Posted on 01/07/2005 6:02:39 AM PST by robowombat
Stratfor Founder Said 9/11 Attack Designed to Draw U.S. into Combat Intelligence Expert Noted Jihadi Victory Over USSR As Watershed Event Addressing JINSA’s Board of Directors on November 14 2004, Dr. George Friedman, founder and chairman of Stratfor, the world’s leading privately held intelligence company, discussed al Qaeda’s origins and explained how that history ties to both the events of September 11 as well as the current war in Iraq. According to Friedman, the war in Iraq was born out of the Cold War. His conclusion comes mainly from the fact that the U.S. trained Islamic jihadists so that they could defeat the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Up until this point an Islamic force had not fought and won a war. Afghanistan, however, was different. Friedman noted that the Afghan defeat was one of the more important reasons for the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Stratfor founder Dr. George Friedman addressed the JINSA Board of Directors, November 15, 2004. After the Afghan war, these jihadists were essentially abandoned and betrayed by their supporters including Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Those states, among many others, did not want these fighters to come home after their impressive victory. Friedman compared fundamentalist fighters with American soldiers who fought in the Vietnam War. After the Vietnam War, soldiers that came home were bitter about the reception they received. One can only imagine the bitterness of an Islamic fighter not being allowed to return home after a war that they won, Friedman noted. From this crucible of rejection al Qaeda, was forged, Friedman declared.
The situation became worse when Iraq invaded Kuwait, which compelled the Saudi royal family to cooperate with the United States. Friedman explained that after seeing this cooperation, al Qaeda decided that it was time for some kind of uprising. In order to do this they needed to convince their fighters that this was their time in history to make a difference. In other words, Friedman said, al Qaeda’s leaders needed to give their followers hope. He pointed out that this was an important event since sending an army into battle without hope could likely lead to disaster.
Al Qaeda was extremely smart in deciding how to do this, Friedman said. They would plan an attack to elicit a response from the United States that would be beneficial to their cause. They knew that the United States would respond in one of two ways. If al Qaeda attacked and the United States did not respond with military force, it could prove that the United States was not a great power and that they were weaker than anticipated. The second response, however, would be even better. If the United States responded with a multi-front attack on Islamic terrorists in Muslim countries, al Qaeda could easily persuade their fighters that the United States was making war on all Muslims. For a while, al Qaeda attacks such as the first World Trade Center bombing, failed to get the United States to respond with great military force.
The attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11, however, were designed to be so terrible, that the U.S. would not be able to decline combat, Friedman said. He pointed to al Qaeda’s mastery of covert operations and understanding of the American intelligence as reason for their success on September 11. Because of this success they helped draw America into an armed conflict with Iraq, a country with a Muslim majority, Friedman concluded.
Rapporteur’s summary by JINSA Editorial Assistant James Cetrone
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Source: http://www.jinsa.org/articles/view.html?documentid=2794
thanks -- for later.
BS. Osama made clear that he thought we would not respond.
Exactly. Stratfor is full of B.S. Osama never thought we would respond.
Say what? I stopped reading at this point.
As for concluding that the 9/11 attack was meant to draw us into war ... well, duhhhhhhh. I wish I had a doctorate degree so people would pay me for such brilliant logical deductions.
Say what? I stopped reading at this point.
___________________________________________
That might be about all that he did get right. The cost in manpower, money and morale both in the service and in the civilian world helped set the stage. It was not "the" cause but it was, as he wrote, "one of the more important" reasons.
Stratfor really lost their marbles around March 2002 or so. Before that, they were dead on about Afghanistan. Now, they whip up all sorts of grand fantasies about UBL and AQ.
If UBL was a strategic thinker at all, he would have had a series of 9/11 follow-up attacks ready to go **here in the USA**. The fact that he had Massoud killed just before 9/11 shows that he thinks at least one step ahead. He expected the US to follow the Soviet path into Afghanistan and lose. We outsmarted him by actually using the Northern Alliance to defeat the Talibunnies, which thought he had neutralized.
Why we didn't use the Afghanistan model in Iraq is beyond me.
Mike
B FOR L
More stratfor babble. I followed their work for several years (it was free in those days) and thought fairly well of them. However, since 9/11, they have been generally erratic and very often way off the mark. It's as if their sources are either feeding them disinformation that they don't recognize or they're just wacked out. I no longer take statfor seriously at all.
Be careful what you wish for.
the 9/11 'attack' was orchestrated by the Bush admin as an excuse to give us an opportunity to get Saddam. This guy's talking points are way old...
Amen to that. If killing these terrorist scum emboldens others to act on their hatred of us I say "good." We'll know exactly who needs to be pacified next.
I think now they're trying to get in the media news circuit-to increase sales- which requires "provocative" anti-Bush statements.
I agree. They got something they didn't expect. As the Hussein brothers said, "Bush is not like Clinton". When someone thinks they can slap and smack down someone else at will with no repurcussions from a Diddler in Chief, they are very surprised when the someone else in question comes after them and stomps the whey out of them.
Note there were two Stratfor guys who spoke at this conference and there is a thread for each. Burton seems to know what he is talking about. This Friedman guy is out on the fringe and grasping. But all these guys are paid to pontificate and write, so you have to expect that some will be better at it than others.
Over 3 years after OBL's master stroke he has 1) Lost his biggest partner and bases in Afghanistan. 2) Lost another partner and bases in Iraq. 3) Al-Queda has lost 80% of their core leadership and are being pursued daily world-wide. 4) Have not been able to follow up with any more attacks in the US.
That is really not difficult to understand since there is no similiarity between Iraq and Afganistan other than both being Moslem. If you believe the Taliban had an Iraqi equivalent then I can't help you.
Osama misjudged America, and above all, he misjudged president Bush. That was the terrorist cowards undoing.
Sneaky, diabolical bastards.
Each one of the bastards killed runs a high price in men/material. While they have limited fighters on the ground in Iraq, their roots, recruiting-stations and sustenance(cash) lies in Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
The war-on-terror is far from over.
Without a doubt. The bastards will hang on waiting for a John Kerry type to get elected. They came within 1 state of their biggest victory in the WOT to date.
Words written by Dr. George Friedman.
I don't believe for a minute that Osama felt 9-11 would result in an invasion of Iraq. Remember, al-Qaeda was based in Afghanistan, where the jihadis, having defeated the Russians, felt they would do the same to the invading Americans. They felt they could DEFEAT US THERE, that we would cut and run at the first sight of blood. The fact that we have summarily humiliated them in both Afghanistan and Iraq, coupled with the now obvious fact that we are willing to stand and die to defeat them, has THEM playing defense, not us.
I disagree with Mr. Friedman that the jihadis PLANNED to exchange two buildings for two countries.
They were not exactly alike. I can not agree 100% with the above statement, though. There were armed forces in place on the ground that we could have used more overtly as surrogates; the Kurds. Eventually, we could have probably won over the Marsh Arabs and Shites in the south; once we showed them we wouldn't abandon them like we did in 91-92.
Big thing about the Kurds, though, is that Turkey and Iran would have had a conniption fit if we armed them to the teeth.
"The war-on-terror is far from over"
I couldn't agree more. What amazes me is the lack of insight by the American public regarding Iraq. The stakes in Iraq are very high. The terrorists see this, and they are willing to die to win in Iraq. However, time and again I hear people complain about Iraq as being for oil, and that we should cut our losses and run.
Why can't people understand that if Johnny Jihadi is willing to die to win in Iraq, that the struggle is not trivial? Why can't Americans see what it could mean to the world to for Iraq to be a model of democracy in the middle east?
Do we just figure that the muslims are walking bombs and they all want to die, and their cause is insignificant? Or, do we just see it as being too hard, and we no longer have the stomach to do heavy lifting?
It confuses me.
I agree. He had the Blackhawk Down mentality about our resolve. Thank God Pres. Bush was on the job. BTW, anybody know where I can get a Crusade-type cross sticker for my pickup?
"BTW, anybody know where I can get a Crusade-type cross sticker for my pickup?"
Hmmm... now that sounds like an opportunity. I'd be interested in something like that.
Your post confirms my statement.
Heheh... I wouldn't mind one of those either.. ;o)
Hmmm... a point worth considering...
Very true.... another huge miscalculation, and why I believe in knowing thy enemy to exploit the tensions and differences within the ummah. Divide and conquer using a Machiavellian strategy.
He also miscalculated that we would run from Saudi like the "paper tiger" he thought the US was after the events he witnessed and commented on in Somalia.
This time, by killing Americans he did not get the desired change in US policy he was aiming for. Unlike Clintons administration, the Bush administration understood Osamas goals and did not make the same mistakes or show the weakness that Clinton did that invited attacks by jihadis in the mistaken belief that they could change US policy in their favor.
Btw, add Ayman Al Zawahiri to your hit list... too many people forget about his role in A.Q. ;o)
Ok, that's your opinion. My opinion is that compared to Ronald Reagan and his policies the Afghan resistance was not a major reason for the collapse. There. We settled it. :-)
Osama wanted us to absolutely obliterate some Islamic Country, perhaps Saudi Arabia since he used all Saudis for the 9/11 mission.
Then he could become the New Mahdi and lead the Jihadists to war saying that America, The Great Satan, was out to destroy Islam...
"Look what they did to all those innocents in Arabia, or Afghanistan!", because he would have gladly sacrificed the Taliban, while he and his murderous cowards hid in the mountatins, or escaped to Pakistan.
He is the lead psychotic of a band of psychotics, with no regard for any life but his own, and the poor, uneducated, assassins that follow him truly believe the Jihad crap he preaches to them and the stories of the rewards in paradise.
UBL is a monster, nothing less, and a coward without honor or shame, but he also does not understand America or her people, and he seriously underestimated President Bush.
Bush held his fire and planned the retaliation, he didn't send in the bombers and Cruise missles to turn Afghanistan or Arabia into the vision of Hell on Earth. No bodies for Al-Jazeera to broadcast and enflame the "Arab Street"; foe UBL to walk upon decrying the infidel "Crusaders" seeking to destroy Islam.
No, he waited, and he helped our nation get back up from the sucker punch, and he prepared for war. While he prepared, the media had to keep the WTC, Pentagon and Flight 93 on the air. It was American bodies in the news - THOUSANDS OF THEM - American property destroyed - America attacked without provocation - and the President won the media war, which played well all over the world and allowed us to go into Afghanistan and kick sime Islamofascist A$$!
And he has never really recovered from that, but the MSM and Islamofascist apologists keep trying.
9/11-related PING!
Thanks for the ping---Guess UBL didn't count on us having a REAL leader, did he?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.