"some" good news
![]() | Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years. Thanks, CNET Support |
Discussion is locked
Why are you trying to give aid and comfort to the enemy? ![]()
Seriously though.
I welcome such reports. The only thing that bothers me is how accurate it really is in saying these folks are Al Qaeda. Our own government has made the case that Al Qaeda is composed of a loose conglomeration of unassociated groups who claim Al Qaeda membership to enhance their profile. That's not to say these groups don't present an extreme danger in many cases. It's just that the Qaeda networks use the same guerilla cell structure that partisan groups always have. Communication between the cells are fast, loose, and possibly non existent in some cases. In short, Al Qaeda is a club anyone can belong to just by saying they're a member.
Certainly a positive spin article and I thank you for sharing it. I just hope it's not another example of the press deciding what the "story" is before they go out to write it.
I'll put this with the "spy squirrels" story
your take is a a given.
But note that you are referring to a small part of the story, not the whole thing.
... but it's a disclaimer saying that the story maybe, in fact, not accurate. That's a pretty significant "small part" in my book.
I was amused/saddened by the part of the report which described many joining the local Qaeda groups because there was no other source of income. This harkens back to the protests by certain strategists over the de-Bathification of the government and the dismantling of the Iraqi army. After VE day the allies used a tribunal system to examine every nazi party member's credentials... forgiving, if you will, those who were members of the hated party but took no part in the real atrocities of the regime. Iraq was much the same, with Bathe party membership being a requisite for employment advancement in most cases. Same with the Iraqi army... just like the differences between the SS and the regular army, there were major differences between the Republican Guard and the the Iraqi regulars. My point being that we took bread out of the mouths of a lot of regular joes who simply went with the next group who offered them jobs. Hind sight is 20/20 but to not mention and discuss past mistakes is... a mistake.
had we screened those we thought would not turn against use you'd be saying the same thing about "mistakes" being made by letting those be involved.
That any and every Bathe party member is always bad? That every Iraqi soldier is an insurgent? If that is what you are saying then quashing the insurgency is as simple as rounding all these folks up and imprisoning them.
It's easy to make the statements you make Duckman. I say "I think we made a mistake here" and you say "you would complain if something else that was bad had occurred". That is exactly my point though. If some mistake is made then you reexamine it, so as to avoid it next time. Duh! Why you seem to want to avoid all critical examination of a discussion topic is beyond me.
Are you saying that al-Qaeda members are paid a salary and a lot of "regular joes" became members to earn that salary?
Disaffected people tend to support those who promise they will take "justice" to the aggressor. A little food, a little money, shelter from the storm, etc.
Do I know how the mechanics of the guerilla pay system works? No. Do you? If you have information to share then please do so.
I would imagine though, that every son and father who volunteers for the fight is one less mouth to feed in a poor family. Not to mention the prestige a family may gain from giving a son for the cause. That sentiment is not so different from the same pride a patriotic family would have for their kids who serve in most parts of the planet.
At the bottom of the article it lists ...
Sources: Times archives; globalsecurity.org
Following the link for GLOBAL SECURITY . ORG gives some very interesting results.
Al qaeda is more likely taking notes to develop even more effective strategies to confront us in the future. Have you forgotten who were fighting, Asama Binladen. Wasn't he once an Afghan freedom fighter ( a group highly praised and supported by President Reagan) and a member of the royal family in Saudi Arabia, one of our closest allies in the middle east? Al qaeda is just laying low, developing reenforcements and regrouping to confront us again. Your post is wishful thinking.