Judging by one just-released study, we should pull the troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq and send the FBI instead.
Maybe you can sing the following story to the tune of “Send in the Clowns“?
Study questions US strategy against al-Qaida
By BARRY SCHWEID, AP Diplomatic Writer Tue Jul 29
WASHINGTON – The United States can defeat al-Qaida if it relies less on force and more on policing and intelligence to root out the terror group’s leaders, a new study contends.
“Keep in mind that terrorist groups are not eradicated overnight,” said the study by the federally funded Rand research center, an organization that counsels the Pentagon.
Its report said that the use of military force by the United States or other countries should be reserved for quelling large, well-armed and well-organized insurgencies, and that American officials should stop using the term “war on terror” and replace it with “counterterrorism.”
“Terrorists should be perceived and described as criminals, not holy warriors, and our analysis suggests there is no battlefield solution to terrorism,” said Seth Jones, the lead author of the study and a Rand political scientist.
The story went on (blah blah blah) but the last paragraph pretty much told me the study it was reporting was a waste of time.
“Terrorists should be perceived and described as criminals, not holy warriors.” Too bad their “analysis did not suggest” that there is something called the fallacy of the false dilemma, and that the “lead author” dived right into it head first.
Seriously, when was the last time President Bush, one of our commanders, or any conservative anywhere EVER refer to terrorists as “holy warriors.” When was the last time anyone outside of terrorists referred to them as “holy warriors”?
How about terms such as “Islamic fascists,” “vicious murderers,” “nihilist monsters,” etcetera? Could you refer to them by any of those terms instead?
When you begin with that kind of fallacious presupposition by the lead author, you pretty much can tell you have a study that isn’t even worth lining your bird cage with.
Later in the article Seth Jones acknowledges, “We are not saying the military should not play a role. But unless you are talking about large insurgencies, military force should not be the tip of the spear.”
But al Qaeda most certainly qualifies as a “large insurgency.” It is both large, and it possesses a truly global reach. So Jones isn’t really saying squat.
That doesn’t stop the Associated Press from titling its story, “Study questions US strategy against al-Qaida,” as though somehow we’re supposed to re-examine our entire policy in Iraq and Afghanistan.
How about if we consider another Associated Press story? This one’s titled, “Analysis: Organized Resistance Has All But Ceased in Iraq: US Now Winning Iraq War that Seemed Lost,” which really ought to kind of count for something.
Apparently there IS a battlefield solution to terrorism, after all. Based on its success, the finest military that ever existed makes for a pretty good spear tip.
And just so you know, Iraq was “the war that seemed lost” for Democrats like Senate Majority Leader Harry “the war is lost” Reid and Barack “the surge will surely fail” Obama. And of course for their “Nothing but Negative News All the Time” counterparts in the media. It didn’t seem lost to President Bush and to our absolutely magnificent military. The greatest tragedy is that we could have won the war a lot sooner – and with a lot fewer lives lost – had despicable Democrats supported it like they should have instead of using it as a political wedge issue.
Our recent successes prove that we shouldn’t be questioning our terror strategy; rather, we should be questioning the moral cowards who spent so much time and energy dividing this country with one pathetic question after another.
Start Thinking Right 