The ‘war on terror’ has failed. Al-Qa’ida-type jihadis are proliferating, and the West bears partial

[bemildred]

responsibility



Twelve and a half years after 9/11, al-Qa’ida-type organisations control an area the size of Britain in western Iraq and eastern Syria. Include Afghanistan, Libya and Somalia and the territory they rule is larger in size than the UK. What is so extraordinary – and blameworthy – is that this vast expansion of jihadi groups comes even as the US, Britain and others are waging a “war on terror”. In the name of such a struggle, great sums have been spent; wars have been fought in Iraq and Afghanistan; civil rights have been curtailed; and torture, rendition, detention without trial and domestic espionage have been justified. But attempts to eliminate the supposed enemy have wholly failed.

It is to consider the roots of this failure that The Independent published a five-part investigation by our distinguished correspondent Patrick Cockburn this week. The aim of the series is to show the extent to which jihadi organisations identical in ideology and methods to Osama bin Laden’s al-Qa’ida have survived, flourished and are now stronger than ever.

This was not an inevitable outcome. Saudi Arabia was crucial to the rise of the original al-Qa’ida: in the attack on the twin towers, 15 out of 19 hijackers were Saudi and the 9/11 Commission Report revealed that Saudi donors were the main financial support for al-Qa’ida. To this day, 28 pages of the report relating to Saudi involvement have never been published. Yet the Bush administration never sought to pin any measure of responsibility on Saudi Arabia, enabling it to go on playing a central role in funding and recruitment for jihadi groups across the Muslim world. Instead, Bush sought to put the blame for 9/11 on Saddam Hussein and Iraq, without the smallest evidence.

Since the start of the Arab Spring the US, Britain and their allies have supported jihadis who appear to be on their side, just as they backed them in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Syrian and Libyan rebel groups much like al-Qa’ida have been viewed tolerantly thanks to their opposition to Gaddafi or Bashar al-Assad. Indeed, the US ambassador to Libya, J Christopher Stevens, paid with his life for Washington underestimating the danger posed by the jihadis with whom America had been co-operating.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/editorials/the-war-on-terror-has-failed-alqaidatype-jihadis-are-proliferating-and-the-west-bears-partial-responsibility-9205951.html

[louis-t]

1. Well, to be fair, bush turned Iraq over to the jihadists.

That would account for about half of the area they control.

[bemildred]

2. Fair to whom? nt

[louis-t]

3. -fair to the Saudis.

[bemildred]

4. Ah, thanks. nt

[blkmusclmachine]

5. Mi$$ion Accomplished, bay-bee!

Ka-ching!

[Jefferson23]

6. Responsibility to the Saudi involvement? tsk tsk..they are our friends.

Patrick Cockburn is an excellent journalist...we need more like him.

K&R

[Doctor_J]

7. Failed???

Last edited Fri Mar 21, 2014, 02:26 PM - Edit history (1)

The 1% got filthy rich off of it - Mission Accomplished! A lot like the War On Drugs, without the prison proliferation. They had to come up with a euphamism for War On Education, but it;s the same thing

[The Stranger]

8. The Neocons' "War on Terror" was intended to have jiadis proliferate.

They are symbiotic.

I thought everyone had already seen this:

https://archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares-Episode1BabyItsColdOutside

http://dotsub.com/view/2019dcbc-330c-4edb-a463-39a63492f65b

[yurbud]

9. even saying the War on Terror could be won or lost buys into its false premise

that it was meant to be won or was anything other than an excuse to do what the wealthy wanted to do anyway without the rest of us getting in their way.

Terrorism is the excuse not the reason.

[TheKentuckian]

10. You got that right.

[yurbud]

11. "Santa Claus has failed to catch the Easter Bunny"