Is it really almost August?…
Good lord. So much for my plan to write more this year.
So, what, you may ask, has awakened me from my blogging slumber? Oh, nothing much. Just a [tag]RAND Corporation[/tag] report that repeats crap I’ve been saying since late 2001. The report is the result of a research analysis into how terrorist groups have ceased to be historically between 1968 and the present. Seems that terrorist organizations are slightly more likely to cease operations because they achieve victory than due to military force exerted against them.
I’ll let you mull that one over for a moment.
Yup, we’re more likely, statistically speaking, to lose the so-called war on terror than we are to win it. Of course that’s not really the main point of the study. The realy money-shot is that terrorist organizations are actually most often put on the shelf of history because of either a negotiated political settlement or policing and intelligence work. Military efforts to combat terrorism only succeed about 7% of the time.
The British, by the way, figured this out right out the gate (granted, they’ve been dealing with guerilla wars and terrorists since, oh, about 1776, so they ought to have learned a little about it by now). The US government still hasn’t got even a shadow of a clue on this subject. That’s why I’m making a small effort to bring this report to your attention, gentle readers. Anyone who supports a continuation of the so-called war on terror needs to be denied your vote this fall. And I’m not just talking about McCain and Obama. There are House and Senate seats up for grabs in November, and we need to put the boot in to anyone who thinks we’re spending our money and time wisely with this alleged war.
My favorite quote from the summary of the RAND report:
Key to this strategy is replacing the war-on-[tag]terrorism[/tag] orientation with the kind of counterterrorism approach that is employed by most governments facing significant terrorist threats today. Calling the efforts a war on terrorism raises public expectations — both in the United States and elsewhere — that there is a battlefield solution. It also tends to legitimize the terrorists’ view that they are conducting a jihad (holy war) against the United States and elevates them to the status of holy warriors. Terrorists should be perceived as criminals, not holy warriors.