14 July 2005

So why ARE people being bombed? Apparently, the US hasn't done enough offshoring

Michael Kortvelyesy also posed that question, and a chap named Greg Schofield from the ECHALK list found this answer, syndicated from here (apprently in August 2003, although the two sites referenced are current). And it’s an interesting one, simple and unique, and relatively easy to implement.

It starts by making a couple of claims almost singular on the topic:

  • most suicide bombers are not religious; and
  • most suicide bombings are over territorial disputes.

The dude keeps records in the (many!) original languages, so he’s not just blowing hot air. And unlike so many of the people who disagree with the existing US presence in the Middle East, he doesn’t just propose that the US walk away or cave in as an answer.

What he does propose is that the US revert to a fast-response fleet-based presence rather than burying the locals in troops. This answer means that US troops are constantly in the area, but not constantly in the faces of people worried (by agents provocateur if not naturally) about a US land grab.

An interesting highlight of the article are some references to an Al Quaeda planning document captured by Norwegian intelligence. Amongst other things, it recommends laying off any attacks on the American mainland.

No comments: