OK, it felt good to make that statement. But I put it up there as the title, because it is unfortunately necessary to state so basic a fact as that, since certain people (I will be nice and not say which particular ones) have managed to muddy the picture quite a bit:
”We have to work to understand their anger”
“American has to face its responsibility for these attacks”
“George W. Bush has declared War on Islam”
Uhhhh, no, no, annnnnnd no. We need to kill terrorists and capture them, not play psychiatry games. America has generally done a credible job of advancing human rights and promoting peace and fair play throughout the world, certainly more than any other nation, so blaming us for terrorism aimed at innocents is distinctly obscene and false. And George W. Bush is attacking a few thousand fascist terrorists, not the hundreds of millions of innocent Muslims. But I digress…
Terrorists generally seem to come from two groups; the very rich who have taken up Jihad as a personal pursuit, in many cases as a way to make their name, and the very poor, who are enticed by groups like Hamas with promises that their family will be looked after and they will be given entry directly into Paradise. Fools on both ends. Sure, they’re technically proficient and able to pull off some sophisticated tricks, but that just makes them the Evil version of ‘Rainman’. And they don’t have Hoffman’s charisma, anyway.
Want proof? Let’s look at the scorecard. Let’s start with the poor kids who are suckered into joining up. Do that, and your personal career ends in death or life in prison. Yeah, that’s a plan. And their families? Just look at the refugee camps and the slums in terrorist-controlled regions. The families get a subsistence from the thuggish terror cells, but they are no better off without their young men, than they would have been if they had their child with them to build a future for himself and them. There is a firm history of emigrants who get education and an opportunity, who then are able to come back and help their parents. Not so if junior dies in a flaming car bomb, for which the family gets a small check and a slogan. It’s an obscene lie told to people unable in most cases to find out they’re being fooled into giving up their most precious hope. There is not a single family whose future was made better by having their son murder innocents for a useless political cause.
As for the “leadership” of these groups? Well, you got your choices there, as well. Some choose the heroic martyr route, which is to say they carry out bold and ruthless missions until they get killed themselves, at which time the Cause simply finds another puppet to preach their bile and vomit. Or they play for power and privilege. Looking at the roster of recent terrorists in the news, here’s what we see:
Abu Abbas – captured
Khalid Shiekh Mohammed – captured
Ansar-al-Islam - largely captured
Abu Farraj Al-Libbi , Al Qaeda 3rd-in-Command - captured
Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani - captured
Abu Nidal - captured, now dead
Mullah Mahdi, Deputy to Al-Zarqawi - captured
Abu Anas al-Shami, Deputy to Al-Zarqawi - killed
Husem al-Yemeni, Deputy to Al-Zarqawi - captured
Abu Alghadiya, Al Qaeda official - killed
Khaled al-Harbi, Al Qaeda mission planner - captured
Mohammed Atef, bin Laden lieutenant - killed
Hassan Ghul, bin Laden lieutenant - captured
Abu Zubaydah, bin Laden lieutenant - captured
75% of Al Qaeda’s operatives and leadership - captured or killed
I could go on, but the lesson is clear. Speaking of lessons, here's another datum:
27 Battalions of the new native Iraqi Army - Now fully operational
As for Al-Zarqawi and bin Laden themselves? If they are still alive (which is under debate), they are in hiding and living on the run, never staying in one place too long. At best, they are eating and sleeping poorly, aware that everyone they considered a close associate or friend a few years ago is either dead or in Coalition hands. Sound like a winning plan to you? Fools, all of them.
So, some say, what about “the Cause”? OK, let’s look at that. How has the terrorist way fared in the past, say 50 years?
IRA – Ireland still under the same government, IRA largely wiped out, what’s left is now a political party with complete rejection of terrorist violence.
Hamas, PLO, Hizbollah – Still around, but then so is Israel, no less likely to continue existing or to defend itself than when this all started.
Iraq – Dictatorship removed, support for terrorist groups abolished. Under self-rule and moving towards self-defense.
Afghanistan – Taliban removed, support for terrorist groups abolished. Under self-rule and moving towards self-defense.
Lebanon – Vocal in demanding self-rule and end to occupation by Syrian forces, and also to ending support for terrorist groups.
Saudi Arabia – Held minor elections, could lead to greater effect in democratization.
Iran - Forced to deny its nuclear weapons program and scale back operations. Increasing pressure from young generation for democracy.
Across the board, the terrorist cause and message is being rejected. Flatly, without exception. Only a moron could miss it. And only a moron could defend them instead of backing the Marines and the President, whose resolution is identical and unwavering on this question.