AL QAEDA'S GAME PLAN:
And here's a chilling piece of evidence of how pre-meditated this entire atrocity was. Back in December, the plans were in place:
<font size=4>
CNN also has obtained a document posted on an Internet message board analysts believe is used by al Qaeda and its sympathizers that spells out the terrorist group's plan to separate Spain from the U.S.-led coalition on Iraq.
The strategy spelled out in the document, posted last December on the Internet, calls for using terrorist attacks to drive Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar's Partido Popular from power and replace it with the Socialists.
That was expected to drive a wedge between Washington and Madrid and result in the withdrawal of Spanish military forces from Iraq.
"We think the Spanish government will not stand more than two blows, or three at the most, before it will be forced to withdraw because of the public pressure on it," the al Qaeda document says.
"If its forces remain after these blows, the victory of the Socialist Party will be almost guaranteed - and the withdrawal of Spanish forces will be on its campaign manifesto."
<font size=5>
Now why would al Qaeda want the disintegration of the
transition in Iraq? Because they understand how that
transition is the most formidable blow to their hopes of
transforming the entire Middle East. When clever anti-war
types insist there is not and never has been any
connection between the fight for democracy in Iraq and the
war against terror, they are thinking in terms of
legalities and technicalities - not strategy.
The only way to meaningfully defang Islamist terror is to
transform the region. If we don't, we will simply be
putting out small fires for ever, instead of dealing with
root causes. The root cause is the lack of democracy in
the region, which gives these religious fanatics the
oxygen they need. Al Qaeda understand the stakes. So must
we. Iraq is the battlefield. We cannot, must not, falter.
In fact, we must ramp up the pressure. Alone, if needs be.
<font size=4>
NOT JUST IRAQ:
Some readers have written me to criticize my argument that al Qaeda is striking back at our allies in Iraq because they see how dangerous to them the transition to democracy in Iraq could be. Some argue that the war against Saddam has nothing to do with the war on terror and that al Qaeda is using it as a new way to win recruits and divide the West.
But this misunderstands al Qaeda's basic philosophy. What they object to is any Western or infidel influence in traditionally Muslim lands. They want those lands not just Judenrein but purged of any non-Muslims and even those Muslims who dissent from Wahhabist orthodoxy. They do not and have never needed the war in Iraq to justify their terror in pursuit of these aims. They killed long before the Iraq war.
Their objection is to our intervention at all. And part of that agenda is our intervention in Afghanistan. After all, that was their safe harbor. Those who blame the war in Iraq for this counter-attack must also logically blame the war in Afghanistan. Should we not have waged that, since it would only embolden the enemy? In other words, all of Europe was at risk long before the Iraq war. And the Germans and Brits and Italians and many others now in Afghanistan are reason enough for more attacks in Europe. Al Qaeda not only resents any impurity in their homelands, they also long for more Lebensraum. They long to regain Andalusia, something bin Laden himself referred to not long after 9/11.
What the Europeans refuse to understand is that there is no proximate cause for this violence. It is structural; it is aimed at the very existence of other faiths; it wishes to purge the entire Muslim world of infidels (which means the annihilation of the Jews), and eventually to reconquer Europe. You can no more negotiate with these people than you could negotiate with Hitler. And by negotiation, I don't just mean direct talks. I mean attempts to placate by occasional withdrawal of troops from, say, Iraq or Afghanistan, or withdrawal of troops from Saudi Arabia or abandonment of Israel.
<font size=5>
All such tactical shifts are regarded purely as weakness.
They are invitations for more massacres. How many more
will die in London and Rome and Berlin and Paris before
the old continent fights to defend itself?
<font size=3>
andrewsullivan.com |
