Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
A Resurgent al-Qaeda
According to the NCTC terrorism statistics, there were approximately 14,000 attacks defined as "terrorist" in 2006, resulting in more than 20,000 deaths. From 2005, this is a 25 percent increase in attacks and a 40 percent rise in deaths. The Middle East and South Asia were the most dangerous regions in 2006, as hosts to 90 percent of the "high-casualty" incidents (defined as killing more than ten people). Within these regions, about 750 attacks took place in Afghanistan, and 6,600 occurred in Iraq, causing 13,000 fatalities. While the statistics are sobering and paint a vivid picture of the global terrorist threat, there are several less publicized aspects of these reports even more important for U.S. policymakers. First, the NCTC report describes an al-Qaeda organization that appears to have rebounded. NCTC refers to a "steadfast al-Qaeda" that is "planning attacks in northwest Pakistan, and was able to expand its propaganda campaign in 2006 to invigorate supporters, win converts and gain recruits." In fact, the report notes that al-Qaeda leaders allegedly played an important role in "steering" terrorists in the United Kingdom, whose plot to blow up ten U.S.�bound planes was foiled in August 2006.
Al-Qaeda's affiliates were also able to carry out several successful attacks in 2006. Most prominently, al-Qaeda in Iraq destroyed the al-Askariya mosque in the Iraqi city of Samarra, a Shia holy site, leading to a round of sectarian violence. Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula conducted the first attack on a Saudi oil facility in February 2006, and al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) -- formerly known as the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat until its August 2006 merger with al-Qaeda -- attacked a U.S. target in Algeria in December (the group has since claimed responsibility for two April 2007 suicide car bombings in Algiers that killed thirty-three and injured more than three hundred).
In contrast, at the time the State Department's 2004 report was issued, al-Qaeda was seen as an organization whose capability had been dramatically decreased. The report assessed that al-Qaeda had been "weakened operationally," and that the United States and its allies had degraded its leadership abilities and depleted its operational ranks. While al-Qaeda remained focused on attacking U.S. interests, the report noted that its ability to conduct large-scale attacks had been diminished. The spurring of a "grassroots" movement of terrorist networks and cells, inspired by al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden but with no direct ties to them, were thought to be the emerging threat.
Based on the 2006 reports, it appears that the terrorist threat has become even more complex and diverse, which presents serious counterterrorism challenges for the United States and its allies. For example, NCTC determined that almost 300 different groups were involved in terrorist attacks in 2006. It reported that, of these, "Sunni terrorist groups" claimed responsibility for more attacks than any other group in 2006. This broad category includes a variety of terrorist organizations including al-Qaeda, its affiliates, and the "grassroots" or "homegrown" terrorist cells. In fact, according to the State Department, the terrorist threat has been transformed to the point that it is now a "form of global insurgency."
my thoughts are President Bush has killed a lot of them.. Clinton ZERO
Have you considered how many americans have died at the hands of terrorists under these two presidents, or how many terrorists are in the world today as a result of these two different foreign policies?
Have you heard the expression "we are making enemies faster than we can kill them"?
Have you considered how many americans have died at the hands of terrorists under these two presidents, or how many terrorists are in the world today as a result of these two different foreign policies?
Have you heard the expression "we are making enemies faster than we can kill them"?
Have you considered how many americans have died at the hands of terrorists under these two presidents, or how many terrorists are in the world today as a result of these two different foreign policies?
Have you heard the expression "we are making enemies faster than we can kill them"?
Because he's hiring people who have questionable backgrounds. Emanuel's connected to Freddie Mac & another aide connected to Tony Rezko...how's that "change"? He's screwing up already and he hasn't been sworn in yet! Can you imagine what the next 4 years will be like?Why do you cons keep grasping at straws to bash Obama before he even takes office?
yep,, I agree, how many times did Billboard sit there whilst AlQada kicked our azz??
Have you seen any terrorists blowing up buildings and kiling American's in the last 7 years?
No one on the right here has addressed the govenrmental statistics showing increased terrorist incidents under Bush's watch. Are you able to connect actions with consequences? Bush's strategy with increased terror, anyone?
Is the logic here that a 3 fold increase in terror is fine and dandy as long as it is somewhere else? That's pretty short sighted.
I did not say 'do nothing,' personally I favor targeted attacks, ie the "a" word. I don't think anyone says do nothing, can I see a show of hands for the "do nothing" policy?
Certainly screwing the allies is about as stupid a policy as anyone could hope for.
so what would be yer answer? 100 more 9-11's. would that do it for you? What would it take to make you stand up and fight??? Shrug!
Yes, have a looky in Iraq and Afghanistan. We've lost about 5000 americans there, and many buildings. Even a few airplanes.
I fight differently than you. More like special covert ops <wicked> than nuking a country, and it's pretty damned cool.
Bush is a moron, you can't bomb your way to leadership in the world, any numbnut knows that.
Our son, a 24yr active duty, SMS, USAF, has been there, in Bagdad. We pray he never has to go back. But, I know him, he will, if or when the time comes.
Its ironic how a guy with 24yrs and his men, those who weve meant with, who are right in the thick of this thing still believe we are better off for having gone into Afganistan and Iraq.
They know a lot more that we do, so I don't have to tell you who I believe.
Obama is busy selecting old insiders for all his cabinet positions, all his staff positions and every other position he has to staff.
Remind me when he will actually get to that "change" part of his promises?
I'm pretty sure he means change from the last 8 years not reinventing the wheel but ya'll keep bitching and complaining...it's fun to watch.
Personally I like the idea of the Clinton staff being used. They were in office when this country was but economically and internationally very strong.
Yeah, I always admired the strong way Clinton had America turn tail and run in Somalia, or cower like whipped bitches in regards to the USS Cole and the embassy bombings.
You might want to stop confusing "strong" with "popular with countries that don't want our best interests". There's no Miss Congeniality category in international politics that I'm aware of.
No one on the right here has addressed the govenrmental statistics showing increased terrorist incidents under Bush's watch. Are you able to connect actions with consequences? Bush's strategy with increased terror, anyone?
DavidS said:What would you expect him to do, hire completely inexperienced people to run our government?
Silence said:I'm pretty sure he means change from the last 8 years not reinventing the wheel but ya'll keep bitching and complaining...it's fun to watch.
