Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Campfire Soapbox. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Do We Really Need To Fear Al Qaida This Much?
Topic Started: Oct 28 2004, 03:51 PM (257 Views)
telcoman
Member Avatar
Member
It has occured to me that hardly anyone had heard of Al Qaida before 911. It seems that a lot of terrorist attacks have been atributed to them since then, such as the Madrid bombing, but was it really Al Qaida? It seems to me that Al Qaida grew out of the Russian Afghan war & its leader Osama Bin Ladin is in hiding & surely unable to control an organization supposedly as large as this is rumored to be. My opinion is that the name, has in effect become francised, sort of like a KFC operation, where scattered terror groups around the world have taken on the lable. If so, possibly the ability of this group to mount another major attack like 911 is not as great as we are led to believe, because the organization is not as organized as we have been led to believe. That may explain why there has been no other major attack on US soil in the last 4 years, & uncovered plots have always (as far as we know) involved relatively small operations, certainly not on the scale of 911. If this is the case, this is both good & bad. Bad because taking out Osama, will not kill Al Qaida. Good because we may not have to fear another 911 for a long time to come. Opinions?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
corky52
Member
In a high energy, closely linked, high mobility society such as ours, with readily available sources of energy we will always be vulnerable to a small group bent on terror. This is especially true when you add the propensity for suicide to the equation. AQ and 9/11 showed it can be done and the damage it can cause, others will follow, the genie is out of the bottle.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cmoehle
Member Avatar
Chris - San Antonio TX
I remember it must have been 60 Minutes reporting on Bin Laden in Afghanistan back when we supported those closely tied to him.

I remember bombings in the 90s but not the mention of Al Queda.

IIRC, according to the 9/11 Commission Report, AQ did not come about until like you say, Paul, after the defeat of the Russians.

I think, too, you have to keep in mind AQ is a relatively small group. Terrorism is represented by a myriad of similar small cells loosely link in what Bush calls a shadowy network.

The defeat of the Russians was likely a great boost in morale and gave them a figurehead in UBL. The Report goes into some detail how after that they loosely linked cells united behind common cause and efforts.

Not to diminish the very real terror they wreak, but as an organization they are much more like organized crime of years past in the US than any kind of army, not even a geurilla army like we are used to fighting in various small wars.

So loosely organized that, as you say, taking out one or two or even the greatly exaggerated 75% of AQ is virtually meaningless as there are more to take there places.

They will strike again, here. No President alone can stop that.
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order.
--Barry Goldwater
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jrf
Member Avatar
Member
You don't hear the Taliban mentioned much anymore.

Just prior to "attacking" Afghanistan we were priming for a war on terror against terrorists. I was always dismayed to hear the focus continually narrowed down to Al Quida, then the Taliban in Afghanistan, then Osama Bin Laden. It just got worse and worse considering the plane dudes were mostly Saudi's.

My hope was we go after them anywhere they are with whatever it takes to get them. It was my understanding that "if you weren't with us, you were against us" meaning to me that if the terrorists are in your border, you take them out or we will.

It didn't work that way at all. We're tip toeing thru the poppies because Musharif might get ousted by his own people if we go into Pakistan.

I don't think Fear AQ is the appropriate phrase. Awareness is in order. We are "at war" with them and it is our mission to hunt them down and kill or capture them. And that for good reason.

Oh well at least our prisons are bulging at the seams with those we've captured, tried, convicted, and placed on death row. So far have we convicted anyone other than one American? How about that guy that is defending himself? Don't hear about him anymore.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
corky52
Member
Joel,

Kill or capture????

I vote for KILL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hurt Americans and Die!!!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jrf
Member Avatar
Member
Correction

Kill em or send em to Corky's house.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
corky52
Member


Run up the Black Flag!!!!! No mercy, No quater, No prisoners.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cmoehle
Member Avatar
Chris - San Antonio TX
Taliban ran for president in Afgahnistan. IIRC, one of them garnered the second highest number of votes. Taliban are just trial warlord worldly weary I suppose but not worldly wise.
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order.
--Barry Goldwater
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tomdrobin
Member
We shouldn't fear El Quida. But, should be vigilant and prepared to meet the threat they pose. They were well known in our government prior to 9-11, but the average american wasn't that familiar with the name because they hadn't launched an attack on our soil. With the sleeper cells not much organization is required on a large scale. If anything, disruption of their funding has probably helped most in limiting their activity. But, we shouldn't let our guard down. They are very patient and will wait a long time and then strike when we least suspect it.
If you kill a terrorist, there will always be another to take their place. We have to get at the root cause of the problem. Which IMO is a combination of religious fanaticism and lack of political power for the people.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bikemanb
Member Avatar
Liberal Conservative
While there is always danger that I could be injured or killed in an attack the way I travel around the country, I figure I have a better chance of being hit by a meteorite.

Hopefully the fools on Wall Street will learn that the flayings of the market after 9/11 helped AQ more and truth be known was probably their true intent more than the bodycount. The view us as living solely for material things and thus that is the way to hurt us the most.
Bill, Rita and Chloe the Terror Cat

For having lived long, I have experienced many instances of being obliged, by better information or fuller consideration, to change opinions, even on important subjects, which I once thought right but found to be otherwise.

Benjamin Franklin
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cmoehle
Member Avatar
Chris - San Antonio TX
So how do we fight terrorism?

I hear hunting them down. I hear interrupting their financing--could easily add interrupting their communications, transportation.

Dealing with the root cause? Spreading free market and democracy is a grand notion.
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order.
--Barry Goldwater
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
« Previous Topic · Soapbox · Next Topic »
Add Reply