BF2S Forums The Thoughts Of An Iraqi...

Chrisimo wrote:

Maybe it is. The question is: Would you change your mind if the US would really help to reduce the violence to non-existance. Not the invasion, but the prolonged stay?

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-08-15 07:20:43)

CameronPoe wrote:

FEOS wrote:

I'm not talking about individual nutjobs. I'm talking about AQIM, AQI, IJU, ASG, and others. Identified groups who have publicly aligned themselves with Bin Laden's Al-Qaeda movement.

If you limit yourself to only Afghanistan as the sole operating area of AQ, then you fail to see even a part of the larger picture.

Does Al Qaeda have a central command structure that governs these? It it not a little disingenous to use a term that implies they're part of one living breathing interconnected entity? Many of these groups are quite disparate.

It's like labelling the RIRA, the PIRA, the INLA, the CIRA, the 32CSC, RSF and SF as 'the IRA' when in reality they are all distinct groups with their own agendas (who sometimes ended up attacking each other in turf wars).

Braddock wrote:

FEOS wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Does Al Qaeda have a central command structure that governs these? It it not a little disingenous to use a term that implies they're part of one living breathing interconnected entity? Many of these groups are quite disparate.

It's like labelling the RIRA, the PIRA, the INLA, the CIRA, the 32CSC, RSF and SF as 'the IRA' when in reality they are all distinct groups with their own agendas (who sometimes ended up attacking each other in turf wars).

AQ has never had a central command structure. They are now and have always been cell-based. Key leadership gives direction and resources, then lets the cells do their thing.

You clearly do not (and apparently have not) understand AQ's basic structure.

I think everyone has a basic understanding of AQ's structure at this stage, they are pretty much a terrorist version of a multi-national company i.e. composed of various elements in various regions but with no central base that can be taken down (though ironically that's what Al Qaeda translates to - base or HQ). Given the sophistication of surveillance technology in this day and age I would doubt that very much useful communication takes place between the far flung elements of 'Al Qaeda'...I would say there is more a philosophical relationship interspersed with the occasional internet based reference to each other.

Braddock wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Braddock wrote:

I think everyone has a basic understanding of AQ's structure at this stage, they are pretty much a terrorist version of a multi-national company i.e. composed of various elements in various regions but with no central base that can be taken down (though ironically that's what Al Qaeda translates to - base or HQ). Given the sophistication of surveillance technology in this day and age I would doubt that very much useful communication takes place between the far flung elements of 'Al Qaeda'...I would say there is more a philosophical relationship interspersed with the occasional internet based reference to each other.

And you would be wrong.

And you would be right? Oh...I forgot you were an expert on all things to do with military and terrorist matters.

You shouldn't waste so much time on this forum and just go out and catch Bin Laden seen as you are so much in the know.

Braddock wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Braddock wrote:

And you would be right? Oh...I forgot you were an expert on all things to do with military and terrorist matters.

You shouldn't waste so much time on this forum and just go out and catch Bin Laden seen as you are so much in the know.

Think about how difficult it is to find that Madeline McCann and then you'll have an idea how difficult it is to find the leaders of a terrorist group.

Did you ever think that might be because she's dead and buried somewhere?

M.O.A.B wrote:

Braddock wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Think about how difficult it is to find that Madeline McCann and then you'll have an idea how difficult it is to find the leaders of a terrorist group.

Did you ever think that might be because she's dead and buried somewhere?

They find ice mummies 10,000 years old. Catching someone who is alive is not some simple task.

M.O.A.B wrote:

Braddock wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

They find ice mummies 10,000 years old. Catching someone who is alive is not some simple task.

Neither is meeting a International terrorist for a coffee and a chat.

Erm, ok then

Last edited by Braddock (2008-08-15 13:22:58)

Braddock wrote:

Beduin wrote:

AQ is an ideology. An ideology put on the "internet" free for anyone to "download". If someone choose to "download" he/she will be "linked" till the nearest active cell.

The more stupid mistakes we make, the more they become.

Am afraid nothing else can stop this part of the structure, unfortunately.

That's exactly how I imagine it operates, you have summed it up. Though I'm sure FEOS will tell you that is not the case.

Braddock wrote:

Living with Iraq's violence

This report from an Iraqi member of the BBC staff sums up a lot of the thinking behind why I disagreed with the Iraq war. We have all debated back and forth about the political decisions that were made to trigger this war and whether or not these decisions had any moral authority but when all is said and done and you break things down to the day to day reality of living in Iraq all that becomes immaterial.

The reality is that Saddam Hussein and his sons were morally corrupt tyrants who ruled with an iron fist. Many freedoms were curtailed under the Saddam reign such as freedom of the press or the right to express dissent, and infringements were punished severely. Many ethnic groups were also persecuted by Saddam and his armies. The average Iraqi however could walk the streets in the knowledge that a strict public order was constantly being maintained and while we all like to wish we could do something about all the less fortunate people of the world the human reality is that first and foremost we need to take care of ourselves on a daily basis and this means being able to work, earn money, buy food and move about without the constant threat of physical harm.

While the US has recently made a certain amount of progress in working with the new Iraqi institutions to claw back a certain amount of stability in the region the sad reality is that for the majority of Iraqis death, destruction, grief and loss are an everyday reality that they now have to deal with. The media don't dedicate as much air time to it anymore but car bombs and suicide attacks are still a regular occurrence - imagine life in New York, London, Paris or Dublin if there were suicide attacks and car bombs every couple of days.

As I have already said, the reality of day to day life in Baghdad has nothing to do with playing the blame game...they find themselves in this situation now and have to make the best lives possible for themselves. Supporters of the war will argue that Saddam's reign may have incurred just as many tragic deaths had it been allowed to persist for long enough and who knows maybe it would have but the fact is a society where once it was safe to walk down the street and go to work is now one of the most dangerous places on the planet.

This is not a denial of the progress being made in Iraq, it is just an assessment of reality.

Braddock wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Braddock wrote:

And you would be right? Oh...I forgot you were an expert on all things to do with military and terrorist matters.

You shouldn't waste so much time on this forum and just go out and catch Bin Laden seen as you are so much in the know.

No, but I work with people who are. And it's my job to know these things.

Don't get all pissy, Braddock.

I won't denigrate you when you chime in on the aspects of being a professional student, so please don't do the same with me and my profession.

And as for bin Laden, your words above explain why he's a non-issue in the GWOT.

The architect of 9/11 is a non issue? Do a huge number of Americans not want that scoundrel brought to book? I certainly would.