Does the war in Iraq cause more terrorism?

[shecky]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2157116,00.html

THREE years after its invasion of Iraq the US Administration acknowledged yesterday that the war has become “a cause” for Islamic extremists worldwide and there is a risk of the country becoming a safe haven for terrorists hoping to launch fresh attacks on America.

According to CIA data released yesterday, there were 11,111 terrorist incidents last year, killing more than 14,600 non-combatants, including 8,300 in Iraq. Of the 56 American civilians killed by terrorists in 2005, some 47 of them were in Iraq.

News or not? It was always a fear of mine that going after the wrong bad guy could inspire some terrorism. Was this a real worry?

 

[Rob Lister]

Does it help in their recruitment? Short term yes. But even before we were there, there was 9/11 and about a dozen other incidents that we barely responded to.

This culture declared war on the US (and western world as a whole) long before Iraq.

The US has now officially 'engaged' them. I think the location of the battlefield is important. Taking the fight to them is very important. In hindsight, Iran might have been a better battleground, but probably not as stratigically profitable. Look at a map of US control, presence, and influence. Color them red, pink and ...lighter than pink.

Iran is in a sea of red.

 

[Mycroft]

I think if the war in Iraq does cause more terrorism, then an important question to answer would be why and how.

For example, if militant Muslims are inherently offended and inspired to terrorism by the presence of mostly non-Muslim troops in a mostly Muslim nation, then how/if/why should we change our policies in response to this form of Islamist bigotry?

 

[Rob Lister]

I kind of view it as the Pope declaring war on the eastern world. Sadly, this pope is Bin Laden, et al. It isn't 'country' specific, it's 'religion' specific.

How do you fight that?

One square mile, one zeolot at a time.

 

[bob_kark]

The US has now officially 'engaged' them. I think the location of the battlefield is important. Taking the fight to them is very important.

I think this is the important part. We didn't really take the fight to "them." We took the fight to a country that, while not a friend of the US, was not a terrorist haven. We were already in Afghanistan, where we could have taken the fight to "them." Instead, we sent in a token force, scattered a government of hooligans, and allowed the real threat to live to fight another day. However, I suppose this point is moot now as we've already wasted our chance.

The war in Iraq will continue to cause more terrorism in the short term. However, if we are somehow able to keep a civil war from erupting and are able to leave Iraq somewhat stable, we may stand a chance of curbing this trend.

 

[Rob Lister]

I've got no major disagreement with your analysis. I just think there is a bigger picture they are going for. The colored map of the middle east is/was a powerful decider for me that we are going about it in a ...thoughtful... way.

It's risky.

 

[bob_kark]

We're fighting a war of perception. I think my fear about the current situation is that we've invaded two countries in the ME and are threatening a third. I hate to take the risk of leaving the wrong impression for the more moderate muslims when we have more viable alternatives. Or rather had.

 

[Rob Lister]

We're fighting a war of perception. I think my fear about the current situation is that we've invaded two countries in the ME and are threatening a third. I hate to take the risk of leaving the wrong impression for the more moderate muslims when we have more viable alternatives. Or rather had.

What would those more viable alternatives include?

 

[bob_kark]

What would those more viable alternatives include?

Well, again, this is past tense. I believe our war was in Afghanistan. However, I won't waste anymore time brooding on it as it is completely irrelevant to our current situation. For now, I believe we simply need to do our best to focus on regaining some control in Iraq.

 

[Rob Lister]

Well, again, this is past tense. I believe our war was in Afghanistan. However, I won't waste anymore time brooding on it as it is completely irrelevant to our current situation. For now, I believe we simply need to do our best to focus on regaining some control in Iraq.

Not disagreeing so much as wondering about the implied premise. It assumes we've lost control. I don't think we have. Our control, as it were, when plotted on a graph, seems to be fairly steady.

I'm guessing another two or three years before Iraqi troops can stand on their own without any help.

I'm guessing another 50 or 60 years before we finally leave.

 

[bob_kark]

Not disagreeing so much as wondering about the implied premise. It assumes we've lost control. I don't think we have. Our control, as it were, when plotted on a graph, seems to be fairly steady.

I'm guessing another two or three years before Iraqi troops can stand on their own without any help.

I'm guessing another 50 or 60 years before we finally leave.

My point is not that we have lost all control. It is that we do not have full and orderly control. We're still losing troops and civillians on a regular basis. I wouldn't consider Iraq a safe place to visit.

 

[Moochie]

Seems to me that terrorism, whether state-sponsored or not, begats more terrorism.

M.

 

[Mycroft]

Seems to me that terrorism, whether state-sponsored or not, begats more terrorism.

M.

Which state do you see as sponsoring terrorism?

 

[Mycroft]

We're fighting a war of perception. I think my fear about the current situation is that we've invaded two countries in the ME and are threatening a third. I hate to take the risk of leaving the wrong impression for the more moderate muslims when we have more viable alternatives. Or rather had.

Why? Is it because moderate Muslims are stupid and can't imagine any reason other than Islamaphobia for these wars?

Seriously, what's your premise here?

 

[Chaos]

Why? Is it because moderate Muslims are stupid and can't imagine any reason other than Islamaphobia for these wars?

Seriously, what's your premise here?

The premise seems to be that, with all the lies that have gone into the Iraq war, and with all the emphasis this took away from the actual war against terrorism in Afghanistan, and all the cronyism and filling-my-buddies´-pockets that went with the occupation and rebuilding of Iraq, coupled with the fact that some of the prime terrorism supporters in the Middle East, like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, are still your best buddies, no moderate Muslim is ever going to believe that the US actually has their best interests at heart.

 

[bob_kark]

Why? Is it because moderate Muslims are stupid and can't imagine any reason other than Islamaphobia for these wars?

Seriously, what's your premise here?

I don't know why you feel the need to create that straw man. Intelligence has nothing to do with this situation, this is simply ignorance. The unfortunate fact is that they're seeing muslims tortured. They're seeing civillians beaten and killed by soldiers. They know that we invaded a country with large oil reserves under pretenses that proved to be false. If you were to witness this, lived in a country where your access to media was limited, Al Jazeera was considered a balanced news source, and people from your local mosque continually reminded you every time you went to prayer that the US was an evil empire, what exactly would you think?

This is not an excuse as the jump from dissidence to violence is a clearly marked line. However, if you believed your country was under threat, you may find yourself doing the same.

 

[Rob Lister]

I don't know why you feel the need to create that straw man. Intelligence has nothing to do with this situation, this is simply ignorance. The unfortunate fact is that they're seeing muslims tortured. They're seeing civillians beaten and killed by soldiers. They know that we invaded a country with large oil reserves under pretenses that proved to be false. If you were to witness this, lived in a country where your access to media was limited, Al Jazeera was considered a balanced news source, and people from your local mosque continually reminded you every time you went to prayer that the US was an evil empire, what exactly would you think?

Bob, I admit that I might well think exactly what they think.

But what to do if you DON'T think that way?

Eventually you gotta respond, especially when a non-response makes matters worse.

My opinion is that if you must respond, respond big.

Go big or stay home, as the red necks would say.

 

[CapelDodger]

What would those more viable alternatives include?

Not invading Iraq. Carrying on as before, while ratcheting up resources in Afghanistan to whatever was necessary to come up smelling of roses. Meanwhile the Saddam regime eats its young, becomes less and less dangerous and implodes. Saddam had fallen back on party, on tribe, on clan, on family, and he was killing them arbitrarily. At some point, probably before now, he'd have turned on his sons which is why they'd have turned on him (and each other) first.

There was no good reason to invade Iraq. Ba'athism is a natural ally against Islamism. A post-Saddam Ba'athist regime, by another name, whatever, in Baghdad with continuity rather than chaos. What could have been a better outcome?

 

[Rob Lister]

Meanwhile the Saddam regime eats its young, becomes less and less dangerous and implodes. Saddam had fallen back on party, on tribe, on clan, on family, and he was killing them arbitrarily. At some point, probably before now, he'd have turned on his sons which is why they'd have turned on him (and each other) first.

Interesting perspective. Better to let them 'eat their young' than to act now while the acting is good.

P.S. How's the North Korean version of 'eat their young' going?

 

[CapelDodger]

Why? Is it because moderate Muslims are stupid and can't imagine any reason other than Islamaphobia for these wars?

The majority in the region see the Iraq War as imperialist. That's what they're used to. They see the flimsy, laughable even, attempt to link it to their religion as just more spin. Which they're also used to. This is a very civilised part of the world.