Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film

Think Tank: Iraq War Distracted U.S.

Old 10-11-04, 10:48 PM
  #1  
Admin-Thanos
Thread Starter
 
VinVega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
Posts: 31,590
Think Tank: Iraq War Distracted U.S.

Yahoo Link
By MARK LAVIE, Associated Press Writer

TEL AVIV, Israel - The war in Iraq (news - web sites) did not damage international terror groups, but instead distracted the United States from confronting other hotbeds of Islamic militancy and actually "created momentum" for many terrorists, a top Israeli security think tank said in a report released Monday.

President Bush (news - web sites) has called the war in Iraq an integral part of the war on terrorism, saying that deposed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) hoped to develop unconventional weapons and could have given them to Islamic militants across the world.

But the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University said that instead of striking a blow against Islamic extremists, the Iraq war "has created momentum for many terrorist elements, but chiefly al-Qaida and its affiliates."

Jaffee Center director Shai Feldman said the vast amount of money and effort the United States has poured into Iraq has deflected attention and assets from other centers of terrorism, such as Afghanistan (news - web sites).

The concentration of U.S. intelligence assets in Iraq "has to be at the expense of being able to follow strategic dangers in other parts of the world," he said.

Shlomo Brom, a retired Israeli army general, said the U.S.-led effort was strategically misdirected. If the goal in the war against terrorism is "not just to kill the mosquitos but to dry the swamp," he said, "now it's quite clear" that Iraq "is not the swamp."

Instead, he said, the Iraq campaign is having the opposite effect, drawing Islamic extremists from other parts of the world to join the battle.

"On a strategic level as well as an operational level," Brom concluded, "the war in Iraq is hurting the war on international terrorism."

In other findings, Jaffee Center experts disagreed with the Israeli government's statements that its four-year struggle against Palestinian militants is part of the world fight against Islamic terrorism.

Yoram Schweitzer, who wrote the chapter about the Iraq war, said the local conflict is a "national struggle," while international Islamic militant groups like al-Qaida target not only Israel but also the entire Western world.

After interviewing Palestinian militants, including some in prison, Schweitzer said they do not consider themselves part of the al-Qaida campaign. "Many of them are critical of Al-Qaida and its methods," he told a news conference.

The Jaffee report found that Israel has succeeded in reducing Palestinian violence against Israelis.

Feldman said the motivation of Palestinian militants to attack the country remained unchanged, but praised the work of military intelligence in preventing many attacks.

"The only reason these (anti-terror) operations succeed is that we have better intelligence," he said.

Feldman said the weekend attacks in the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula aimed at places where Israelis gather did not figure in to the assessment. Thirteen Israelis were among at least 34 people killed in two car bomb attacks Thursday.

"We regard the attacks in the Sinai in a different category," he said, likening it to an attack at a hotel in Mombasa, Kenya, last year that killed 10, including three Israelis.

The report includes statistical breakdowns of the military forces and their capabilities in the Middle East, as well as analyses of regional issues.
VinVega is offline  
Old 10-11-04, 10:51 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: PDX Metro
Posts: 8,953
Bah. Fuck Israel. What do they know about Terrorism?

Don't they know that the United States is safer now?
Tsar Chasm is offline  
Old 10-11-04, 10:54 PM
  #3  
Admin-Thanos
Thread Starter
 
VinVega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
Posts: 31,590
You know we were going to start an otter think tank. What ever happened to that?
VinVega is offline  
Old 10-11-04, 10:56 PM
  #4  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: PDX Metro
Posts: 8,953
Originally posted by VinVega
You know we were going to start an otter think tank. What ever happened to that?
The liberals thought the tank was for swimming, the conservatives thought it was for shooting and the libertarians thought it was one of those sensory depravation tanks.
Tsar Chasm is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 12:48 AM
  #5  
Moderator
 
nemein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: 1bit away from total disaster
Posts: 34,141
Wait I thought we were fighting this war for Israel... now they are turning their back on us


Seriously I guess I can see the point they are trying to make but IMHO at some point we needed to "step up" the WoT and show people that we were serious about it. Had we just stopped at Afghanistan I suspect we would be almost in the same place we are now wrt the world "popularity"[1] and SH would still be in power (and probably harboring refugees from Afghanistan).


[1] The sympathy from 9/11 was already starting to wane before Iraq really became an issue. Since we would still have been harping on Iraq, even w/o the threat of going in, we still most likely would have "isolated" Framany/Russia as much as we did by going in. Things are probably a little worse off (regarding relations) but I still contend trade relations have been a bigger problem overall than Iraq. Regarding our current "standing" w/ the terrorists they hardly need an excuse to join the cause. So while recruiting maybe up it just means the WoT (which has been going on pretty much since the end of the cold war) has finally been engaged by both sides. Personally I think it's about time the world "woke up" (as much as I hate that phrase ).
nemein is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 02:54 AM
  #6  
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Stars
Posts: 1,330
Originally posted by nemein
Had we just stopped at Afghanistan
Well, it might have been a good idea to finish things up in Afghanistan before moving on. And I don't think any administration would have 'stopped' there but I also don't think that moving forward with the GWOT = war with Iraq.
Captain Pike is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 03:19 AM
  #7  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 23,460
Originally posted by nemein
Wait I thought we were fighting this war for Israel...
So now we're doing this for israel? WMDs? Democracy to Iraq? 9/11 revenge? Terrorists? Links to Al Queda? Geez, pick a reason and stick with it.
Trigger is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 06:44 AM
  #8  
Moderator
 
nemein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: 1bit away from total disaster
Posts: 34,141
Well, it might have been a good idea to finish things up in Afghanistan before moving on. And I don't think any administration would have 'stopped' there but I also don't think that moving forward with the GWOT = war with Iraq.
Didn't we make agreements/plans/obligations w/ our allies to help finish things in Afghanistan? Are you saying that they need a baby sitter in order to do anything? Sure more US troops may have helped but we had a lot of committments on the books, I guess the thing to check is to see who lived up and who (if any) didn't.

Regarding Iraq, even if you don't think it was related to terrorism at the onset it certainly has become related to it now. Whether for better or worse remains to be seen.
nemein is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 06:45 AM
  #9  
Moderator
 
nemein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: 1bit away from total disaster
Posts: 34,141
Originally posted by Trigger
So now we're doing this for israel? WMDs? Democracy to Iraq? 9/11 revenge? Terrorists? Links to Al Queda? Geez, pick a reason and stick with it.


Just in case you thought I was serious (I don't believe you do) I was just regurgitating one of the plethora of conspiracy theories that is out there.
nemein is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 07:33 AM
  #10  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 52,503
In order to fight future countries on the subject of terrorism, we need areas to land our troops and rally them.

Before Iraq, it was very difficult because Middle Eastern countries would not support us or changed their minds at the last moment.

Now, we have a nice big airport which can reach ME countries.
DVD Polizei is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 08:42 AM
  #11  
Admin-Thanos
Thread Starter
 
VinVega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
Posts: 31,590
Originally posted by DVD Polizei
In order to fight future countries on the subject of terrorism, we need areas to land our troops and rally them.

Before Iraq, it was very difficult because Middle Eastern countries would not support us or changed their minds at the last moment.

Now, we have a nice big airport which can reach ME countries.
Airports in Greece and Turkey could do just as well to reach the ME as airports in Iraq.
VinVega is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 09:22 AM
  #12  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 36,981
Originally posted by VinVega
You know we were going to start an otter think tank. What ever happened to that?
we need funding. you want to fund us?
Venusian is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 09:49 AM
  #13  
Admin-Thanos
Thread Starter
 
VinVega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
Posts: 31,590
Originally posted by Venusian
we need funding. you want to fund us?
Who do I look like to you, George Soros?

Notice how I wasn't asked to be IN the think tank. Perhaps I could buy my way in if I become the wealthy benefactor.
VinVega is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 09:55 AM
  #14  
DVD Talk Hero
 
CRM114's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 42,731
Funny. The CRM114 Thinktank came to the same conclusion a year ago.
CRM114 is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 10:09 AM
  #15  
Premium Member
 
bfrank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: So. Cal
Posts: 20,623
wow- the article has been my position from the beginning.

(CRM - yeap! )
bfrank is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 10:28 AM
  #16  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...e.asp?ID=15486
What Would Zarqawi Be Doing if He Weren't in Iraq?
By Dennis Prager
FrontPageMagazine.com | October 12, 2004

The most frequently offered argument of Sen. John Kerry and other antiwar Democrats to support their charge that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake is that Iraq has become a den of terrorists.

This claim is true. But it completely undermines the Democrats' charge that invading Iraq was a mistake.

They say this: There are far more terrorists in Iraq since the invasion, and, therefore, the invasion was a mistake.

Yet, in order to believe that the greater number of terrorists in Iraq means the invasion was a mistake, you have to believe one or both of the following -- that were it not for the invasion, the terrorists who are in Iraq would have been engaged in some peaceful work in some other country, or that they are newly minted terrorists who were perhaps selling shoes prior to the war in Iraq.

Neither scenario makes sense.

Take the leading terrorist -- the Jordanian butcher of human beings, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Everyone acknowledges he was a terrorist before the war in Iraq. In the 1990s, he spent seven years in a Jordanian prison for plotting to overthrow the government and establish an Islamic state. He then went to Germany, where he set up a terrorist cell.

So here's the question that apparently goes unasked of all the Democrats who are sure it is President Bush who lacks intelligence: What would Zarqawi be doing now if he were not slaughtering people in Iraq? Selling used cars in Amman? Playing cello in the Berlin Philharmonic?


The president has said from the beginning that a major reason for invading Iraq was to bring the war to the terrorists, and that if we don't fight them on their soil, we will have to fight them on ours. Therefore, unless one posits that Zarqawi and other Arab sadists would be doing nice things elsewhere, their presence in Iraq seems to vindicate the president entirely -- that they would be busy in the West if they were not kept busy defending their very lives in Iraq.

It is sad that this obvious point is not constantly repeated when Democrats make what they believe is some unassailable point about the influx of terrorists into Iraq.

Which raises a variation on this theme: Why are so many Arab and other Muslim terrorists in Iraq? The point that Iraq has become a terrorist haven is made so often by critics of the war in Iraq that these critics must think it is a self-evident argument against the war.

But this point is as weak as the first. The fact that many terrorists have flocked to Iraq argues what, exactly?

No one ever quite says. Because the only argument against the war suggested by this fact is that all the terrorists flocking into Iraq are new recruits -- Arabs and Iranians who left their accounting firms to blow up themselves and Iraqi children because America invaded Iraq and deposed Saddam Hussein.

There is no evidence offered to prove that contention, however. And it defies common sense. As Charles Krauthammer pointed out after we invaded Afghanistan, unlike before the invasion, there were no more Osama t-shirts being sold in Pakistan; people love winners, and Osama was finally losing. Recruits to Muslim terror are made by Muslims who preach evil in God's name and by terrorist victories, not by America fighting back.

Just as in the first case, the claim is true, but it undermines the charge.

The claim that there are more, indeed many, terrorists in Iraq now is true. But the terrorists are there because they know that if America prevails in establishing a relatively free country where there once stood an America-hating terrorist-supporting Arab regime, they are ultimately doomed. Liberals love to find out the root causes of sociopathological behaviors. Well, one root cause of Islamic terror is the hermetically sealed Arab-Muslim world. Open that up to even some freedom, and the cesspool that produces the terrorist monsters begins to dry up.

That is why so many terrorists have moved to Iraq. They agree with President Bush -- the War on Terror is taking place in Iraq.
bhk is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 10:30 AM
  #17  
Moderator
 
Geofferson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: The Village Green
Posts: 39,186
Good article bhk. Prags was talking about this the other day on his radio show.

Last edited by Geofferson; 10-12-04 at 10:34 AM.
Geofferson is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 10:44 AM
  #18  
Admin-Thanos
Thread Starter
 
VinVega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
Posts: 31,590
The reason Iraq is a hotbed for terrorism now is because they don't have to be funded to the same extent to get to the US, create terror cells and all that crap. They can just walk across the desert, grab an AK-47 or a roadside bomb and go to work. We've made it infinitely cheaper for the terrorists to get their message out and they're now doing in on a daily basis.

Plus, there might have been a radical Islamist fence sitter who didn't intend to join up with a clown like Al-Sadr, but now that he sees "infadel" troops in his backyard, he grabs a gun and goes after the westerners. He would never have been a threat because he did not have the means to make it to a western country and blow himself up.

Last edited by VinVega; 10-12-04 at 10:46 AM.
VinVega is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 10:46 AM
  #19  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
The question that Prager asks is what would they be doing now if there was no iraq to go to?
bhk is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 10:49 AM
  #20  
Admin-Thanos
Thread Starter
 
VinVega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Caught between the moon and NYC
Posts: 31,590
Originally posted by bhk
The question that Prager asks is what would they be doing now if there was no iraq to go to?
They'd probably be heading to Afghanistan, just like they did in the 1980's when the Soviets occupied the country. But, at least that was a war that the world was behind us on.
VinVega is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 10:53 AM
  #21  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
They'd probably be heading to Afghanistan, just like they did in the 1980's when the Soviets occupied the country. But, at least that was a war that the world was behind us on.
So they would still be attacking US soldiers and innocent civilians.
bhk is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 11:00 AM
  #22  
DVD Talk Ruler
 
General Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 21,431
Originally posted by bhk
So they would still be attacking US soldiers and innocent civilians.
.. and Saddam would still be in power killing 25k people a year, working on his weapons programs, and invading his neighbor countries while at the same time paying terrorists to kill Americans.
General Zod is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 11:03 AM
  #23  
bhk
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Right of Atilla The Hun
Posts: 19,749
Saddam would still be in power
"Not necessarily..."
bhk is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 11:13 AM
  #24  
Moderator
 
Geofferson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: The Village Green
Posts: 39,186
Originally posted by bhk
"Not necessarily..."
Geofferson is offline  
Old 10-12-04, 11:13 AM
  #25  
DVD Talk Ruler
 
General Zod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 21,431
Originally posted by bhk
"Not necessarily..."
Oh yeah, I forgot. The bribed countries on the U.N. council were just this close to ordering that the U.N. force Saddam from power.
General Zod is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.