meade95

And another from the UK Times ....a la the New Republic of all places.... The New Republic The Unraveling by Peter Bergen and Paul Cruickshank The jihadist revolt against bin Laden. Post Date Wednesday, June 11, 2008 Al-Qaeda: the cracks begin to show A succession of leading Muslim radicals has condemned the terror group’s tactics as its support in Islamic countries falls off dramatically. Is Britain following the pattern? During Friday prayers this weekend, Dr Usama Hasan stood at the pulpit of his Tawhid mosque in Leyton, east London, and delivered a sermon on the sinfulness of alcohol and drugs. It was quite a sedate affair compared with some of the sermons the 36-year-old imam has given. He often uses his platform to rally his congregation against terrorism, condemning Osama Bin Laden, the Al-Qaeda leader, and his deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri as unIslamic criminals. __________________________ And others... Most Saudis Oppose al Qaeda James Joyner | Tuesday, December 18, 2007 A recent survey of Saudi Arabian adults finds a complicated view of America, terrorism, and freedom. Most Saudi Arabia citizens interviewed in a poll oppose terrorism and want closer ties with the United States. But many Saudis remain opposed to making peace with Israel, according to what researchers call an unprecedented survey of the kingdom. Ten percent of Saudis have a favorable view of the al Qaeda terrorist network, according to a survey by Terror Free Tomorrow, an international public opinion research group based in Washington. Fifteen percent said they have a favorable view of al Qaeda’s leader, Saudi exile Osama bin Laden, the poll found. Saudis also have a better opinion of the United States than in other countries in the Muslim world, with 40 percent saying they view the U.S. favorably. That compares to 19 percent in Pakistan, according to a poll taken by the same group in August, and 21 percent of Egyptians, according to a May survey by the Pew Research Center. _______________________ And how about this one from Fareed Zakaria’s article in Newsweek: Al Qaeda Central, by which I mean the dwindling band of brothers on the Afghan-Pakistani border, appears to have turned into a communications company. It’s capable of producing the occasional jihadist cassette, but not actual jihad. … Bin Laden’s most recent appeal is a mishmash of argument and detail, and seems slightly crazed. He has broadened his verbal attacks against the “Zionist-Crusaders” to include the United Nations and China. The latter he condemns because it “represents the Buddhists and Pagans of the world.”Like Hitler crazily declaring war on the United States after Pearl Harbor, bin Laden is adding to his slew of formidable enemies… ____________ How about this from StrategyPage... Bin Laden Admits Defeat in Iraq October 27, 2007: On October 22nd, Osama bin Laden admitted that al Qaeda had lost its war in Iraq. In an audiotape speech titled "Message to the people of Iraq," bin Laden complains of disunity and poor use of resources. He admits that al Qaeda made mistakes, and that all Sunni Arabs must unite to defeat the foreigners and Shia Moslems. What bin Laden is most upset about is the large number of Sunni Arab terrorists who have switched sides in Iraq. This has actually been going on for a while. Tribal leaders and warlords in the west (Anbar province) have been turning on terrorist groups, especially al Qaeda, for several years. While bin Laden appeals for unity, he shows only a superficial appreciation of what is actually going on in Iraq. Bin Laden doesn't discuss how the Americans defeated him. It was done with data. Years of collecting data on the bad guys paid off. Month by month, the picture of the enemy became clearer. This was literally the case, with some of the intelligence software that created visual representations of what was known of the enemy, and how reliable it was. The picture was clear enough to maneuver key enemy factions into positions that make them easier to run down. Al Qaeda is under a lot of pressure of late. In addition to defeat in Iraq, the organization is being battered in North Africa, South East Asia, Somalia, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Bin Laden has not got any good news to talk about, and that's what's really got his followers angry. ____________________ From July of 08 - In a recent thread posted on Al Ekhlaas, the largest Al Qaeda forum on the internet, the author of the thread who is also a very prominent member of the terrorist forum admitted that Al Qaeda main battlefield against the US has now moved from Iraq to Afghanistan. In his thread “Qanas Al Jazeera” said that the so called “Iraqi Resistance”( i.e. Al Qaeda terrorists) is now suffering from a lot of problems that has badly affected their status in Iraq and led to their decline. He went on to explain why the battlefield in Iraq is no more suitable for Al Qaeda terrorists and why Afghanistan is becoming the main theater of war against the US. The thread was written in Arabic and I will post below a partial translation. Also Al Ekhlaas is not an open forum and one must be registered to view the posting. However for the folks who may have access to the terrorist forum here is the link: http://ek-ls.org/forum/showthread.php?t=155079 Beginning of the partial translation: “Date of the thread: June 17 2008. Author: “Qanas Al Jazeera”. A lot of events lead now to the direction that Afghanistan will become the main center to resist the imperial American project after Iraq was the main center of resistance for a period of two years from 2005-2006. There are a lot of subjective and objectives reasons that lead in the direction that Afghanistan and that the strength of Afghani resistance increases each passing day where as the Iraqi resistance suffer from a number of problems that greatly affected it and caused its decline after being so close from achieving a strategic victory against the US….. …The Iraqi resistance has been suffering from division and many factions where they were a lot of Emirs and Emirates in regions where they were not required and with great regret the success of the Americans in penetrating the Sunni ranks who were the main shelter of the resistance and they founded the so called “Awakening Councils” which greatly weakened the resistance and led to its decline….” ____________________ Another - Fascinating: The Jihadists Admit Defeat in Iraq A prolific jihadist sympathizer has posted an ‘explosive’ study on one of the main jihadist websites in which he laments the dire situation that the mujaheddin find themselves in Iraq by citing the steep drop in the number of insurgent operations conducted by the various jihadist groups, most notably Al-Qaeda’s 94 percent decline in operational ability over the last 12 months when only a year and half ago Al-Qaeda accounted for 60 percent of all jihadist activity! http://krishna109.newsvine.com/_news/2008/05/17/1494468-fascinating-the-jihadists-admit-defeat-in-iraq __________________________ May 27, 2008 Report: al Qaeda Discussing "Why we lost in Iraq" It seems that the jihadis are finally admitting what we've know for months: they've lost in Iraq. It's stunning. Not so much that al Qaeda has lost in Iraq, but that they're online supporters are now admitting it. Just a few months ago my reading of the online discourse was that al Qaeda's fans were in total denial, continuing to call us the "United States of Losers" in Iraq. For any of them to admit defeat is a real victory. If this report is correct, its importance cannot be overstated. Why? Because a key to insurgency recruitment has always been hope for victory. Far fewer people are willing to risk death in a cause they believe they cannot win. Hence, al Qaeda has long pushed propaganda designed to present an image of imminent victory in Iraq. Since so many al Qaeda operatives are always dying, a key to keeping up the fight is in recruiting. But the perception of defeat means far fewer recruits, translating into weaker fighting ability. Strategy Page: Al Qaeda web sites are making a lot of noise about "why we lost in Iraq." Western intelligence agencies are fascinated by the statistics being posted in several of these Arab language sites. Not the kind of stuff you read about in the Western media. According to al Qaeda, their collapse in Iraq was steep and catastrophic. According to their stats, in late 2006, al Qaeda was responsible for 60 percent of the terrorist attacks, and nearly all the ones that involved killing a lot of civilians. The rest of the violence was carried out by Iraqi Sunni Arab groups, who were trying in vain to scare the Americans out of the country. Read the rest. Now that al Qaeda's supporters have admitted to the obvious, will the reality based community on the Left admit we've all but won the war that "couldn't be won"? Don't hold your breath.

There are all sorts of Islamic websites / forums you can go read yourself - There are all sorts of Pew Polls and Kempler polling (Sp) which focuses on the ME.... Here is just one example ....of a recent review of attitudes in the ME....Regarding AQ/mimics/Bin laden.......Hell, look at some of Zawahiri's OWN preachers / mentors who have openly turned against him..... This from the Union Leader of all places....(also went out via AP)... al-Qaida on ropes: Monday, Jun. 2, 2008 CIA Director Michael Hayden said last week that al-Qaida is losing its war on the West. Skeptics who don't trust any information that emerges from the lips of a Bush administration official do not have to take Hayden's word to believe the truth of his assessment. The evidence is everywhere. In a Washington Post interview last week, Hayden presented our successes in the War on Terror this way: "Near strategic defeat of al-Qaida in Iraq. Near strategic defeat for al-Qaida in Saudi Arabia. Significant setbacks for al-Qaida globally -- and here I'm going to use the word 'ideologically' -- as a lot of the Islamic world pushes back on their form of Islam." That might sound like Bush administration puffery. But days earlier, two New York University researchers wrote a strikingly similar appraisal in the liberal magazine The New Republic. "According to Pew polls, support for Al Qaeda has been dropping around the Muslim world in recent years," wrote Peter Bergen and Paul Cruickshank. "The numbers supporting suicide bombings in Indonesia, Lebanon, and Bangladesh, for instance, have dropped by half or more in the last five years. In Saudi Arabia, only 10 percent now have a favorable view of Al Qaeda, according to a December poll by Terror Free Tomorrow, a Washington-based think tank. Following a wave of suicide attacks in Pakistan in the past year, support for suicide operations amongst Pakistanis has dropped to 9 percent (it was 33 percent five years ago), while favorable views of bin Laden in the North West Frontier Province of Pakistan, around where he is believed to be hiding, have plummeted to 4 percent from 70 percent since August 2007." On Thursday U.S. commanders announced that Iraq's Diyala province, once a stronghold for al-Qaida in Iraq, was under U.S. and Iraqi control. On May 24 U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker said al-Qaida in Iraq was closer to defeat than it has ever been. In mid-May, terrorist attacks in Iraq fell to their lowest level since March 2004. The evidence worldwide strongly suggests that al-Qaida has been decimated by a combination of aggressive action by the United States and its allies and the terrorist organization's own horrific acts. Not only are ordinary Muslims turning against terrorism in droves, but former al-Qaida supporters and trainees have taken to denouncing the group for murdering innocents, especially Muslim ones. Still, Hayden cautions against complacency. "The fact that we have kept [Americans] safe for pushing seven years now has got them back into the state of mind where 'safe' is normal," he said. "Our view is: Safe is hard-won, every 24 hours." That's a good way to look at this war, which President Bush said from the start would be long and arduous. It isn't over yet, but the evidence shows that so far we are doing better than the enemy.

[quote I have no political bias; I think both parties are equally incompetent and the supposed alternative parties hopelessly irrelevant My only interest is getting this country, and by extension the world, on the right track. There's only so much I myself can do about that, of course. Steve

This really isn't a fair overview..... not at all true in total - There are plenty within the Military that advocate such - Perhaps not within all the HQs of the Big Green.....but in other brances (those that would actually be going in most likely for such *raids*) are very much in favor of doing such. I have a family member in the USN (Teams) and in albeit limited conversations to a degree....he has more than openly stated the desire by many within the community for more DA Ops within such places.....and that there is a constant struggle between those within the military (shooters) and those HQ elements / JAGs which are much more risk adverse...... Of course there is also the relaity that the Big Green doesn't like when others are in charge (one reason Rumsfeld was disliked so much by some in the HQ elements was for making SOCOM its own branch)....but there are plenty that want to hit into Pak border regions and targets in Syria where appropriate....(without the need for holding ground / large ground forces). And yes, such raids can be effective.......and plenty within the military think so. And oh come on Steve - The one who constantly talks about *others* political dogmas...is the one who comes with the political slant. That is beyond obvious.

Steve - Lets cut the "expert" BS - It is you that brought up "experts" to begin with and ridiculously boasted in a sense that "all experts" agree with you..... Please.

And are you directing that at the POTUS or Congress level?? Wasn't it Congressional leadership that told us Iraq was lost and that the "surge" would only make matters worse? That certainly was the "wrong call" for the "wrong reasons" (i.e. solely politically movtivated). Not at all in what was best for us (U.S.) nor Iraqis....

Ha. I may have used that word too often.......but I can't help it.... I can't turn on my TV anymore without some expert on this or that telling me what I'm suppose to think...

Is this playing RT or WEGO? Just curious. I've never used the DEMO charge yet to enter a building / W/ assault..

And there is some real strategic sense to this type of "simple" thinking. Iraq was the venus-fly-trap war....where our enemies found themselves in.....a la, too late..... All you have to do is read the intercepts that are being released (or the islamic websites themselves) where AQ and their ilk are speaking of how they have lost in Iraq...and how it turned out to be a terrible blunder for THEIR cause.....how much they have lost in lives and resources and what a waste it turned out to be....

You mean T Boon Pickens who is looking to make billions off going with his new alternative energy business? No, he doesn't have a dog in this fight now does he......Of course he wants Gov't mandates forcing the public to go his route......That is just smart business. Why the hell do you think Warren Buffett is so rich and constantly in support of Gov't. Because he made the majority of his billions off Gov't directly or off Gov't mandates (thus indirectly). And your notion that it will take 10 years to bring more oil in from off shore sites is flat out wrong. As is the notion that it would take 10 years from ANWAR. If Congress would wake up and get serious about energy......and there were real economic incentives for drilling and bringing that oil to market....it would be done in half that time (from ANWAR) and even less than that from places off shore..... If companies knew they could bring that product to market for a profit..... Again, the same tired notions that it would "take 10 years" is the same old notion that was used 10 years ago.....hmm? Additionally, oil is a speculative market.....The reality that the U.S. was going to allow our marketplace to search for and bring to market our own oil supplies would take all the speculative push out of a barrel of oil (pushing prices down) and also we woud see an increase in production across the globe by oil producers (further keeping prices down, even with increases in consumption). Anyway......Good discussion Steve and best regards,

The same CIA that missed the fall of the USSR?? The same CIA that gave POTUS the "slam-dunk WMD" assuracne? The reality is since the war in Iraq / removal of Saddam.... more on the muslim street are turning against AQ/ and their mimics. Polls throughout the ME show this..... It was a boom for recruiting in the short-run.....but a majority of those recruits are all dead now. A whole segment of a generation is gone....dead. Years and years of terrorist leadership is likewise captured or dead...... These results are a net positive for the world. The dirty secret was.....it was AQ who could not fight an effective multi-front war....not us..... We have done so, and done so damn well by most reasonable measures. Of course there are mistakes or wish-I-could-do-that-one again type situations/events.........But on the whole any notion that AQ and their mimics are better off today than in 2001 is ridiculous.... Or that Stan/Iraq are worse off today is beyond foolishness..... The world is better off with Saddam gone. The world is better off with the Taliban out of power.....The world is better off with ten's of thousands of AQ/ their mimics / anti-West foot soliders in the ground....... The world is better off with elections, with high voter participation taking place in Iraq and Stan......The world is better off and the root causes of hate in the ME are finally seeing an alternative with the values of freedom and self-worth being seen and taking root for the first time in this region in recent memory......With us, the U.S and allies standing beside / with... seeing these new Gov't's stand fully up. And no, I just don't agree with you on this one..... we do not need to change our way of life for those in the ME. Again, that (IMO) is circle-jerk smartest guy in the room thinking that only comes out of the unreality-world of academia.....

Well,first I never really said that was the full premise.....but to your point above.... it sure in hell does make the world safer from THAT rapist...and that in and of itself is a net positive - The notion that capturing or killing real bad guys creates more of them is warped thinking wrapped up as trying to be the smartest guy in the room.....(a la, why you see plenty of "experts" touting such......thus the commonness of common-sense is what they avoid/hate acknowledging).......And reality is evil people don't need excuses...they will create them if need be..... Fact is, by and large people do respond to incentives or decentives....this includes terrorists....and if doing XYZ will get you dead...at some point you're going to stop dong XY&Z (or at least so in larger numbers)......and if they don't....then they are just evil SOBs at heart that have earned a bullet to begin with....

Steve - At work at the moment but plan to get back with you later tonight - Your post if full of false notions, half-truths and strawman throughout - And what don't you get about establishing the true notions/ values of freedom and self-worth in the heart of the ME....as not taking on the "root causes"....... Furthermore if some guy is raping my neighbor.....I really don't care about the root causes (and neither does the victim) more so than they care about the police showing up and killing or capturing the guy doing it........ But that is off topic somewhat........More later tonight and you are dead wrong about oil across the board. From how long it would take to actually get if there were REAL economic insentives to do so.....to what quanitites are actually out there....to what effect it would have on other oil producing nations......(and wasn't it those on the LEFT saying 10 years ago, that we didn't need access to these oil reserves because it would take 10 years.....hmm, sure would have helped the past couples years now wouldn't it).

No. Until those majorities within Muslim countries learn to love their children more than they hate....... These people will need to be confronted with force at times....plain and simple.....while at the same time where possible looking to continue to plant the values of freedom and self-worth within the citizens of said countries.....who for far too long have been denied even the notions of such.... Blaming Israel or the U.S. is beyond absurd.

Update - U.S. Official: Syrian Strike Killed Al Qaeda Target Created: Monday, 27 Oct 2008, 3:43 PM GMT A U.S. strike on a network of foreign fighters in Syria killed its main target — an Al Qaeda coordinator who was wanted for sending foreign fighters, weapons and cash into Iraq, a U.S. official told FOX News. Killed in Sunday's attack by Special Operations Forces was Abu Ghadiyain, Al Qaeda's senior coordinator operating in Syria who was closely associated with the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq. The assault, which took place about 4-5 miles inside Syria, came just days after the commander of U.S. forces in western Iraq said American troops were redoubling efforts to secure the border, which he called an "uncontrolled" gateway for fighters entering Iraq.

+1 to this as well - There should be an option for ONLY the sniper to shoot - But yes, there is a real problem with accuracy of snipers themselves as well.....

First, most "experts" love to have mental circle jerks more than actually accomplishing anything.......has been my experience and observation in life...... They love to be monday morning QBs even more.... And secondly, the above notion is really nothing more than straw-man. No one is advocating simply killng bad guys and not doing anything else......What is the whole purpose of us trying to help new quasi-democracy governments stand up in Iraq and Stan......And it is working. Furthermore, the notion that the WOT is about oil is foolishness.....Unless those of that mindsent want to say it is only about ME (Middle Eastern) oil....... . Because most of those same people saying it is about oil...and the need for it......Do everything possible to stop the U.S. from obtaining more of its own supply within our Country and off our shores..... The old wise adage of "people should be upset at those who CAUSE higher prices not those who charge them" comes to mind here.... Lastly, killing bad guys, does work. Especially on those you are killing if they are effective in what harm they are trying to create or in the leadership they provide. Sr / productive leadership is not easily replaced. Hell, we all can see this in our daily lives. Be it working at a gas station or a fortune 500 company...... AQ and AQ elements are no different. We have killed over 3/4+ of AQ original leadership and yes, after all the mental masturbation by "experts"....the bottom line is AQ is worse off for it.....

+1 to this - Snipers are way, way, to inaccurate in CMSF - IMO - I also believe snipers are much to prone to be KIA while in overwatch positions from inside buildings - After reading numerous AAR, along with first person account books such as Ambush Alley, House to House, Sheriff of Ramadi, DR, etc, etc...... U.S. Soliders (and especially sniper teams) are not being KIA from small-arms incoming fire while being inside buildings / houses ...and taking small arms fire from OUTSIDE the house....... Of course clearing houses / buildings is where many of the KIA/WIA happens..... But in CMSF....I see way too many KIAs from guys in buildings taking small arms fire from 100+ meters away.....

Thanks. So using "Quick" command clearing a room / building is likely the best mode of movement - While having surpressing fire from other units with good LOS...... Or ditto the supressing fire (from other units ) while using the assault order too.

Love this map - Bloody, agreed! Working my men through it right now - I really do hate the "time options"...with a max ony being 2 hours. I see it as such a waste that BFC doesn't allow for a "no-time" option for those customers who which to play longer battles. What the hell is it to BFC if those of us would wish to have such battles / scenarios? Bake the one's they make so they are time driven.....but give the customers an option out for scenarios we make.

What have others found to be the best way to clear a room / building? Is it best to use a team (large enough for Assault command) and let them go about it? Or is it best to micro-manage even more....Having elements "target" fire on the building while sending in a smaller team? Also, when sending in a team...What command is best for making sure they do it with speed but also with intent to kill bad guys.... Quick? Or Hunt? There has been a real good disscussion with regard to WEGO (and some of that can apply to RT)....but just looking for comments specifically to RT play....and clearing rooms. It would be nice to have a "clear" command to give to smaller units or split teams.

Any chance of anything like this in the near future? It really would add a level of realism and help greatly when looking at AAR.....See what exact units had KIA/WIA, etc.

+1 - Just hoping to see your excellent map work of Ramadi released....as a stand alone for now.....if you don't have time for a campagin along with it.......Looks great.

Granted a better distance weapon.....But not better for MOUNT operations - Again, why those Marines that could used M4 (variants) in Iraq when possible. It would be nice if CM could provide this option.

Last one.....So not to hijack this thread...... But you must have missed the part in which I included "Especially when it is protected / defended until the newly established can defend themselves."..... (a la, not cutting and running before the new quasi-democracy is up and established)...