Thread: Seventeen years after Sept. 11, Al Qaeda

Seventeen years after Sept. 11, Al Qaeda may be stronger than ever

In the days after Sept. 11, 2001, the United States set out to destroy Al Qaeda. President George W. Bush vowed to “starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest.”

Seventeen years later, Al Qaeda may be stronger than ever. Far from vanquishing the extremist group and its associated “franchises,” critics say, U.S. policies in the Mideast appear to have encouraged its spread.

What U.S. officials didn’t grasp, said Rita Katz, director of the SITE intelligence group, in a recent phone interview, is that Al Qaeda is more than a group of individuals. “It’s an idea, and an idea cannot be destroyed using sophisticated weapons and killing leaders and bombing training camps,” she said.

The group has amassed the largest fighting force in its existence. Estimates say it may have more than 20,000 militants in Syria and Yemen alone. It boasts affiliates across north Africa, the Levant and parts of Asia, and it remains strong around the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.
It has also changed tactics.

Instead of the headline-grabbing terrorist attacks, brutal public executions and slick propaganda used by Islamic State (Al Qaeda’s one-time affiliate and now rival), Al Qaeda now practices a softer approach, embedding itself and gaining the support of Sunni Muslims inside war-torn countries.

Here’s a look at how Al Qaeda has grown in some key Middle Eastern countries:

Read more
Seventeen years after Sept. 11, Al Qaeda may be stronger than ever

Originally Posted by Klondyke

It’s an idea, and an idea cannot be destroyed using sophisticated weapons and killing leaders and bombing training camps

Indeed. Simular to Rome's failure to rid the world of those pesky christians.

Originally Posted by Klondyke

What U.S. officials didn’t grasp, said Rita Katz, director of the SITE intelligence group, in a recent phone interview, is that Al Qaeda is more than a group of individuals. “It’s an idea, and an idea cannot be destroyed using sophisticated weapons and killing leaders and bombing training camps,” she said.

Al-qaeda is not an idea. It is a group (or groups) of people. Salafism is an idea. You cannot totally destroy the idea of salafism but you can certainly shoot, bomb and kill salafists and members of al-qaeda.

Originally Posted by david44

WIKILEAKS founder Julian Assange today said the CIA was responsible for paving the way for ISIS

The same was said by UK ex-FM Robin Cook in Parliament, few weeks before his surprise death...

Originally Posted by david44

Wahabi DHabi Don't

Of course there are alternate narraitives.

Cui bono is always the zinger.

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/al-...h-relationship

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...76100802670803

https://www.rferl.org/a/iran-accusat.../26636912.html

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world...Julian-Assange

'CIA created ISIS', says Julian Assange as Wikileaks releases 500k US cables

WIKILEAKS founder Julian Assange today said the CIA was responsible for paving the way for ISIS as the whistle blowing organisation released more than half a million formerly confidential US diplomatic cables dating back to 1979.

I hope to but haven't read the WikiLeaks cables, guessing that they offer the most accurate of all pictures, and certainly more accurate than anything coming from the media, Hollywood, 'experts' or govs.

But filling around what may be common knowledge or fiction, the Americans had al-Baghdadi among some 100k hardened detainees flowing through Camp Bucca (Buka) in Iraq, didn't know what to do with them, al-Baghdadi was already gaining popularity with talk of a Caliphate and openly fomenting collective resistance; but it wasn't polite to off him with so many witnesses. He was there about 5 years, and turns out 9 top members of the Islamic State were also there at the same time, so add the numbers and see what you get, though a clue may be had by one commentator on the scene describing Bucca as a terror uni.

The Americans had more or less lost control over the camp and couldn't maintain minimum acceptable standards under increasingly critical scrutiny from several quarters brandishing various treaties and charters built on western niceties. So the Obama admin decided the cool thing would be to back off and hand the entire package to the Iraqis, probably knowing they would do the logical thing for that place and time though a bit daft with hindsight, which was to empty the camp and release thousands of fighters for the front line against the Americans, or what was left of the Coalition by then. UK Independent estimates that 90% returned to the fight.

And from there it goes in all directions all at once.

Could be spot on or nothing of the sort, and based on stuff we could never know and can only ever stitch together from various unreliable sources, which imho doesn't include Wiki.

[QUOTE=HuangLao;3823553


And yet, still don't recognize the greatest terrorist threat.[/QUOTE]

What terririst threat would that be Jeff? Kindly elucidate and educate us mere mortals please.

If one is interested in delving into the more esoteric aspects of the events of September 11, 2001, these two books are a good start.



A quote from book #2 by the author S.K. Bain:

9/11 wasn't simply a black op; it was that, and more. Highly compelling evidence shows beyond a reasonable doubt that the perpetrators of this massive criminal act not only employed a broad range of sophisticated psychological warfare tactics, but, even more disturbingly, incorporated a wide variety of occult symbols and other esoteric elements into multiple levels of the event.

This implies the ability to manipulate, to control, on such an enormous scale that it is beyond what most people are prepared to accept. It so strongly conflicts with our perceptions of reality that we dare not even contemplate it.

Unfortunately the evidence points to a worst-case scenario....(The) picture that emerges is that of 9/11 as an ultra-powerful mind-control and propaganda weapon---a psychological warfare tool of enormous proportions---infused with techno-sorcery and deep-level occult programming. 9/11 was a global MegaRitual, and the painstakingly reconstructed occult script for the event contained herein convincingly shows this.

Farrell in book #1 describes Bain's thesis... "9/11 as a Textbook, or Grimoire, of High Magical Ritual"




https://www.amazon.com/Hidden-Financ.../dp/1939149630




https://www.amazon.com/Most-Dangerou.../dp/1937584178

Originally Posted by HuangLao

Foreign policy blowback.

Historically copious.

Dipperly Doculas.

Originally Posted by SKkin

If one is interested in delving into the more esoteric aspects of the events of September 11, 2001, these two books are a good start.

Didn't post on this thread to argue, rant, rave or even discuss....been there, done that.

Just dropping breadcrumbs for those who might be interested.




couldn't be arsed to dig out even more of the books(and take pics) I have regarding this subject...

The war on drugs didn't get the desired effect, so make another war.

New U.S. commander in Afghanistan says we're going on offense against the Taliban

In his first interview as commander, Gen. Scott Miller says the more aggressive posture was needed because of heavy casualties among Afghan forces.

KABUL, Afghanistan — When Gen. Scott Miller took over the war in Afghanistan on Sept. 2, Afghan soldiers were being killed and wounded at near record numbers.

He instituted a more aggressive policy of helping the Afghan military track and defeat the Taliban — what he calls "regaining the tactical initiative" — but in an exclusive interview with NBC News on Tuesday, his first since taking command of U.S. and coalition forces here, he also says he recognizes that the solution in Afghanistan will be political, not military.

"This is not going to be won militarily," Miller said. "This is going to a political solution."

"My assessment is the Taliban also realizes they cannot win militarily. So if you realize you can't win militarily at some point, fighting is just, people start asking why. So you do not necessarily wait us out, but I think now is the time to start working through the political piece of this conflict."

Speaking from the Resolute Support headquarters building in Kabul, Miller said he knew early on that he needed to turn the tables on the Taliban and go after them.

"We are more in an offensive mindset and don't wait for the Taliban to come and hit [us]," he said. "So that was an adjustment that we made early on. We needed to because of the amount of casualties that were being absorbed."

Afghan Security Forces suffered 1,000 casualties in August and September, according to the Pentagon.

---

"This is my last assignment as a soldier in Afghanistan. I don't think they'll send me back here in another grade. When I leave this time I'd like to see peace and some level of unity as we go forward." Miller said peace here "makes it much easier to safeguard our vital national interests in the region."

During his previous tours in Afghanistan, Miller got to know Afghan Gen. Abdul Raziq, a powerful Afghan police leader. Two weeks ago, Miller was near Raziq when one of his bodyguards opened fire on a group of Afghan and U.S. military leaders in the governor's compound in Kandahar, killing Raziq. Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Smiley, the U.S. general who oversees the NATO advisory mission in southern Afghanistan, and an unidentified civilian were also wounded.

Miller doesn't believe he was a target. "I was not on the gun line," he said. "If it had gone on would the rest of us become part of the gunline? That's possible."

Miller called Razik "a friend and a partner" and "somebody I knew very well." But, once again, Miller saw the attack through a lens of pragmatism.

"He knew he was at risk. We all know we're at risk. It's Afghanistan."

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/militar...ffense-n926431

Originally Posted by Klondyke

New U.S. commander in Afghanistan says we're going on offense against the Taliban

I thought we already defeated them...NYT and the Pentagon said so.

https://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/11/w...s-but-war.html

Three months after the attacks on America and nine weeks after bombs began falling on Afghanistan, a senior-level Pentagon official said for the first time today that the Taliban government had been defeated.

Originally Posted by SKkin

I thought we already defeated them...NYT and the Pentagon said so.

https://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/11/w...s-but-war.html

Well they did win that battle.

They just didn't win the war. And they were never going to. FFS the Russians tried and they went home with their tails between their legs.

Bush 'Not Concerned' About Bin Laden in '02 - latimes

I'm no fan of Bush but it's easy to see how that quote has been taken out of context.

The banner... well that's stupid no matter the context, but that meme is conflating the two for effect.

^yes

...Fair enough then!

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Well they did win that battle.

They just didn't win the war. And they were never going to. FFS the Russians tried and they went home with their tails between their legs.

And that's saying something, after what the Russians accomplished in WW2, so many years before

Originally Posted by Klondyke

"This is not going to be won militarily," Miller said. "This is going to a political solution."

or they could just fcuk over the pakis who are supporting the tali

Ain't there a passage where I an't taking the sausage?

Originally Posted by baldrick

or they could just fcuk over the pakis who are supporting the tali

They have nukes, thanks to our Saudi mates, so regardless of lost lives the US/EU are between two hard places. Could talk about tactics, but that's pointless when the strategic goal appears to rely on procrastination, cheques, tightly closed eyes and crossed fingers.

Should warm up a bit when Iran reaches its nuclear goal, which will prompt other states in the region to tool up; then toss a coin for who launches first.

Originally Posted by jabir

Should warm up a bit when Iran reaches its nuclear goal, which will prompt other states in the region to tool up; then toss a coin for who launches first.

Nuke the world. Too many humans. Time for a good culling.