Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
We know all those numbers went up -- we also know that successes in deterring recruitment, short circuiting terrorist acts, and identification and disruption of the greater number of cells operating in other countries have been achieved and that those successes are growing. They have not really had a good year in spite of the increases you posit and I'm quite sure that will continue to be the case. That's why I say those pluses are unimportant.
Ken, I don't know where you're finding your facts, but here are a few starting points:

http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/st...2/excerpt.html

http://jamestown.org/terrorism/news/...icleid=2369635

This issue is so well-documented that I'm a bit surprised that you're willing to debate it. There is no lack of data that the U.S. war in Iraq has contributed to the radicalization of Islamic extremists; that they are spreading into Europe, Africa, the Near East, etc.

a highly likely one but in either case, it's irrelevant, we are where we are and where we are is at a point where the impact of any or no increase or even had (or has?) there been a decrease -- and we don't; cannot, have true numbers -- will have no real strategic impact.
No offense intended, but I'm not exactly sure I know what you just said. It sounds like you're saying that the documented increase in al-Qaeda fighters world-wide is "irrelevant", and/or that we "cannot have true numbers". I must have missed the memo that said to ignore whether your enemy is gaining ground, both in numbers of fighters and geographical distribution. I have a hard time believing that that's considered sound doctrine in any nation's military, let alone ours.

To bring this discussion back around to Steve's book, my question still stands for Steve - has this unforseen development been addressed in your book as a factor in our evolving military strategy Post-Iraq?