Crowdsourcing on AQ and Analysis (new title)

[Bob's World]

A couple of thoughts:

1. Killing senior leadership is a slow road to victory (Except in a case where some guy with legal power over people is forcing them to do things against their will. UBL's power is the power of the conditions he exploits, the power of his cause, and his supporters are all volunteers.) Killing him will not weaken the cause, but could make it stronger.

2. Capturing him and attempting a civilian trial under US, or even international, standards would be an IO disaster for the west.

3. He will be replaced. Take out UBL, and AQ gains a new leader who may actually be more effective than the current one. Take out AQ and a new organization will form that may well be more effective than AQ. Success lies in addressing the causes, and so long as the majority of senior leaders believe it is a mix of "malign actors" and "radical Islam" we will continue to chase our tails on this. (both of those are necessary aspects of how the causation is exploited, but are not causal in of themselves).

4. Should we kill him? Definitely. Quietly, relentlessly pursue him and his core followers to the corners of the earth and terminate them where we find them. They have earned that. But that is a handful of guys, and should not be confused with the nationalist insurgents across the globe that respond to the UW efforts of AQ. But as to the causation they exploit, as to the conditions of insurgency in so many countries that they exploit, as to the sympathetic supporters in western communities that either empathize with the people in oppressed lands, or feel strongly that their government at home is an oppressor (or at least an enabler of oppressors); that will all still be in place, and that is the real problem that must be addressed, and killing UBL will have no positive effect on that. That will require an evolution of US foreign policy and will also require evolution of many domestic policies in the nations where this causation is the stongest as well.

[slapout9]

Of course it matters. He killed Americans and destroyed our property. Will it stop terrorist attacks no, but it will bear on the mind of future attackers that when we find you, you will be DRT(dead right there).

[Fuchs]

Of course it matters. He killed Americans and destroyed our property. Will it stop terrorist attacks no, but it will bear on the mind of future attackers that when we find you, you will be DRT(dead right there).

I know 19 guys who wouldn't have given a damn.

[slapout9]

I know 19 guys who wouldn't have given a damn.

Yea,cause they are dead!

[Fuchs]

"wouldn't have given" referred to the time when they made their final decision.

[CWOT]

I don't think the fear of being hunted will keep AQ attacks from occurring. They are seeking death as a way of fulfilling their ideology.
Persistent pursuit does alter AQ's operations and their security. Continued attacking of AQ's leadership shapes their ability to conduct further operations.

[Bob's World]

I don't think the fear of being hunted will keep AQ attacks from occurring. They are seeking death as a way of fulfilling their ideology.
Persistent pursuit does alter AQ's operations and their security. Continued attacking of AQ's leadership shapes their ability to conduct further operations.

OK, quotes on "Lie" because I don't think either was a conscious lie to defraud the American people; but rather that the idea that AQ is about ideology is even more flawed than the idea that going into Iraq was about WMD. Or more analogous, that Soviet efforts to expand their influence during the Cold War were about Communism; or that U.S. efforts to expand its influence are about Democracy. We need to learn to be better at separating Causation from Motivation; and Material Facts from Relevant Facts.

AQ and Bin Laden are an organization and man for their times; much as the Nazi party and Hitler were for theirs. Different times in a different place, they don't occur. Given the time and place, if they did not exist some similar organization and leadership would have eventually emerged in response.

The seeds for WWII were planted at Versailles; or at least were not eradicated and were well fertilized there by the victors of WWI. Similarly the seeds for GWOT have been planted and nurtured over hundreds of years of Western Colonial and Post-Colonial manipulation of the politics and populaces of the Middle East. With the end of the Cold War rationale for such manipulations and the advent of the tools of globalization AQ and Bin Laden were inevitable.

The question is not what happens if we kill Bin Laden. Answer that and get a C+. The real question is what happens if we do not address Western foreign policies toward the Middle East? What happens if the West continues to enable some of the most despotic regimes on the planet to both remain in power and treat their own populaces with impunity? Kill bin Laden, but that is just step 1 in a 100-step process. Personal opinion? We've been way too focused on step 1, and it is distracting us from the hard policy work that is yet to be done on the other 99.

[carl]

I don't think the fear of being hunted will keep AQ attacks from occurring. They are seeking death as a way of fulfilling their ideology.

They are seeking death while successfully accomplishing their missions. If they are killed and captured often enough before they have a chance to accomplish their missions, that might have a dissuasive effect as time passes. If you can never get on base, most people might tend to give up the game.

[CWOT]

1. Killing senior leadership is a slow road to victory (Except in a case where some guy with legal power over people is forcing them to do things against their will. UBL's power is the power of the conditions he exploits, the power of his cause, and his supporters are all volunteers.) Killing him will not weaken the cause, but could make it stronger.

I agree in the case of a persistent COIN or CT campaign. I see it differently with UBL. His death would create an immediate shift in how the West chooses to counter AQ. He's a big symbolic target for the U.S. and one of the main justifications for being in Afghanistan. I don't think it would make AQ stronger either, but do think the result would be more attacks as followers compete to emerge the new leader.

2. Capturing him and attempting a civilian trial under US, or even international, standards would be an IO disaster for the west.

Agree, I sure hope they wouldn't take him alive.

3. He will be replaced. Take out UBL, and AQ gains a new leader who may actually be more effective than the current one. Take out AQ and a new organization will form that may well be more effective than AQ.

Really good point, I am curious how this will play out. I expect it will happen eventually, and maybe even soon.