Yeah, Iraq was a clean floor before any al-Qaeda milk was spilled huh? Your analogy doesn't work.

Ahk, no disrespect intended, but isn't that a particularly narrow view of the world?  It disregards the total sum of the activities against al Qaeda, not only in Iraq, but in other countries as well, particularly the Afghan and Saudi moves against them.

Isn't the more accurate picture painted by looking at al Qaeda in toto?  Recent pronouncement by nearly everyone (cites readily available if you truly need them) are concluding that AQ is severly crippled.  Focusing on AQI with your milk analogy misses the big picture, in my view.

S.

I think the manner in which they are significantly worse now is the disdain and lack of grassroots support from people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.  That, combined with the loss of several influential leaders, has made their tacticial position untenable in former stornghold cities and neigborhoods, particularly in Iraq.  In other words, it appears recently that "the street" has turned against them.  I don't think that was the case in March of 2003.  Those two reasons, in my opinion, is how they are significantly more worse off now that in early 2003.

Those two reasons came about by a change in direction by the US forces, supported by the burgeoning local Iraqi police and a renewed confidence of the people in their government.

http://www.reuters.com/article/asiaCrisis/idUSISL2875


Guess we shouldn't report this news if the LEft don't think it's positive, but...it is.

Ahk,
If you see how many muslims put their faith in OBL right after 9/11 and how many does right now, IMO it can be called a victory.

Now was Bush right about invading Iraq. No, of course.
Because al-Qaida became very strong, widespread and killed many people as a reaction in the meantime. Let alone many other things.

But the fact is that al-Qaida is losing the WoT.

And as CharleMartel said, al-Qaida was not the only issue. The issue was Saddam Hussein.
It would have been funny to see the WoT unfolding with Saddam still at the power (or even funnier: toppled by someone else) in Iraq.
But I don't think it was necessary to invade and occupy Iraq to fight al-Qaida. A little part of Iraq, controlled by Ansar al-Islam would have sufficed.

Ahk,
The "Muslim World" is not a single person.
Many, probably most of them were horrifies (Arafat more than anyone else) but a large minority, more or less vocaly admired OBL for striking the US empire.

The use of the name "Osama" given to new born muslim childs doubled afater the attack.
That makes a bunch of poeple...

Read the link to start the thread again. al-Qaeda gains GLOBALLY, not just in Iraq are mentioned. So, we can blame you, you're not making any sense at all. Sorry!

Charlie, were there fewer troop deaths in Iraq in May than in April. True and with removal there will be far less. But is it the result of a rout of al Qaeda or because of the actions of al Sadr, a true fly in the ointment of the total Iraqi picture. The other factor most who are supporters of the continuation for years or for decades of the occupation of Iraq, tend to forget when there is more use of airpower, the result is less casualties on the ground. Though the Predator has not been the miracle proclaimed there is no risk to troops at all with the use of that drone or the more deadly one the Reaper now deployed for use in Iraq and Afghanistan as the operators are primarily in Nevada, nearby Beale AFB nearby to me. 

I suspect as more are deployed there will be less use of ground troops, but your al Qaeda claims are IMHO way off base.  Here have a bit of fun with this one Charlie. Sometimes you just get carried away with the usual talking points. I begin to wonder if you're one of the paid Pentagon posters we continue to hear about somewhat like the 75 generals that got found out, but lower in rank of course.  You may want to bookmark the site. Lots of good military info available. 

Al Qaeda Issues "Request For Proposals"
By Sharon Weinberger June 06, 2008 | 1:46:58 PMCategories: Terror Tech 

Frankly, it seems like Al Qaeda is becoming more like the Pentagon with each passing day. Women want equal rights to wage Jihad; the bureaucrats issue nasty memos and want to coordinate strategic communication; and now they're putting out the equivalent of a "request for proposals" on how to cause madness and mayhem.

"Senior al-Qaida leaders through a password protected Internet message board periodically ask their loyal readers to send in their best ideas for attacking their enemies," reports National Defense, quoting recent remarks by Rita Katz, of the SITE Institute. Katz claims Al Qaeda gets "thousands" of responses.

“Basically they are using all the jihadists throughout the world as their eyes,” said Katz. The request called for members to look for vulnerabilities in U.S. government facilities or for targets “anywhere in the world,” she said.

This shows that terrorist groups are not lacking for ideas when it comes to cooking up deadly plots, but Katz warned that it’s important to distinguish “chatter” from real threats.
What next? A DARPA for terrorists? A prize for the most innovative terrorist idea?

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/06/al-qaeda-issues.html