They will follow us home?
The current military occupation of Iraq by the United States Military has nothing to do with the freedom or safety of Americans living in the United States.
As the 2008 Presidential election looms ahead the war in Iraq becomes a hot button issue. According to President Bush "I've often warned that if we fail in Iraq, the enemy will follow us home" (Bush). If one were to analyze this statement critically, how plausible would this scenario be? Some argue that the continued US led occupation of Iraq is vital to national security of the United States, while others argue that the invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq have been a debacle that have harmed the United States of America's reputation and military readiness irreparably.
One of the Major arguments for the continued American occupation of Iraq is that if we were to leave, Iraq would become vulnerable to takeover by Al Qaeda. This takeover is extremely unlikely as foreign fighters are estimated to be at 1,300 personnel (Baker and Hamilton 4). The possibility of such a small and unpopular group of people taking over a country of 28 million people is astronomically small. This is especially true considering the fact that Iraq has shown a clear resistance to foreign occupation.
The other fear that stems from Iraq falling into terrorist hands is that it will become a launching point for future attacks against the United States. The Most ridiculous aspect of this claim is that Iraq is in no way strategically located any where near The United States. Aside from
Ekstrom 2
the logistical problems associated with a Sunni militant group like Al Qaeda taking over a predominantly Shia country, they would then need to completely rebuild the countries infrastructure.
Not only would the hypothetical terrorist government need to rebuild all the roads, reestablish the power grid, and provide basic social service for the Iraqi people, they would also need to turn Iraq into a naval super power capable of sending men and supplies thousands of miles across the ocean.
Aside from amassing a fleet of ships and an army of millions, Al Qaeda would need to do this in absolute secrecy. Shipping yards and military basses are easily spotted by spy satellites, and make easy targets for American bombs and cruise missiles. The boats themselves would be extremely vulnerable to American gunships and submarines.
The only way to counter this vulnerability would be to covertly retrofit hundreds of civil cargo ships with military technology. Multimillion dollar vessels would need to undergo multimillion dollar renovations to be capable of launching landing craft. All of these renovations would need to be done in absolute secrecy, because if these ships where identified by western intelligence agencies they would be sunk or boarded upon entering US waters.
During the Second World War Nazi German was unable to invade Britain because they lacked the naval and air power to send large numbers of troops across the English Channel. Given that Al Qaeda has no navy to speak of, and the fact that the United States is considerably farther from Iraq than Britain was from German held territory, such a massive land invasion by conscripted terrorist forces is impossible.
Even if Al Qaeda were able to overcome the challenges of sending troops across the Atlantic Ocean, or even had the resources to get student visas for thousands of illiterate Muslim
Ekstrom 3
teenagers, an Iraq style insurgency would not work in the United States. There are too many logistical problems involved with operating an insurgency within Americas Borders.
Iraq is littered with unexploded ordinance from 30 years of war. Improvised explosive devices can be fashioned by hot wiring a cell phone to an artillery round. In the United States no such treasure trove of free explosives that are available to the public exists.
Any improvised explosive material would need to be home made. Ammonium nitrate fertilizer is regulated and hard to find after the Oklahoma City bombing (Fester 117). The next most popular improvised explosive filler is acetone peroxide (Fester 152). Acetone peroxide is dangerous to make, unstable, and fairly easy to tell if some one is trying to make.
Even launching conventional terrorist's attacks with guns would be more difficult in the United States. The Middle East has a thriving black market of automatic weapons and destructive devices. In the United States such weapons are extensively regulated and cost thousands of dollars (ATF 75). Even semi automatic weapons require ID and a green card to purchase legally (ATF 5). Any terrorist assault would be limited to whatever cheap handguns they could buy off the street, assuming they can find a gun dealer who is willing to tie himself to terrorism charges.
A less literal interpretation of President Bush's "They will follow us home" speech, is that with out being tied up repelling American forces from Iraq, Al Qaeda will have more resources freed up to launch attacks against the American main land. This rational for staying in Iraq is called "The Fly Paper Theory." The basic logistical assertion behind this theory is that if the United States stays in Iraq for long enough, Al Qaeda will simply run out of forces.
This theory has several ethical and logistical flaws that prevent it from being relevant to America's security. Having American troops in Iraq does not prevent individual terrorists from
Ekstrom 4
coming to the United States. Most of the 9-11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia and would not have even encountered US forces if the US had invaded Iraq prior to 2001.
Another logistical flaw in the "Fly paper theory" is that a terrorist organization like Al Qaeda is unlikely to run out of conscripts, especially with the casualty rates of the war so far. By August 2007, approximately 19,000 suspected terrorists had been killed in Iraq, along with over 5,000 injured (Giordono and Burgess A3). Because of advances in body armor and medical
technology American casualty rates are almost inversed. With over 4,000 killed and over 30,000 wounded, American casualties are significantly higher than the insurgency (Giordono A3).
Combatant deaths in Iraq pale in comparison to the number of Iraqi civilians killed from fighting and terrorism. The verified number of Iraqi civilians killed is approaching one hundred thousand, and estimates of the number of Iraqis who have died as a result of the American invasion are in the hundreds of thousands to millions (Fischer 3). This is along with millions of Iraqi refuges scattered all over the world.
The American invasion of Iraq hasn't only had negative effects on the people of Iraq; it has also had negative repercussions on America as well. American soldiers have raided and destroyed the homes of innocent Iraqis (Glantz 105). Innocent people have been detained without evidence or probable cause (Gibney). Worst of all prisoners in American custody have been abused, tortured, and even murdered. Over 105 prisoners have died in US custody, and 37 have been ruled homicide (Gibney).
The war has taken a heavy toll on American servicemen as well. One in four Iraq veterans comes back with post traumatic stress disorder, depression, or traumatic brain injury.
Any one of these will severally affect a veteran's ability to hold a job, live a normal life style, and will cost the Veterans Administration hundreds of thousands of dollars over the course of their lives.
Ekstrom 5
Adding insult to injury, the financial costs of the war have yet to be fully felt. When the initial cost of the war is added to the estimated cost of replacing the damaged gear, paying for veterans benefits and paying the interest on the loans that where made to fund the war, the total cost of the war will be roughly two trillion dollars (Ferguson).
When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, it hastened the inevitable downfall of the USSR. As more and more lives and government resources where funneled downward to support a useless and immoral war, people of the Soviet Union grew weary of the corrupt and incompetent government while at the same time Muslims from all over the world rallied behind the Majhudeen in their efforts to push out their Russian invaders.
In all likelihood, Al Qaeda predicted the same would happen to the United States if it ever invaded Afghanistan. September 11th was not meant to be a decisive victory, but merely an attempt to bait the United States into invading Afghanistan. The terrorists hoped that their heinous crime would provoke such massive and unethical repercussions on the Afghani people that the United States would spend decades fighting a protracted Guerrilla war in the far away mountains of Afghanistan.
Their hopes must have been dashed when Afghani militias aided the American military in overthrowing the Taliban, only to have those hopes reignited when the US invaded Iraq. Not only did invading Iraq draw forces from Afghanistan and allow the Taliban to make resurgence, it also put Americans within driving distance of Middle Eastern terrorists.
The subsequent corruption and scandal involved in the occupation and reconstruction only fortified the suspicions that Americas War on Terror is only a front for a neo-colonialist agenda. Muslims who were on the fence before the war have fallen on to the strongly anti-American side. When a man with nothing to loose is offered money for his family to strike at a nation that he hates, is it that surprising that he becomes a terrorist?
Ekstrom 6
Terrorism is not a weapon, it is a tactic. It is impossible to wage war against a tactic. Air assaults can be stopped by bombing airstrips. Tank assaults can be stopped by bombing motor pools. But terrorist's attacks can not be stopped by bombing. Terrorism requires hatred, desperation, and chaos, all of these are created by war. The only way to end terrorism is to change peoples out look on life, without killing their families or destroying there homes, thus creating the grounds for new terrorists to gestate.
The current military occupation of Iraq by the United States Military has nothing to do with the freedom or safety of Americans living in the United States.
As the 2008 Presidential election looms ahead the war in Iraq becomes a hot button issue. According to President Bush "I've often warned that if we fail in Iraq, the enemy will follow us home" (Bush). If one were to analyze this statement critically, how plausible would this scenario be? Some argue that the continued US led occupation of Iraq is vital to national security of the United States, while others argue that the invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq have been a debacle that have harmed the United States of America's reputation and military readiness irreparably.
One of the Major arguments for the continued American occupation of Iraq is that if we were to leave, Iraq would become vulnerable to takeover by Al Qaeda. This takeover is extremely unlikely as foreign fighters are estimated to be at 1,300 personnel (Baker and Hamilton 4). The possibility of such a small and unpopular group of people taking over a country of 28 million people is astronomically small. This is especially true considering the fact that Iraq has shown a clear resistance to foreign occupation.
The other fear that stems from Iraq falling into terrorist hands is that it will become a launching point for future attacks against the United States. The Most ridiculous aspect of this claim is that Iraq is in no way strategically located any where near The United States. Aside from
Ekstrom 2
the logistical problems associated with a Sunni militant group like Al Qaeda taking over a predominantly Shia country, they would then need to completely rebuild the countries infrastructure.
Not only would the hypothetical terrorist government need to rebuild all the roads, reestablish the power grid, and provide basic social service for the Iraqi people, they would also need to turn Iraq into a naval super power capable of sending men and supplies thousands of miles across the ocean.
Aside from amassing a fleet of ships and an army of millions, Al Qaeda would need to do this in absolute secrecy. Shipping yards and military basses are easily spotted by spy satellites, and make easy targets for American bombs and cruise missiles. The boats themselves would be extremely vulnerable to American gunships and submarines.
The only way to counter this vulnerability would be to covertly retrofit hundreds of civil cargo ships with military technology. Multimillion dollar vessels would need to undergo multimillion dollar renovations to be capable of launching landing craft. All of these renovations would need to be done in absolute secrecy, because if these ships where identified by western intelligence agencies they would be sunk or boarded upon entering US waters.
During the Second World War Nazi German was unable to invade Britain because they lacked the naval and air power to send large numbers of troops across the English Channel. Given that Al Qaeda has no navy to speak of, and the fact that the United States is considerably farther from Iraq than Britain was from German held territory, such a massive land invasion by conscripted terrorist forces is impossible.
Even if Al Qaeda were able to overcome the challenges of sending troops across the Atlantic Ocean, or even had the resources to get student visas for thousands of illiterate Muslim
Ekstrom 3
teenagers, an Iraq style insurgency would not work in the United States. There are too many logistical problems involved with operating an insurgency within Americas Borders.
Iraq is littered with unexploded ordinance from 30 years of war. Improvised explosive devices can be fashioned by hot wiring a cell phone to an artillery round. In the United States no such treasure trove of free explosives that are available to the public exists.
Any improvised explosive material would need to be home made. Ammonium nitrate fertilizer is regulated and hard to find after the Oklahoma City bombing (Fester 117). The next most popular improvised explosive filler is acetone peroxide (Fester 152). Acetone peroxide is dangerous to make, unstable, and fairly easy to tell if some one is trying to make.
Even launching conventional terrorist's attacks with guns would be more difficult in the United States. The Middle East has a thriving black market of automatic weapons and destructive devices. In the United States such weapons are extensively regulated and cost thousands of dollars (ATF 75). Even semi automatic weapons require ID and a green card to purchase legally (ATF 5). Any terrorist assault would be limited to whatever cheap handguns they could buy off the street, assuming they can find a gun dealer who is willing to tie himself to terrorism charges.
A less literal interpretation of President Bush's "They will follow us home" speech, is that with out being tied up repelling American forces from Iraq, Al Qaeda will have more resources freed up to launch attacks against the American main land. This rational for staying in Iraq is called "The Fly Paper Theory." The basic logistical assertion behind this theory is that if the United States stays in Iraq for long enough, Al Qaeda will simply run out of forces.
This theory has several ethical and logistical flaws that prevent it from being relevant to America's security. Having American troops in Iraq does not prevent individual terrorists from
Ekstrom 4
coming to the United States. Most of the 9-11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia and would not have even encountered US forces if the US had invaded Iraq prior to 2001.
Another logistical flaw in the "Fly paper theory" is that a terrorist organization like Al Qaeda is unlikely to run out of conscripts, especially with the casualty rates of the war so far. By August 2007, approximately 19,000 suspected terrorists had been killed in Iraq, along with over 5,000 injured (Giordono and Burgess A3). Because of advances in body armor and medical
technology American casualty rates are almost inversed. With over 4,000 killed and over 30,000 wounded, American casualties are significantly higher than the insurgency (Giordono A3).
Combatant deaths in Iraq pale in comparison to the number of Iraqi civilians killed from fighting and terrorism. The verified number of Iraqi civilians killed is approaching one hundred thousand, and estimates of the number of Iraqis who have died as a result of the American invasion are in the hundreds of thousands to millions (Fischer 3). This is along with millions of Iraqi refuges scattered all over the world.
The American invasion of Iraq hasn't only had negative effects on the people of Iraq; it has also had negative repercussions on America as well. American soldiers have raided and destroyed the homes of innocent Iraqis (Glantz 105). Innocent people have been detained without evidence or probable cause (Gibney). Worst of all prisoners in American custody have been abused, tortured, and even murdered. Over 105 prisoners have died in US custody, and 37 have been ruled homicide (Gibney).
The war has taken a heavy toll on American servicemen as well. One in four Iraq veterans comes back with post traumatic stress disorder, depression, or traumatic brain injury.
Any one of these will severally affect a veteran's ability to hold a job, live a normal life style, and will cost the Veterans Administration hundreds of thousands of dollars over the course of their lives.
Ekstrom 5
Adding insult to injury, the financial costs of the war have yet to be fully felt. When the initial cost of the war is added to the estimated cost of replacing the damaged gear, paying for veterans benefits and paying the interest on the loans that where made to fund the war, the total cost of the war will be roughly two trillion dollars (Ferguson).
When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, it hastened the inevitable downfall of the USSR. As more and more lives and government resources where funneled downward to support a useless and immoral war, people of the Soviet Union grew weary of the corrupt and incompetent government while at the same time Muslims from all over the world rallied behind the Majhudeen in their efforts to push out their Russian invaders.
In all likelihood, Al Qaeda predicted the same would happen to the United States if it ever invaded Afghanistan. September 11th was not meant to be a decisive victory, but merely an attempt to bait the United States into invading Afghanistan. The terrorists hoped that their heinous crime would provoke such massive and unethical repercussions on the Afghani people that the United States would spend decades fighting a protracted Guerrilla war in the far away mountains of Afghanistan.
Their hopes must have been dashed when Afghani militias aided the American military in overthrowing the Taliban, only to have those hopes reignited when the US invaded Iraq. Not only did invading Iraq draw forces from Afghanistan and allow the Taliban to make resurgence, it also put Americans within driving distance of Middle Eastern terrorists.
The subsequent corruption and scandal involved in the occupation and reconstruction only fortified the suspicions that Americas War on Terror is only a front for a neo-colonialist agenda. Muslims who were on the fence before the war have fallen on to the strongly anti-American side. When a man with nothing to loose is offered money for his family to strike at a nation that he hates, is it that surprising that he becomes a terrorist?
Ekstrom 6
Terrorism is not a weapon, it is a tactic. It is impossible to wage war against a tactic. Air assaults can be stopped by bombing airstrips. Tank assaults can be stopped by bombing motor pools. But terrorist's attacks can not be stopped by bombing. Terrorism requires hatred, desperation, and chaos, all of these are created by war. The only way to end terrorism is to change peoples out look on life, without killing their families or destroying there homes, thus creating the grounds for new terrorists to gestate.