| Submit your comments on this article |
| Terror Networks |
| Jabhat al-Nusra greater threat than ISIS, warns report |
| 2016-01-28 |
| [Rudaw] A new policy report by Fred and Kim Kagan (developers of the so-called "surge" strategy in Iraq around a decade ago) charges that the al-Qaeda offshoot in Syria, Jabhat al-Nusra ...formally Jabhat an-Nusrah li-Ahli sh-Sham (Support Front for the People of the Levant), also known as al-Qaeda in the Levant. They aim to establish a pan-Arab caliphate. Not the same one as the Islamic State, though .. ... , poses a greater threat to the United States in the long-term than the Islamic State ...formerly ISIS or ISIL, depending on your preference. Before that al-Qaeda in Iraq, as shaped by Abu Musab Zarqawi. They're very devout, committing every atrocity they can find in the Koran and inventing a few more. They fling Allaharound with every other sentence, but to hear the pols talk they're not reallyMoslems.... (ISIS) does. "Any strategy that leaves Jabhat al-Nusra in place will fail to secure the American homeland," the report warns. Published by American Enterprise Institute and the Institute for the Study of War the report posits that Nusra is "much more dangerous to the U.S. than the ISIS model in the long run." "While ISIS is flashier ... both represent an existential threat, both wish to attack the homeland, both seek the mobilization of Muslim communities against the West," Kim Kagan told CNN. However Nusra is more dangerous in their view since, unlike ISIS, it "is quietly intertwining itself with the Syrian population and Syrian opposition ... they are waiting in the wings to pick up the mantle of global jihad once ISIS falls." "Right now," she continued, "al-Nusra has decided not to overtly host attack cells because the al-Qaeda leadership's priority is preserving success in Syria and avoiding being targeted by the U.S." "We define a threat as having the capability and the intent. ... The capability is already there, and in time the intent will be as well," they warned. |
| Posted by:trailing wife |
| #5 Sad-be-dam was an admirer of Stalin. Hard to square that with being a nazi. |
| Posted by: Sven the pelter 2016-01-28 17:53 |
| #4 Christopher Hitchens demonstrated that Saddam Hussein was not secular Saddam enjoyed a long relationship with Islam's holy men, inscribed the worlds "Allahu Akhbar" on the Iraqi flag, and sponsored holy jihadis, built mosques, and murdered thousands of people in his "Operation Anfal" borrowing a term from the Koran. the Baath party modelled itself on European fascism, which was not modelled on secularism and proposes the worship of the state, the party and the leader. In Iraq in the last 15 years under Saddam morphed completely into an Islamist regime and changed all its rhetoric to Jihadism, complete with a koran written entirely in Saddams blood. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ft2YEQK8oWc Saddam pretended to be secular as he was a minority sect (Sunni) in control of a majority Shia country. Similarly Bashar al Assad ran a completely religious regime - a minority Alawite religious clan. A variant of shia. It sponsors clerical terrorism around the world and its main ally is Iran, a shia theocracy, and co-sponsors hezbollah. That is NOT secular. Finally, you can be a bad leader and secular or a good leader and secular. It is not enough on its own. but it is an absolutely necessary precurser to any ally being long-term safe for the West. That means we should have long ago dumped the Saudis and have kicked Turkey out of Nato when Erdogan began sponsoring IS and supporting Islamism |
| Posted by: anon1 2016-01-28 17:18 |
| #3 The Assads were secular Muslims, anon1, as was Saddam Hussein. Both sponsored and trained terror groups that attacked Israel and elsewhere. And Gamel Nasser And Muammar Gaddafi And Yassir Arafat And the rest of Fatah And the PLO And.. .I could go on. Unfortunately. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2016-01-28 14:38 |
| #2 Only truly secular muslims pose no threat to the USA or anywhere else The Assads were secular Muslims, anon1, as was Saddam Hussein. Both sponsored and trained terror groups that attacked Israel and elsewhere. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2016-01-28 12:23 |
| #1 WRONG AGAIN everyone "Any strategy that leaves Only truly secular muslims pose no threat to the USA or anywhere else all theocratic fascists are a threat to democracy and freedom. Even the shia in Iran. Yes. |
| Posted by: anon1 2016-01-28 08:30 |