Many in the west feel that AQ is in a war against the west. This is not true. They are in a war against their own governments but feel the support of the west for their corrupt governments must end before they can overthrow them. With the attack of Iraq came the end of in-country support for the Al Saud regime in Saudi Arabia. AQ believes it has won an important first step towards overthrowing the Al Saud dynasty. This apparent victory marks a new phase in their campaign, i.e. direct attack against the government itself. We have this article from Arab news, There are so many good nuggets of information here that I could only find a few paragraphs to snip. We see that the Al Saud really can't fight AQ from a moral standpoint or a popular standpoint as it lacks either standing. It can’t institute democracy because that is seen as kowtowing to western pressure. It can’t depend on popular support because of popular indifference to attacks on the Al Saud government. I think it's only a matter of time untill the Al Saud family flies out of the Islamic Republic of Arabia.
So it's all just a big brainwashing scheme by al Qaeda? It seems like a stretch, but there are a number of thought-provoking ideas that he puts forward. There doesn't seem to be any real coherency to the story, though.
No, you are the one who's brainwashed. Brainwashed into believing that everything the rest of the world does directly relates to US policy or Bush. The US is not the center of the universe nor the reason everything happens. AQ has always been clear that it intends to overthrow the western supported regimes. AQ has always been clear that they feel they must force the west to withdraw support for the Al Saud family and the like. This is what they hope to achieve with terrorism. Not the western capitulation to Islam which you, rightfully, don't take seriously. Rather they use terrorism to bully the west into indulgent isolationism. They want you to ask questions like, "I don’t see what fighting AQ has to do with Welfare Benefits."
Really? So that's why they attacked New York on 9/11? Does not compute. If they really wanted us to leave, they'd have kept it small - attacking soldiers in Saudi Arabia, and embassies in Africa. Tough to justify attacking Afghanistan based on that. Easier to withdraw. When you take down the twin towers, you get ready for the ******** to hit the fan. One would think they were - gasp - expecting consequences! Perhaps. Or, they want the US to become MORE engaged in the middle east, because that furthers their agenda. Their recruiting is made much easier when we did what we did at Abu Ghraib.
Please, no more WWII Japan analogies. Pearl Harbor was a very well thought out and executed plan to end a war with the U.S. before one had even begun. It nearly succeeded. How is that in any way, shape, or form the same as Sept. 11th? Wait, forget I asked, no more, please!
AM, what exactly is your point here? That Al Qaeda's real goal is to overturn Western supported regimes in the Middle East? That their only beef with the US is our support of those regimes, and that if we backed out of the region and severed all ties, Al Qaeda would win? Therefore we should not pull away from the Middle East? Is that what you are saying, or is there something more that I'm missing? Because if that is what you're saying, then the only response I can think of is, "duh." Al Qaeda has always been very vocal about their desire to bring down the House of Saud and other non-fundamentalist, westerm-backed regimes. That much is obvious. But do you think that if they accomplished that goal, they'd stop there and leave the US alone? There are very few people out there who honestly believe that, or who seriously advocate for the US withdrawing from the Middle East completely. Staying involved in the region is indeed the only way we can counter Al Qaeda. The real controversy is over how we should stay involved in the region. Invading Iraq, for example, might be viewed by any reasonable and thoughtful individual as making the situation drastically worse. If it were true that all AQ wanted was the withdrawal of US forces/support from Middle Eastern nations, and they'd just leave us alone after that, then we'd probably be best off just giving them what they wanted. Oh, but then again, there's that small issue of the oil to think about.
Once again you folks are arguing with me rather than each other. One would think that the obviousness of the proposition is clear to all and worthy of a "duh" yet we have replies like this, Roel thinks the idea is so alien it's some sort of "brainwashing scheme."
Once again you folks are arguing with me rather than each other. One would think that the obviousness of the proposition is clear to all yet we have replies like this, and this, Roel thinks the idea is so alien it's some sort of "brainwashing scheme." nic seems to think that AQ wanted us to come at them in Afghanistan then attack Iraq so they could recruit more members. Again, don’t argue with me. Argue with each other.
And you still can't read. Clever, that, otherwise you'd have to respond to my points. I never said that Al Qaeda wanted the US to come to Afghanistan. They did want us in Iraq, absolutely. They wanted the US pissed off, they wanted the US angry, and they wanted the US more engaged in the Middle East. Iraq makes them very happy. If the whole point, as you claim, is just to get the US out of Saudi Arabia, WHY were the twin towers attacked? Your analogy to Pearl Harbor was blown out of the water already. Don't duck the question by posting what Roel says, either.
I think the AQ's Real Objective is every American man gets a muslin wife and gruadually transforming the US into a crimeless, drugless, warless, violentless, homelessless, hungerless lovely country.
Actually, nothing helps a recruitment drive like success. Blowing up the WTC was an amazing feat (evil and sickening as it was).
I'm not so sure about that. Don't forget - they all died in the process. Suicide bombers aren't recruited by "look at how many people you can kill" but rather by "they're all evil, and God is telling you to kill them".
Okay so now the reason they attacked the the WTC was to draw us into Iraq. You propose that UBL knew that Bush&Co. was crazy insane to attack Iraq. He knew that it would lead to a quagmire that Bush&Co would fail to forsee. He was crazy like a fox and decided to give Bush& Co. a reason to invade Iraq. Either you are full of it or their evil genious knows no bounds. I do need to clear up the Pearl Harbor idea. It's become fashionable to criticize the PH analogy among the Leftist circle jerk. I would say I probably know the history of the pacific as well as anyone here. I grew up on the western shore of Pearl Harbor on the mouth of the entrance. I scored a perfect ACT history score as Admiral Perry's visit to Japan was the "hard question" and at 17 I knew it cold. I have a signed copy of "At Dawn We Slept" as my (future) wife took Dr. Goldstein's course at Pitt's GSPIA school and I met him with my copy. I feel fully qualified to offer a layman's opinion of Japan's thinking prior to Dec. 7th 1941. You may not like my opinion but it is well grounded.
New story, It must be pretty bad terrorism when Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood condem it. As far as "try to understand what is driving them", I find it a funny haha comment to read from a SA newspaper.
AQ wanted us to come at them in Afghanistan. That was the whole point of attacking us on 9/11. One more time, all together now: Al Qaeda wanted us to come at them in Afghanistan. That was the whole point of attacking us on 9/11. No, they weren't necessarily aiming for an Iraq invasion. That was just, like, a bonus for them.
Nope. Not right at all. You're making it up. Here we have UBL's own words, And he goes on to say, So according to UBL, who is an expert on why AQ does what it does, AQ attacked the US to end the support of "the oppressive, corrupt and tyrannical regime" on the Arabian peninsula by having the people " change their governments which attack our countries." It seems pretty clear to me.
I suggest you go re-read my post. I never said that Osama knew that the attacks would lead to Iraq. I said al-Qaeda is happy we're in Iraq. As to why the attacked the Twin Towers - I would guess its because they wanted to piss us off, and to strike terror. Did they think we'd simply abandon our operations in the middle east? No. Did they hope for it? Maybe. Was that their primary reason? Judging by our responses to previous provocations, real or imagined, I doubt it. America's never been reticent about striking back. I spent time growing up in Cleveland, and just got lost driving around to the west side of town while visiting the parents. Clearly, living there didn't endow me with precognition on the subject. OK......and this has what to do with Pearl Harbor? Dude, there are plenty of people on these boards who'd put your amateurish "qualifications" to shame. Seriously, a perfect ACT score on the history section? That's the best you can do? To wit: while you were taking your cute ACT test, I was taking upper level college history classes while in high school. I don't claim to know what I'm talking about because of that. You're starting to sound like Michael "you lawyers don't understand how the law works" Russ. OK......I've an autographed Nolan Ryan baseball card that he signed. I'm sure I can pitch just like him because of that We've noticed. That you persist in offering said opinion with little regard for proof has also been noticed. I thought you were going to "clear this up"? You merely said "the Japanese didn't think we'd respond", which is NOT what in fact happened. (Some Japanese believed that a quick enough strike would make it IMPOSSIBLE for us to respond, which is an entirely different suggestion.) That you're married to someone who took someone else's class doesn't make you any more qualified than living in Hawaii.
moral standpoint? Al Saud does not kill 10 year old Egyptian boys while holding helpless expatriates hostage.