The Iraq Effect: War Has Increased Terrorism Sevenfold Worldwide »
Posted By elzorro2162 1 year, 7 months ago in NewsThe administration's own National Intelligence Estimate on "Trends in Global Terrorism: implications for the United States," circulated within the government in April 2006 and partially declassified in October, states that "the Iraq War has become the 'cause celebre' for jihadists and is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders
Read Full Story at motherjones.com »
Submitted By:
elzorro2162
I am Latino, I love watching and practicing sports (especially baseball), enjoy working out and living a healthy lifestyle. I also enjoy movies and acting ...
Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 153
-
0%
elzorro21621 year, 7 months ago
I completely agree with the analysis of this article which states:
{{The president's argument conveyed two important assumptions: first, that the threat of jihadist terrorism to U.S. interests would have been greater without the war in Iraq, and second, that the war is reducing the overall global pool of terrorists. However, the White House has never cited any evidence for either of these assumptions, and none appears to be publicly available.}}
Z
Reply-
-
0%
Sabretooth1 year, 7 months ago
Good thinking. You will probably need to dispatch forces to Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Iran, Algeria, UAE, Syria and Pakistan to start. Just how many troops, and how much money and equipment do you have David? I am pretty sure if you poke the hornets nest just a few more times they will leave you alone.
Reply -
0%
kobzikov1 year, 7 months ago
DavidHalko,
Not only do you lack historical knoweledge of the region and basic understanding of human psyche, you lack a human conscience. I can't find another way to characterize your support of increase in terrorism in the troubled region and implication that the lives of people who live there are somehow expendable.
Not only, US lacks the capability to prosecute and fight terrorists in other countries, since most countries even allies in War on Terror are increasingly cooperating with US only on paper. But US can't even defend its own troops outside of Green Zone in Iraq.
So far all mitary and intelligence actions taken by US have either contributed to more terrorism or became a recruiting source for the terrorists. Ranging from Afghanistan's heroin trade, torture and rendition and concluding with military occupation of Iraq, support of Israeli military and occupation policies, all have resulted in destabilization of the region and strengthening of terrorist organizations.
Reply -
0%
donald511 year, 7 months ago
The analysis stated and validated with Rand data that Bush was wrong on both these assumptions. Just another nail in the coffin of the worst US president in at least the last century.
Halko, you have to be an idiot to want more successful terrorist attacks worldwide! Did you even read the article before you made your innane comment?
Reply -
0%
MikeReardon1 year, 7 months ago
In Saddam's Iraq, the Sunni's minority held power over the Shia majority. And Suddam with the Sunni's, openly opposed in war Shia Iran. The rest of the Arab world mostly Sunni did not mind this arrangement that much, for them it was the supposed to be that way the Sunni minority in power in Iraq. We have upset that cart of Sunni control in Iraq. Some place in that you can see why Sunni al Qaeda terrorists, attacking against the Shia majority inside Iraq are supported by Sunni outside Iraq. The local Sunni will in the end kill everyone not local even al Qaeda, but for now al Qaeda is part of the army they have. We and al Qaeda are only two more tribes in the middle of a civil war and an extended sectarian struggle. Sunni against Shia.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
MonkeyBiz1 year, 7 months ago
"...in the countries where they originated..." I heartily agree. We should be in Afganistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and a couple more countries where the terrorists originated.
They weren't originating in Iraq until we invaded. That's what Walt and a majority of Americans now see.
You should take a better look at what is going on instead of lock-stepping with a group of incompetents with a new world order agenda.
Reply -
-
0%
donald511 year, 7 months ago
..a president who calls the venture a crusade and unilaterally occupies a moslem country with insufficient force is the guilty party. But, it didn't help that the forces were told they'd be greeted as liberators, or that they don't do nation building and that we were only fighting terorists (not insurgents per Dubya). The politicians forced bad tactics too!
Reply
-
-
0%
Lurch1 year, 7 months ago
I agree David, only we do that best with intelligence instead of invasion.
By invading we created terrorists where they would not have been.
Reply -
0%
ADAGUY1 year, 7 months ago
How can you bring action when you have no idea who they are until they strike? Then, it's too late, as it's most commonly a suicide bomb.
Reply
-
-
0%
Dsb2k61 year, 7 months ago
The terrorists were in Afghanistan. Remember 9/11? It had nothing to do with Iraq. We went to Iraq because of WMD, not terrorists. Once the WMD theory took a crap, we were there to free the Iraqis from Saddam, not to fight terrorism. Now, we are there so we can fight the "terrorists" (a.k.a. the people embroiled in the civil war) there so we dont have to fight them here. Its nonsense that has only served to discredit our nation and create more terrorists.
Are you aware that the US government created Bin Laden AND Saddam? We have also funded Iran and assasinated their democratically elected leader in the past.
If you really believe this occupation of Iraq has anything to do with terrorism you are truly dilussional, but what am I saying, you are DavidHalko, we already know you are dillusional.
Reply-
0%
Sabretooth1 year, 7 months ago
Bahhh...there is always some party pooper that wants to cloud a good invasion and occupation with facts.
Reply -
67%
Beau78901 year, 7 months ago
Not that it has to do with Iraq or modern-day terrorism, but we also supported, if not installed, Noriega, Pinochet and others.
We have an excellent foreign policy record.
Reply
-
-
100%
donald511 year, 7 months ago
Halko, read the article then come back and retract all your unfounded comments.
Reply -
0%
BSdetective1 year, 7 months ago
(That is the best thing that could have ever happened.
Instead of Saddam using terrorists to do his dirty work and the Taliban sheltering al-Qaeda - both countries are now actively fighting terrorists within their own border.)
Apparently something is wrong with your brain. Saddam used no terrorists.
(If terrorists are being fought where they formerly were raised, it is the best thing that could ever happen!)
Yes, it's too bad bush decided not to do that. he pulled 26 pages on Saudi Arabia out of the 9/11 report.
Reply-
0%
espse1 year, 7 months ago
Everybody keeps blaming Bush. Bush is a sock puppet. It was the neocon's, Woofy, Cheney, Rumsfeld. They had the invasion ready to go, and saw their opportunity during the 911 confusion. Bush just did what he was told by his daddy shotgun dick.
Reply -
0%
MntnWllm1 year, 7 months ago
Agreed! Maybe our future mantra should be "It's The Saudis, stupid?" I can easilly envision Carville's face on the poster...and..he would be right, again
Reply
-
-
0%
TheTruthIsHere1 year, 7 months ago
Cronkite was the traitor who caused us to have a defeat out of a major battle that we had actually won in Vietnam and he is personally responsible for 3.5 million people that were murdered after we left....a really insane guy.....
Reply-
0%
DanmLiberals1 year, 7 months ago
It's funny because somehow the libs think we lost the war in Vietnam when we didn't lose one single major battle. Sure we lost a few skirmishes here and there but in all, we kicked the Vietcong ass. http://www.vietnam-war.info/casualties/
Too bad that the voted for this war also because they could have used this info. in the coming election.
Reply-
50%
djn3nunez31 year, 7 months ago
Really which one? Aren't you just making up a position then saying that the liberals say....
I don't think we lost one major battle in Vietnam, unlike the French. South Vietnam was surely the looser. But the dominoes didn't fall and maybe, just maybe, all hell will not break loose if the Iraqis get the chance to settle their country themselves. Then again, maybe it will spark a larger war whose results could be a total re-alinement of the Arab world.
One day we will have to roll the dice and see what happens. Until then more sons and daughters will be sent to occupy Iraq. More of them will of course die and come home injured both phyically and mentally. More innocent Iraqis will die as well.
Reply -
0%
Beau78901 year, 7 months ago
DanmLiberals, call it what you want. Won, lost, whatever.
Did we accomplish anything we set out to in Vietnam? We were ostensibly trying to stop the Commies from taking over. That didn't happen, and despite winning battles, we weren't making any progress toward it. We helped install friendly leaders, though, creating instability that led to the murders of countless villagers after we left. They say history repeats itself...
Or maybe the idea was really to create a friendly country in which we could sell our goods. If so, the war didn't help that--it was accomplished through later diplomacy.
And by the way, casualty counts don't really help us accomplish goals, unless the goal is to kill everyone.
Reply
-
0%
NelsonR1 year, 7 months ago
TheTruthishere - Your 3.5 figure is ludicrous. Iraq is the parallel of Vietnam. You wish to fight a civil war with your moral convictions. In Vietnam the truth is in the pudding. They are now a soverign nation that is not a threat to Americas values.
Vietnam wanted to be united exactly like America during its civil war. WHY is your convictions so strong to want world dominance? Let the iraqi's sort this out for themselves. Bush should not be involved in any more world authoritarian agendas. Haven't Americans and you learned from past mistakes or do you want to continue this charade.
I say exit now and fight the war in Afghanistan and if necessary deal with Pakistan where the sancturaries are in place.
Reply -
-
0%
Sabretooth1 year, 7 months ago
The Truthishere, i think you may want to actually read the title before you comment. By the way, great name, i suggest in the future you try to live up to all it implies.
Reply
-
-
0%
NelsonR1 year, 7 months ago
RoyHobbs - Where Truthishere obtained these 3.5 million figures is ludicrous. I think he is talking out of his A$$.
He apparently is a Republican conservative hawk that desires the perpetuation of the ignoramus Bush war in Iraq. Hell he isn't fighting so its easy to continue. Again, the war is in Afghanistan. Our Leader Georgie went into Iraq since his geography was lacking, he forgot 9/11 occured from Afghanistan.
Reply-
0%
MonkeyBiz1 year, 7 months ago
Truthishere is just chin2fat with a new name. He/she/it is just as goofy as before.
If the shrub had done the right thing and pursued OBL and Al Queda until they were all captured or killed, it would have been an object lesson to any one else contemplating attacking the US.
Most of the world, including Islamic countries, were appalled by 9-11 and would have cheered us on even if we pursued the terrorists all the way into Pakistan.
Of course if we had quickly dispatched OBL and his ragged little band, there would have been no "fear card" to play, and the shrub might have lost the 2004 election.
Reply
-
-
100%
Beau78901 year, 7 months ago
RoyHobbs--don't you know that telling people the truth is treasonous? Haven't you heard anything Ann Coulter says?
Reply
-
-
0%
Searunner521 year, 7 months ago
What is truly frightening is that Bush and the simpletons that continue to support him don't see that it is their actions that are the primary contributing factor to this rise in international terrorism!
They smugly bray that "we haven't been attacked since 9/11" and use that as the sole piece of evidence to support their contention that we are "winning" the war against terrorism when the facts (those pesky things that give all neocons the willies) show that the statement is as hollow as the space between their ears! The fact that this Nation hasn't been directly attacked has little, if anything, to do with their actions and a tremendous amount to do with luck!
It is but a matter of time before there is another attack on the home soil of this Nation and when it come all the neocons will once again shout that it is the fault of the "liberals" or anyone else who has disagreed with their actions - ignoring all the while their own personal responsibility!
Reply-
100%
COMNCNTS1 year, 7 months ago
Actually what is even more frightening is that terrorism has been here and will be here.
Anyone ever think that our intelligence is just concentrating on them more than say when Clinton didnt think more about the problem at hand when the world trade center was attacked the first time. So of course if you are looking harder you will find more.
Of course the war may have increased them some. But who is not to say they were there before hand and are now just coming out of the woodwork.
If we let the problem continue to grow without retribution and understanding that in alot of these countries they teach their children from birth to hate us essentially making human robots and soldiers. Which means as time goes on more will be made.
Most people in N. Korea believe they have been at war with us for decades and do not mind starving during war times. Thats how far these leaders distort the truth from their people.
Reply -
-
-
0%
walden31 year, 7 months ago
i never really thought that combating terror was the our government's true motive. terrorism is just the handiest stick that the government has to keep the citizens in line both emotionally and financially.
"Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people.... No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare."
j. madison
Reply -
100%
whatmatters1 year, 7 months ago
Terrorism would have increased anyway. Maybe it would not have accelerated to this point so quickly, but lets not fool ourselves, These fanatic Muslims have it out for the West and are recruiting more and more Poor, Ignorant souls each day. They really think by killing non muslims that they will go to Heaven? Crazy as it is thats a fact. The sane Muslims will have to reign in the Psycho's and other Western countries are going to have to remove their blinders and get involved before we turn the tide.
Reply-
0%
elzorro21621 year, 7 months ago
That's not ALL Muslims, only fundamentalists. By being in their lands and torturing them we tick them off causing higher recruitment for that brand of Islam. If we would get the heck outta there and be viewed as a nation of true justice, peace and freedom like we once where, then there might be a chance. BTW, all fundamentalism is evil, violent and self righteous and should be dealt with this includes christian fundamentalism which is just as dangerous and deadly as shown by distant and recent history.
Z
Reply-
0%
ChefEOD1 year, 7 months ago
Your hatred for Christianity makes me want to vomit. How did you get such a twisted view of reality? Tell me when was the last time you heard of Buddhist monks beheading someone for not believing the same as they, or Catholic nuns strapping on bombs and blowing people up?
Reply -
0%
COMNCNTS1 year, 7 months ago
Elzorro2162
I do not see Japan hating us or trying to fly planes into our buildings. I agree fundamentalism is on both sides.
But leaving without figuring out the best way to help the situation is not the answer. We have to figure out how to show them we are caring people. I think alot of them do. But the fundamentalists get all the press.
We are not there for an occupation, no matter what many think in and out of our country.
Alot of it has to do with our governments red tape, which leads to wasting of money that is sent there and to New Orleans after Katrina.
It will take some time to change things there. If we just cut and run we will only give the fundamentalists more power and resources they need to come and kill or convert us or allies of ours.
Reply
-
-
100%
jeffery11 year, 7 months ago
Didn't Bush say "It's better to fight them everywhere else and eventually here."?
This is what we get when the rabid right-wing gets to vote. a bunch of extremist know-nothings running purely on empty platitudes, lies, rhetoric, and faith in their authoritarian leaders. It's just too bad that the others were too busy or disenchanted to pay attention enough to get their rears to the polls in enough numbers to counter the right-wing threat to our republic.
Reply -
-
-
-
0%
espse1 year, 7 months ago
We are fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here, for this generation. When the orphans grow up and are brainwashed by the mulahas, we will have a million strong terrorist orginization just by our actions in Iraq. I guess the cons want the rapture for their children.
Reply
-
-
