or supported the radical's causes, anti-American hatred has been whipped into a frenzy, and they have a fabulous propoganda tool.

Thanks to the bungling of the Bush Administration and its neocon supporters, the US could not have played into their plan any better. Except maybe by invading more countries.

 

[EAGLE1]

Quite right. Terrorism is the poor man's tactic. It is not a strategy for victory but a means to galavnise a population into supporting a group once a wider conflict is engaged in.

Good example. 1916 Ireland.

 

[Cephus]

Our initial attack on Afghanistan was fine, it was a direct response to those who directly caused 9/11 and was an appropriate response, but almost immediately, became a political boondoggle where Bush started nation building and exerting his influence outside of the proper military response to the attack. Iraq was just a complete cluster**** and had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11, except that Bush wanted to go after the guy who tried to kill his daddy and 9/11 gave him the excuse to give it a go, even if he had to lie to the American people about his reasons.

 

[Cephus]

Quite right. Terrorism is the poor man's tactic. It is not a strategy for victory but a means to galavnise a population into supporting a group once a wider conflict is engaged in.

And terrorism is often the last tactic of a desperate people who have had everything else taken away. Those who are likely to engage in terrorist tactics are those who simply cannot compete with their opposition financially, militarily or politically, they take the last option available to them which is guerilla attacks against targets of opportunity, designed to cause both physical, political and emotional damage to the enemy.

That's not to defend terrorism in any way, it's a dispicable method of operations, but it's certainly understandable how a group might come to use it.

 

[Tashah]

Did we over-react? I think we did, and I think we've lost the trust of the world as the leader and representation of who we are.

The immediate response (Afghanistan) to 9/11 was justified and necessary. That said, I also believe the Bush administration did not fully comprehend nor appreciate the subtleties of asymmetric/ideological warfare. IMHO, this initial conceptual shortcoming birthed and nurtured an exponentially deficient war on terror stratagem.