Terrorism is a method, not an enemy.
I just realised that saying we're fighting 'terrorism' is a lot like saying we're fighting 'bombing'. I learned this while reading about a book called "Inside the Kingdom" by Carmen Bin Ladin. She's a sister-in-law of Osama Bin Laden, and a proponent of women's rights in Muslim countries, notably Saudi Arabia. Interestingly, her work is creating a stir of activity with the idea that this war could be fought with Feminism (or human right's for women, if you don't like the term), rather than with Imperialistic, military actions. This is a very interesting idea, though not entirely the point of this rant.
Anyway, it would seem that the enemy is, in fact, "...an extremist Islamic insurgency whose appeal lies in its claim to represent the Muslim masses against a bullying superpower," rather than the idea or methods of terrorism. I think this is fascinating in that it seems entirely ineffective to fight such an insurgency with 'counterterrorism' since it serves only to strengthen the cause. Why aren't we acting politically and socially to challenge the gaps in human rights, and other issues that are so much more important than fueling the insurgency?
Another interesting question, if terrorism isn't an enemy, then what defined the war in Afghanistan? It certainly wasn't revenge... as all but two of the 9-11 terrorists were Saudi. So what would that part of this war be called if we weren't yet dealing with this particular insurgency? Any ideas?
Anyway, it would seem that the enemy is, in fact, "...an extremist Islamic insurgency whose appeal lies in its claim to represent the Muslim masses against a bullying superpower," rather than the idea or methods of terrorism. I think this is fascinating in that it seems entirely ineffective to fight such an insurgency with 'counterterrorism' since it serves only to strengthen the cause. Why aren't we acting politically and socially to challenge the gaps in human rights, and other issues that are so much more important than fueling the insurgency?
Another interesting question, if terrorism isn't an enemy, then what defined the war in Afghanistan? It certainly wasn't revenge... as all but two of the 9-11 terrorists were Saudi. So what would that part of this war be called if we weren't yet dealing with this particular insurgency? Any ideas?