1/31    Is Al Qaeda ineffective? I ask this because despite spouting so
        much bile and hatred they haven't really done much of anything.
        As the train accident in LA showed, it's easy to stage simple
        attacks and yet all they have to show are a train bombing in Spain
        and the WTC. I am starting to think the WTC was more lucky than
        good. Is Al Qaeda as large of a threat as most of us thought on 9/11?
        \_ Oh.  It's only 1300+ and counting.
           \_ 1411 to be exact.
              \_ Your number is old.  1435.
        \_ Al Qaeda is effective in the Russian guerilla warfare sense -- they
           are using very limited resources to tie up a LOT of resources of
           the enemy. -- ilyas
           \_ Understood, but I guess the surprise is how limited their
              resources really seem to be. Even Hamas seems to be a
              stronger, better-backed, and better-funded organization. They
              make the most of what they have, but what they have seems to
              be 'not much'.
              \_ Al Qaeda may well be smaller and less funded than Hamas.
                 Their only claim to fame is pulling off an attack on US soil.
                   -- ilyas
                 \_ And on US embassies.  And on US warships.  Not to mention
                    MASSIVE loss of US civillian life.  And the first WTC
                    bombing.
                    \_ All of this was on or before 9/11, no?
                       \_ Mostly, yeah -- I was responding to the notion that
                          WTC II was their only claim to fame.
                       \_ Bali nightclub bombing was after.  weren't there
                          refinery explosions in germany or something claimed
                          by al qaeda?  American compound in riyadh in may 03.
                          daniel pearl
        \_ This is almost stupid enough to call troll on it, but it's dim,
           so i think it's sincere.  Coordinated embassy bomings in africa,
           uss cole, etc.  now have expanded their presence to over 60
           countries.  they're dispersed, and growing, and bush hasn't done
           a thing to actually work on it.
           \_ Wow, now THIS is a troll. Since 9/11 there hasn't been one
              successful attack on U.S. soil. If your Al-Qaida was so
              powerful why haven't they done even one suicide bombing in
              America? Oh, I guess you're going to blame the LA train wreck
              last week on some sort of government cover-up. Tinfoil hat
              time.
              \_ As ilyas points out above, they've done an incredible job
                 costing the US billions of dollars, thousands of lives,
                 and tying up a HUGE portion of the US's military power with a
                 trickle of resources.  What should be obvious is that if we
                 didn't tie up those resources, then it's far more likely that
                 rather than military personnel lost in combat it would
                 probably be as many civillian lives somewhere else.  Your
                 observations are accurate, but your standards of evaluation
                 are all wrong.
                 \_ You seem to be suggesting that if we had not invaded Iraq,
                    the US would have suffered around 14,000 civilian terrorist
                    casualties in the past 2-3 years.
                    \_ [This is now incoherent because PP backed off of his
                        absurd assertion]
                        \_ [PP was too busy trying to beat the motd spinlock
                            and didn't think all the details through.]
                            \_ Motd spinlock never happens!  Someone who posts
                               way more than me says so! -- ilyas
                               \_ That claim was never made.  Reread the
                                  archive, dude.   -4 hp for poor reading
                                  comprehension.
                                  \_ Ilya was being sarcastic.  Now who's got
                                     poor reading comprehension?
                                     \_ Sarcastic...you keep using this word..
                                        perhaps it doesn't mean what you think
                                        it means.
                                     \_ You can be sarcastic AND wrong.
                                        Sarcasm is fun; being misquoted is
                                        irritating.  Crap.  Ilyas trolled me,
                                        didn't he?  DAMN YOU ILYAS!  -4 hp to
                                        me for being gullible.
              \_ Before 9/11 there hadn't been a us attack for many years.
                 And now there are all those nice soldiers in Iraq to blow
                 up instead.
                 \_ Attacking military targets isn't a particularly good
                    way to terrorize the US populace at large.
                    \_ You know the goal isn't terror.  Terror is just one
                       of many tools.  The goal is to further an agenda.
                       This isn't a Bond movie.
                    \_ No, but it terrorizes the Iraqi population, which makes
                       our job there harder, more expensive, and with higher
                       casualties to boot.  If they hurt the populace enough,
                       the US may even be forced to withdraw which would be a
                       PR disaster (not to mention a massive ideological
                       failure).  Also, if it gets bloody enough for our
                       troops, the government may even lose popular support,
                       which gives further validation to the effectiveness of
                       terrorism overseas impacting domestic policy (ie, the
                       US populace at large).
                        \_ so Saddamn didnt terrorize the iraqi populace?
                           \_ ???  Are you responding to the correct thread?
                    \_ But it is a good way to 1) drain our resources and
                       2) solidify and "train" their people.
           \_ On the other hand, if all of the attacks happen in the Middle
              East (e.g. Cole) then they fade into irrelevance. Same thing
              if the attacks come decades apart. You'd think there would be
              more attacks in the US, Japan, or Europe and yet nothing. To
              me this indicates they have a severe lack of resources and
              thus spend a lot of time planning to use them efficiently.
        \_ I get the impression that they have a few smart people at the top
           who move very slowly, and a lot of low level poor ignorant angry
           men.  Rember that 9/11 was years in planning and only then it was
           the second try to destroy the WTC.  I don't think they have
           the resources to make chem or bio weapons, but given enough time an
           a state-sponsor they could put them into use.
        \_ Yeah, I'd have to agree. That's why I was and continue to be
           surprised that people believe that that 9/11 has changed the world.
           Staging an attack on U.S. soil is *very* hard, but anyone can
           get lucky once in a while. There will not, however, be another
           attack on U.S. soil of any substantial magnitude (over 50
           casualties) masterminded by Islamic fundementalists in the next
           15 years (you heard it hear first).
           \_ I guess the idea is that they shouldn't have gotten lucky --
              US had gotten too lax in its handling of terrorism.  The
              World Trade Center was a wake up call.  It was the wake up call
              that serves as the 'changed the world' part.  That's just a
              guess on my part though.  You're probably right about the 15
              years part.
        \_ If Dubya didn't start the practice of scanning checked-in luggage
           for bombs, you can bet there would be a synchronized commuter
           plane event.
        \_ Yes, but how many unsuccessful attempts at terrorism has there
           been since 9/11?
        \_ why make a move when the great satan imperialist is sending
           its running dogs all over the place.  let them run around raging
           mad doing stupid things and waste money and get tired, making
           their friends turn away, and making new enemies, then when they
           are broke and exhausted and got kicked out of iraq with tail
           between their legs, then add insult to injury and start
           bombing and terrorizing them at their home again.  by then their
           will would be totally broken, and they will cry like girl.
           \_ Wow!  This r3wl5!!1!
           \_ You WIN!
           \_ I would suggest that the 'kicked out of Iraq' part isn't
              going according to plan.