# Al-Qaeda Renews Threats on Canada - National Post story



## Griffin (28 Oct 2006)

The National Post ran a front page story about the latest video release by the propaganda arm of al-Qaeda.  In its diatribe, they called our soldiers, "Second Rate Crusaders".  Well, since the video came out in early summer, our troops have helped some of their Taliban buddies find a new 'path', and with the arrival of the LdSH Leo's, I do hope they try and concentrate again where we help them join their brethren.   For the full story see:

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=e9f20f44-ec19-470c-9ac3-6c79218d4d91


----------



## tlg (28 Oct 2006)

Just reading that post screams of Propaganda and unfortunately the media is only helping them out by printing this. We should either support the effort or pull out. There can't be both. I personally think we should pummel the piss out of the Taliban. 

And as for "second-rate Crusaders.", doesn't the Afghan government WANT NATO to help out?

Just some incoherent thoughts of an over-tired, sleep deprived guy.


----------



## mainerjohnthomas (28 Oct 2006)

They have struck at us at every opportunity, and will continue to do so as long as we permit religions other than their own form of radical Islam.  For the threat of violence to have any affect on our actions, there must be the perception that if we yield, we will be spared the violence, and if we do not, we cannot withstand the violence.  Since they will strike at us wether we back down or not, and will have the ability to strike much harder if we do back down, what is the possible justification for backing down?  Al-Qaeda has long been advocating for those young Islamics who feel disenfranchised or otherwise alienated to rise up in our cities and strike at us, and leaving them a safe sanctuary to operate from just makes it easier for them to co-ordinate this, and for the would-be martyrs to get the idea that they were joining something that was winning, rather than being hunted down like rabid animals in the foothills.


----------



## Rodahn (28 Oct 2006)

The only problem is that Al-Qaeda does not engage in open warfare, they utilize terrorist tactics as in the twin towers. This means that any attack by Al-Qaeda would occur most likely here in Canada, and they have thus far, always made good on their threats.


----------



## Griffin (28 Oct 2006)

tlg, I applaud the Post for printing the article for a number of reasons.

1.  It underscores what despots the Taliban and al-Qaeda are.  When al-Qaeda makes such pronouncements about us fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan, it is a reminder that the two are indeed allies, so our fight is a good one.    It also once again reminds Canadians of the links between the Taliban and al-Qaeda, that killed 24 Canadians on 9/11 and why in good measure we are in Afghanistan and need to stay there.  It would be helpful also if people were reminded of the Canadians attacked in the Bali bombing also.

2.  It may make some Canadians think twice about the ridiculous statements of Taliban Jack et al.  

3.  It underlines the need for our security and intelligence assets to work against those who would abuse our freedoms.

4.  Their farcical 'Second Rated Crusaders' comment will be an affront to our fighting soldiers and make them all the more determined to help these pathetic creatures on their way.  The ridiculous rantings may be swallowed by the uneducated and idealogically stupid, but for most Canadians, this example will only draw their condemnation.

5.  It is a counterweight to the overblown media left who chant the peace-monger themes, without understanding their consequences, let alone understanding that those who fail to heed the lessons of history are bound to repeat its mistakes.  Some reading is in order for them and I would suggest that they could start with William Shirer's books - 'The Nightmare Years' and then 'The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich'.  They could then read about the start of the Korean War and the terrible state the Canadian military found itself in just years after WWII, and a host of other books I'm sure members here could recommend.


----------



## George Wallace (29 Oct 2006)

People like Jack Layton and those in the CPA have no concept of what they are really saying and doing.  Here is an article found at this site  http://www.siteinstitute.org/bin/articles.cgi?ID=publications222806&Category=publications&Subcategory=0  well worth the read.



> *The Crusaders Admit: Our Troops are Being Defeated in Afghanistan; An Analytical Study of the Crusader Forces Occupying Afghanistan*
> By SITE Institute
> October 27, 2006
> 
> ...


----------



## Rodahn (29 Oct 2006)

The problems as I see them after reading the "analysis" is the fact the persons who do read this are fanatical, and really do believe that they are fighting a holy war. While I do believe that what the military is doing is right, I fear that our revered leaders aka politicians, will press forward until we are wholly involved in a "religious" war. It didn't work in the crusades and can't work now in my opinion. I hope that it does not go that far.


----------



## brihard (29 Oct 2006)

OK. Each time they mess with us they lose more people. If they want to keep skewing the numbers through attrition, that's just fine with me. That's why we're there.


----------



## paracowboy (29 Oct 2006)

Rodahn said:
			
		

> The problems as I see them after reading the "analysis" is the fact the persons who do read this are fanatical, and really do believe that they are fighting a holy war. While I do believe that what the military is doing is right, I fear that our revered leaders aka politicians, will press forward until we are wholly involved in a "religious" war. It didn't work in the crusades and can't work now in my opinion. I hope that it does not go that far.


what? Are you saying that we are being duped into a Crusade? Are you for real? Canada, the nation that won't allow prayer in the schools? Do you honestly think that the soldiers, sailors and airmen are too stupid to catch on if something that absurd, if not impossible, were to occur? Come on...


----------



## SeaKingTacco (29 Oct 2006)

What strikes me about this document is just how far off base the author is with his conclusions.  It is almost "Soviet" in the analysis department.  And when wishful thinking becomes the basis of your intelligence analysis...well, we have all seen how that turns out.


----------



## Rodahn (29 Oct 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> what? Are you saying that we are being duped into a Crusade? Are you for real? Canada, the nation that won't allow prayer in the schools? Do you honestly think that the soldiers, sailors and airmen are too stupid to catch on if something that absurd, if not impossible, were to occur? Come on...



Para; please note that I did not make reference to soldiers, sailor, and airmen, I made reference to "our revered leaders aka politicians". Obviously I don't have much faith in any of them....

Regards


----------



## KevinB (29 Oct 2006)

Brihard said:
			
		

> OK. Each time they mess with us they lose more people. If they want to keep skewing the numbers through attrition, that's just fine with me. That's why we're there.



Yeah but they have millions to lose...  quite simply even if we trade them 1:1000 -- they will win since that enables the status quo.

This winter will be the decisive time for ISAF and the aid agencies to do recontructions while the EN holes up for the winter


----------



## paracowboy (29 Oct 2006)

Rodahn said:
			
		

> Para; please note that I did not make reference to soldiers, sailor, and airmen, I made reference to "our revered leaders aka politicians". Obviously I don't have much faith in any of them....
> 
> Regards


guess I didn't make my point clear.

Even if, by some bizarre alignment in the cosmos, every Politico we have were to turn into a raging Christian Fundamentalist overnight, the nation would turn against them, and vote their asses out. This is the country that cringes if anyone mentions Christianity, after all. The public outcry against reprehensible behaviour like that would bring Parliament down in about 20 minutes. Just imagine the field day that the carrion-feeders would have with something like that!

And, even if those selfsame hypothetical Christian Zealouts were to order the troops in theatre to launch a Holy Crusade, that would an Unlawful Command, and the troops would shit-can that ASAP. No way would the troops stand for that shit, since a significant number belong to faiths other than Christian, or NRE. Also, such orders fly in the face of the Charter, and the Geneva Conventions.


----------



## Rodahn (29 Oct 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> guess I didn't make my point clear.
> 
> Even if, by some bizarre alignment in the cosmos, every Politico we have were to turn into a raging Christian Fundamentalist overnight, the nation would turn against them, and vote their asses out. This is the country that cringes if anyone mentions Christianity, after all. The public outcry against reprehensible behaviour like that would bring Parliament down in about 20 minutes. Just imagine the field day that the carrion-feeders would have with something like that!
> 
> And, even if those selfsame hypothetical Christian Zealouts were to order the troops in theatre to launch a Holy Crusade, that would an Unlawful Command, and the troops would crap-can that ASAP. No way would the troops stand for that crap, since a significant number belong to faiths other than Christian, or NRE. Also, such orders fly in the face of the Charter, and the Geneva Conventions.



Stranger things have happened in history.... Nor would the politico/zealots neccessarily do something like this in the name of religion. Call me a cynic...

The point of my original post was to point out the fact that the "other side" are looking/treating this as a jihad/religious war rather than a geo-political affair.


----------



## brihard (29 Oct 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> Yeah but they have millions to lose...  quite simply even if we trade them 1:1000 -- they will win since that enables the status quo.
> 
> This winter will be the decisive time for ISAF and the aid agencies to do recontructions while the EN holes up for the winter



What is your estimation of the number of people with both hostility towards, and the intestinal fortitude to confront NATO based on? I would submit that if their resrouces truly numbered this great we would not be having nearly as much success as we are.

I'm not denying that you certainly qualify as a greater SME in the area than I do, however perhaps you're prone to overestimating their manpower? Do they really have 'millions to lose'? Even after killing 'mere' hundreds in recent months there has been a sharp increase in rhetoric and suicide missions against our forces- historically a sign that the greater body of their strength is licking its wounds. If they had even tens of thousands available (simply 1% of your perceived millions) of fighters available, could they not overwhelm us with sheer numbers, at least to the point of causing politically unacceptable casualties?

I will also point out a couple political dimensions. Usually for each one of ours they kill, they kill a number of locals as well. Those deaths are clearly attributable to the insurgents, and local sentiment has largely been shown to be antipathic to the insurgents, insomuch as the population seems to be more likely to help us than them. Even you and I grouping 'them' in such a term is incorrect; there are distinct groups of insurgents. Those who are from within the region have a more local political agenda, and tend to not resort to suicide tactics, but instead to 'conventional' guerilla tactics. The foreign Jihadis, conversely, are the more religiously motivated lot and are the ones with the cojones to blow themselves up. Each of these groups is both distinct and as well is comprised of any number of smaller ethnic, political, and in the case of the locals, criminal and tribal factions.

Every action by these groups that cause local civilian casualties is remarked upon by the locals- sadly not often enough for our media to pick up upon, and from accounts of people over there in CIMIC and PSYOPS positions, leads towards great local antipathy to the militant factions. This correspondingly results in greater friendly access to intelligence, be it outright infiltration, or something as simple as Engineer Aziz being more likely to imform a rep from Charles coy that militants moved through his farmland the night before.

Moreover, each time these factions unsuccessfully challenge our forces (by 'unsuccessfully' I refer to any operation in which the casualties are such that it provides no real political or propaganda benefit to them, or such that their losses outweigh any possible benefit), that too is remarked upon, and lessens their credibility. Ultimately, and I apologize for the cliche, this is a 'hearts and minds' war, with the tide turning on the opinion of the locals. We have as much legitimate presence in the region as the majority of the militant factions, and have shown greater regard for the locals as opposed to those who prey equally on them as they do us.

Yes, this is a simplistic and perhaps unfairly generalized analysis, but I would submit that on average most of the points I've hit are essentially correct, with the exceptions being of minimal dimension or consequence.

Any input is, of course, welcome. Fundamentally I still think it's good when they come out to play and our lads kick them around a bit.


----------



## Infanteer (29 Oct 2006)

Rodahn said:
			
		

> The point of my original post was to point out the fact that the "other side" are looking/treating this as a jihad/religious war rather than a geo-political affair.



Your putting things into nice Western boxes; there is no difference for the Salafist.  You cannot Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's when Caesar and God are the same things.


----------



## tlg (29 Oct 2006)

The PR guys for the CF should hire you on Brihard. You even half convinced a relative that we should be in there. That was a great argument. Kudos.


----------



## brihard (29 Oct 2006)

tlg said:
			
		

> The PR guys for the CF should hire you on Brihard. You even half convinced a relative that we should be in there. That was a great argument. Kudos.



It's simply putting together what's known into a coherent package. And besides, when would the CF ever let me speak so plainly in an official capacity?


----------

