Al Qaeda's Losing Strategy
UPDATE 2: Winston, at The Spirit of Man is reporting ongoing news from Iran. It seems that student and worker protests continue. This movement is not dead yet, by any means. If the Mad Mullah's regime is toppled, watch for a flowering of the great Persian heritage. I can feel it. It is so close, I'm almost tempted to hold my breath.
UPDATE: Speaking of Islamists, this one seems quite happy with Bhutto's assassination, but we've seen him before, haven't we. I especially like that last one, where he's begging to be allowed back into England. I am so glad that even in the free world, there is a limit to free speech.
==============================
Salah al-Din Awakening Council calls on Bin Laden to stop “targeting Iraqis”
Osama Baby's last best hope in Iraq has dried up. Where should he concentrate his efforts now? Pakistan?
Since the assassination of Benazir Bhutto a couple of days ago there has been much speculation about the role of al Qaeda or al Qaeda affiliated groups in pulling off the dirty deed. There were reports that al Qaeda claimed responsibility. There were denials almost immediately thereafter. Was this a strategy designed to confuse? Or was it, perhaps, a sign of dissention and splintering in the ranks? Or maybe al Qaeda had nothing to do with it at all.
One thing is certain, though, and hopefully more of our friends on the lunatic fringes of the left are beginning to comprehend this: al Qaeda's ideology is a movement that involves far more than one man and a handful of his followers hiding in the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Bin Laden may be one of its pre-eminent leaders, but it is ludicrous to think that capturing him would be all that is necessary to confront and defeat this movement. After all, Islamism is an idea, not a man, and it holds a lot of currency in many parts of the Islamic world.
What will happen in Pakistan now is anyone's guess, but God willing, there are many countries that will not just sit around and let Pakistan sink into an ungovernable hotbed of Islamofascism. For one, the world's largest democracy, which is also a nuclear power, is right next door and has vital strategic interests in a stable Pakistan.
Not too far away is another (still very fragile) democracy - Iraq, which, as the article at the top clearly illustrates, has had it with al Qaeda's strategy. The Sunni faction in the Western regions of that country, which at one time did everything it could to thwart the nascent democracy in Iraq, would rather work together with their Shiia brethern than side with the organzation that has wantonly slaughtered so many thousands of their fellow Sunnis, including innocent women and children.
A lot of Western pundits working in main stream media have been focusing on where this development leaves the United States. (Yes, I actually forced myself to listen to Michael Enright on CBC's Sunday Edition this morning.) Well guess what fellas, the US is not the only power with interests and strategies in place. This event is not going to be the end of the world. I would expect India and Afghanistan will start receiving a lot more attention from a lot more countries real soon.
UPDATE: Speaking of Islamists, this one seems quite happy with Bhutto's assassination, but we've seen him before, haven't we. I especially like that last one, where he's begging to be allowed back into England. I am so glad that even in the free world, there is a limit to free speech.
==============================
Salah al-Din Awakening Council calls on Bin Laden to stop “targeting Iraqis”
Osama Baby's last best hope in Iraq has dried up. Where should he concentrate his efforts now? Pakistan?
Since the assassination of Benazir Bhutto a couple of days ago there has been much speculation about the role of al Qaeda or al Qaeda affiliated groups in pulling off the dirty deed. There were reports that al Qaeda claimed responsibility. There were denials almost immediately thereafter. Was this a strategy designed to confuse? Or was it, perhaps, a sign of dissention and splintering in the ranks? Or maybe al Qaeda had nothing to do with it at all.
One thing is certain, though, and hopefully more of our friends on the lunatic fringes of the left are beginning to comprehend this: al Qaeda's ideology is a movement that involves far more than one man and a handful of his followers hiding in the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Bin Laden may be one of its pre-eminent leaders, but it is ludicrous to think that capturing him would be all that is necessary to confront and defeat this movement. After all, Islamism is an idea, not a man, and it holds a lot of currency in many parts of the Islamic world.
What will happen in Pakistan now is anyone's guess, but God willing, there are many countries that will not just sit around and let Pakistan sink into an ungovernable hotbed of Islamofascism. For one, the world's largest democracy, which is also a nuclear power, is right next door and has vital strategic interests in a stable Pakistan.
Not too far away is another (still very fragile) democracy - Iraq, which, as the article at the top clearly illustrates, has had it with al Qaeda's strategy. The Sunni faction in the Western regions of that country, which at one time did everything it could to thwart the nascent democracy in Iraq, would rather work together with their Shiia brethern than side with the organzation that has wantonly slaughtered so many thousands of their fellow Sunnis, including innocent women and children.
A lot of Western pundits working in main stream media have been focusing on where this development leaves the United States. (Yes, I actually forced myself to listen to Michael Enright on CBC's Sunday Edition this morning.) Well guess what fellas, the US is not the only power with interests and strategies in place. This event is not going to be the end of the world. I would expect India and Afghanistan will start receiving a lot more attention from a lot more countries real soon.
posted by Louise at 1:00 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home