“How Terrorist Groups End”

(1 am – promoted by DDadmin)

The title above comes from a new Rand Corporation Report

After 7 years of conflict and occupations, with 893 coalition deaths — 556 Americans, in Afghanistan and increasing, and 4,438 coalition deaths — 4,124 Americans in Iraq and increasing, with tens of thousands of injured and maimed, physically and mentally, and millions of innocents in both countries killed, maimed, living as refugee’s, fighting each other in sectarian civil wars, living in ethnically cleansed neighborhoods and area’s in Iraq behind huge concrete blast walls, this “Think Tank?” comes out and says:

U.S. Should Rethink “War On Terrorism” Strategy to Deal with Resurgent Al Qaida

Current U.S. strategy against terrorist organization al Qaida has not been successful at limiting the group’s capabilities. Since Sept. 11, 2001, al Qaida has been involved in more terrorist attacks than ever before and over an increasingly broader range of targets.

No F’in Shit!!!!!

Millions of us, here and around the world, before the invasions and occupations, were saying exactly the same and more, and we weren’t called a “Think Tank” we were labeled as “Focus Groups” not to be listened to, those here were labeled as “Unpatriotic”, “Traitors”, “Enemy Sympathizers”, you name it “We Were In The Wrong” and the lying bastards of power Were Right, over seventy percent of this countries people Said So, and now hide from that support and tune out what the reality is!

And what does this “Think Tank” think we should do, not only this country but the world, well according to their press release:

Current U.S. strategy against the terrorist group al Qaida has not been successful in significantly undermining the group’s capabilities, according to a new RAND Corporation study issued today.

Oh if you click the link directly above they’ll sell you the study in paperback. But you can download the Full Document (File size 3.1 MB, 13 minutes modem, 2 minutes broadband) in PDF or download the Summary Only (File size 0.1 MB,  1 minute modem,  1 minute broadband) also in PDF.

From the site page linked above, a short description:

All terrorist groups eventually end. But how do they end? The evidence since 1968 indicates that most groups have ended because (1) they joined the political process (43 percent) or (2) local police and intelligence agencies arrested or killed key members (40 percent). Military force has rarely been the primary reason for the end of terrorist groups, and few groups within this time frame have achieved victory. This has significant implications for dealing with al Qa’ida and suggests fundamentally rethinking post-9/11 U.S. counterterrorism strategy: Policymakers need to understand where to prioritize their efforts with limited resources and attention. The authors report that religious terrorist groups take longer to eliminate than other groups and rarely achieve their objectives. The largest groups achieve their goals more often and last longer than the smallest ones do. Finally, groups from upper-income countries are more likely to be left-wing or nationalist and less likely to have religion as their motivation. The authors conclude that policing and intelligence, rather than military force, should form the backbone of U.S. efforts against al Qa’ida. And U.S. policymakers should end the use of the phrase “war on terrorism” since there is no battlefield solution to defeating al Qa’ida.

If you noticed in the above the terms “leftwing” and “nationalists” are used. While both so called ideologies, across many spectrum’s not only political have their extremists I would argue that we recently became witness to a terrorists attack, on innocents, in a church, that from the reporting of it coming out hardly shows this terrorists was of a “leftwing” ideology, a “nationalists” maybe, but I doubt he even knows what that is.

And those we presently label as “Terrorist”, any we wish as those naming wage terror, are hardly “leftwing”, more of the extreme “rightside” of political, religious, and corporate entities.

If you also noticed, near the end of the above, it says, “U.S. policymakers should end the use of the phrase “war on terrorism” since there is no battlefield solution to defeating al Qa’ida.”!

Now where have I heard that before, oh ya, from the Millions of us in the “Focus Groups” for over seven years! And what do they suggest we call it exactly, why “CounterTerrorism” instead, and why, because Terror is a Criminal Act and can only be gone after as a Crime finding and arresting, and if a fight ensues possibly killing, those carrying out these crimes, breaking up the organizations big and small, and I’ll add change the policies the powerful practice to suppress any need for the disenfranchised to rebel against that power and those failed policies!

From the Press Release:

Among the other findings, the study notes:

   * Religious terrorist groups take longer to eliminate than other groups. Since 1968, approximately 62 percent of all terrorist groups have ended, while only 32 percent of religious terrorist groups have done so.

   * No religious terrorist group has achieved victory since 1968.

   * Size is an important predictor of a groups’ fate. Large groups of more than 10,000 members have been victorious more than 25 percent of the time, while victory is rare when groups are smaller than 1,000 members.

   * There is no statistical correlation between the duration of a terrorist group and ideological motivation, economic conditions, regime type or the breadth of terrorist goals.

   * Terrorist groups that become involved in an insurgency do not end easily. Nearly 50 percent of the time they end with a negotiated settlement with the government, 25 percent of the time they achieved victory and 19 percent of the time, military groups defeated them.

   * Terrorist groups from upper-income countries are much more likely to be left-wing or nationalistic, and much less likely to be motivated by religion.

“The United States has the necessary instruments to defeat al Qaida, it just needs to shift its strategy and keep in mind that terrorist groups are not eradicated overnight,” Jones said.

It took over seven years for this thinktank to come up with the obvious.

We waged War, mostly on Innocent Human Beings, using such catch phrases as “They hate our Freedom and Democracy”, “They want to convert all to Islam”, the so called leader? of the pack even used a term describing it was another  “Religious War” and called himself a “War President” and “The Decider”.

What we have done is create not only new generations of Hatred, we have made New Enemies of us and the World, tens of thousands if not millions, by the Failed Policies, the Death and Destruction, the Want To Control Them. And the generations behind us will be left dealing with the New World We Have Given Them!!

Once again, you can get the press release here, you can get the  full document here or a summary of the research brief here. There is also a link for a Congressional Briefing to be held today:

Speakers: Seth Jones Date: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 Time: 2:00 p.m. – 3:00 p.m. Location: 210 Cannon House Office Building Washington, D.C.

If televised I’m wondering if I should watch it, I’m afraid I might either start pulling out my hair or throw something into the tv screen, as I think of All that has been Done these past seven years and none can be taken back!!!!!!!


Skip to comment form

    • Metta on July 29, 2008 at 22:21


    It’s not like this information wasn’t available for study before this.  Sheesh.

    So Richard Pearle gets away with profiteering from the war he helped create???? WTF…

    • feline on July 29, 2008 at 23:07

    This was brought to my attention by a fellow blogger at Conyersblog, also, and I was hoping someone would discuss this here.

    Thank you for bringing this to us.

  1. between an insurgent, revolutionary, freedom fighter and a terrorist? and more importantly who get to define who is a terrorist? Maybe if our foreign policy did not support regimes and that terrorized people and stopped funneling money and arms into propping up all the creepy terrorists who we think are ‘geopolitically’ helpful like Bin Ladin, we could sort out who was really a terrorist group. Historically any Empire that tries to stop  the ‘barbarians’ militarily gets ground down in the process.  

    As it stands now it’s just one handy Goldstein after another. A better deal for perpetual war then the Commies were as terrorists are in the eye of the beholder. As Edwards said a ‘bumper sticker’ enemy. When nation states start being labeled terrorist organizations as in Iran or any one who defies our ‘national’ interests and yet Darfur is allowed to operate unheeded you got to wonder about the whole concept of fighting terror.      

    • Edger on July 30, 2008 at 02:05

    On June 23, 2006 Salman Rushdie was interviewed by Bill Moyers. The video is here, and it’s a great discussion between the two men. I highly recommend it. Transcript here.

    Rushdie drew a very apt and instructive analogy to the long history of ‘terrorism’ troubles Britain had to deal with from the IRA that can be of help in understanding what we are dealing with when considering what do do about groups like Al Qaeda:

    SALMAN RUSHDIE: There are people, as I say, you have to defeat, you know. But I’m talking about the enormous culture of which they’re the pimple on the nose of it. And I think in the end the way in which radical Islam will be defeated is when ordinary Islam, you know, when the regular world of the Muslim faith comes to reject the idea that they will be represented by, defined by that kind of extremist behavior.

    BILL MOYERS: But many people say that that kind of extremist behavior is part and parcel of the ideology of the heart of Islam. What do you–

    SALMAN RUSHDIE: I don’t think necessarily. I mean, the IRA was not intrinsically– was not somehow arising from something intrinsic to Catholicism. And actually the IRA is a relevant example. Because when the Catholics of Northern Ireland became disillusioned by being represented by the IRA that is what brought the IRA to the peace table. At that moment their power disappeared. And that’s why I’m saying that it is in a way incumbent on the Muslim world to reject Islamic radicalism, because that is what will remove the power of Islamic radicalism.

    BILL MOYERS: Is America doomed to live under a fatwah as you did? Under the threat of terrorism for a long time, as you did?

    SALMAN RUSHDIE: Yes, I think. But I mean, I think everywhere is dangerous now. You know the world is not a safe place; and there are no safe corners of it. And actually, there probably never have been. I think, in a way, America was insulated from that for awhile by the enormous power of America. But even that no longer insulates. So I think we do have to accept that the world is like that now. And I think  ‘ one of the reasons I can say this is that, having lived in England during the years of the of the IRA campaign  ‘ it became something that people, in a way, came to accept. That every so often a bomb would go off in a shopping mall, shopping center, and in the end, people refused to allow that to change their daily lives and just proceeded. And I think that refusal to be deflected from the path of normality also played a great deal of the role in the defeat of the IRA, that they didn’t achieve their goal. And I think it is, I mean, it’s something I’ve written quite a bit about, that the answer to terrorism is not to be terrorized, and it becomes important to continue–

  2. Jan Berry did a blog post on the Rand Report after seeing mine, over at his site, he’s a writer I’m not.

    Take a trip over he does a good tie in to ‘Nam and today.

  3. Jan Berry did a blog post on the Rand Report after seeing mine, over at his site, he’s a writer I’m not.

    Take a trip over he does a good tie in to ‘Nam and today.

  4. Report this evening.

    We all agreed to stop saying,

    “Fighting for Peace and Justice”

Comments have been disabled.