What Would al-Qaeda Do?

Via Blake Hounshell, al-Qaeda leaders say they want the occupation of Iraq to continue as long as possible:

The most important thing is that you continue in your jihad in Iraq, and that you be patient and forbearing, even in weakness, and even with fewer operations; even if each day had half of the number of current daily operations, that is not a problem, or even less than that. So, do not be hasty. The most important thing is that the jihad continues with steadfastness and firm rooting, and that it grows in terms of supporters, strength, clarity of justification, and visible proof each day. Indeed, prolonging the war is in our interest, with God’s permission.

An important point that, naturally enough, I have no doubt the press will overwhelmingly ignore.

Comments

Looks like it's "Stay the Course" all around; or perhaps more charitably "Adapt to Win".

Posted by tomboy | October 3, 2006 10:41 PM

The meme that we are in Iraq because al Qaeda has said they think this is a central front on the war on terror, as Bush has said, is absolutely stupid. Al Qaeda is politically astute. Are the Republicans willing to let al Qaeda set US policy?

The Democrats could use a "war-room" to counter Bush/Rove spin. They do it very ineffectually, then wonder why the country doesn't see it their way every 4 years. Morans.

Posted by epistemology | October 3, 2006 11:36 PM

Jeez, Marc Lynch is having a difficult time reading today. The letter says NOTHING about whether AQ wants the US in or out of Iraq. It says they want to prolong the war. Which makes sense when they are losing - the alternative is that they have lost. Its like a letter from Nazi High Command to a forward division in February 1945 saying that the Nazis want to prolong the war - well...DUH. And it's not because they are happy the US is still holding Holland.

Posted by Al | October 3, 2006 11:40 PM

OK, Al. Let's check in in a few months. I'm sure everything will be resolved with a resounding victory for America. Or...maybe not. Still, something tells me you'll have some not so clever excuse.

Been reading much Thomas Friedman lately?

Posted by Brian | October 3, 2006 11:50 PM

We're fighting pedophilia in Iraq so we don't have to fight it at home.

Or whatever.

Posted by Linus | October 4, 2006 12:18 AM

I've often wondered if this is the same 'Al' who comments on Kevin Drum's Washington Monthly posts. That Al sometimes goes far enough over the top that he's clearly doing parody. I don't think I've ever caught this one doing so. If he's a parodist he's very, very good.

Posted by David Tomlin | October 4, 2006 1:00 AM

Al is right to point out that 'the war' and 'the occupation' are not synonymous. That 'al-Qaeda leaders say they want the occupation of Iraq to continue' is not supported by the quoted excerpt.

I marvel that Matt, or anyone, would take such documents at face value. They could be authentic, but they could as easily be disinformation ops.

I don't have the patience to read the whole letter, but I did some skimming. I think it's suspicious that geographical terms like 'Waziristan' and 'Amman' are not replaced by code names. It also seems odd that the writer makes a point of saying that an earlier letter 'that the Americans published' is 'a genuine letter'.

Posted by David Tomlin | October 4, 2006 1:26 AM

Al:

The mission in the Iraq war is to depose a secular leader that we put in power to suppress radical Islam, with a government whose leader, al Sistani, is an Iranian born Ayatollah.

Even this modest goal seems to have been screwed up. If it succeeds, we are screwed. You are just defensive because you supported the Iraq war, which for Bush was just a way to get reelected, and he played you for a fool. Mission accomplished.

Posted by epistemology | October 4, 2006 1:39 AM

Reuters
March 17 2004

A group claiming to have links with al Qaeda said on Wednesday it was calling a truce in its Spanish operations to see if the new Madrid government would withdraw its troops from Iraq.

The statement said it supported President Bush in his reelection campaign, and would prefer him to win in November rather than the Democratic candidate John Kerry, as it was not possible to find a leader "more foolish than you (Bush), who deals with matters by force rather than with wisdom."

In comments addressed to Bush, the group said "Kerry will kill our nation while it sleeps because he and the Democrats have the cunning to embellish blasphemy and present it to the Arab and Muslim nation as civilization. Because of this we desire you (Bush) to be elected."

Have the past 2 years proven them wrong?

Posted by Carl | October 4, 2006 2:32 AM

Al is right to point out that 'the war' and 'the occupation' are not synonymous. That 'al-Qaeda leaders say they want the occupation of Iraq to continue' is not supported by the quoted excerpt.

I don't think that's quite right. The excerpt says

a) "continue in your jihad in Iraq," and
b) "The most important thing is that the jihad continues"

I think the point is somewhat more subtle. They're just assuming that there will be an open front in Iraq, and they want it to continue. It seems most likely from this excerpt that the letter-writer and intended audience see the war in Iraq as a good thing for al Qaeda.

Al's argument that they want it to continue because they're losing is pretty classic. Insofar as al Qaeda is losing, they're losing becuase other anti-American groups are winning more supporters in the battle against the American occupation. They're not losing in any way that speaks well of American fortunes in the area or of the plan to go to war in the first place.

Posted by DivGuy | October 4, 2006 8:49 AM

The excerpt says

a) "continue in your jihad in Iraq," and
b) "The most important thing is that the jihad continues"

Is it your point that the war won't be a 'jihad' after the American infidels withdraw? It's my understanding that bin Laden and his followers accept the teaching of Qutb, that their Muslim opponents are apostates.

Posted by David Tomlin | October 4, 2006 10:01 AM

Is is not possible to read this as al-Qaeda's belief that they must hang on in Iraq until we lose our will and go home, thus giving them both valuable propaganda, as well as what would be a very real victory over the US in Iraq?

It does not follow that just because the leaders of al-Qaeda are encouraging their troops to continue fighting, we should pull out. There are good arguments for that, but that al-Qaeda doesn't want to stop fighting isn't one of them.

Posted by TW Andrews | October 4, 2006 2:43 PM

It does not follow that just because the leaders of al-Qaeda are encouraging their troops to continue fighting, we should pull out.

No one is really making that argument, except as a response to the argument that we shouldn't leave because it's what al-Qaeda wants us to do.

Posted by Steve | October 4, 2006 6:51 PM