[Griff]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

I'm not sure how effective that will be. I agree that the more we use drones and fight Islamist terrorists overseas, the more unpopular we become in the countries we are fighting in. This directly leads to more terrorist recruits. However, I don't fully agree that if we disengage from these countries that we will be in a better situation.

First, as shown by Afghanistan in the 90's and recently in Yemen and Mali, Islamic group tend to organize in regions outside state sovereign control where they have free reign. In the 90’s we had absolutely nothing to do with Afghanistan and until recently we had no influence in Yemen and yet anti-American groups still flourished there. To me, this implies that Islamic groups with a global focus (Al-Qaeda for example) recruit many – but not all - members based on American supposed actions against Muslims in general and not that actions that directly affect them. Also, the claims that supposedly motivate Al-Qaeda and other globally focused Islamic groups – support of Israel, support of Arab Dictators, etc. – are not going to change and therefore these groups will continue to recruit members whether we disengage or not.

The Eighties.

Second, the vast majority of Islamic groups - Al-Shabab for example - have regional focuses that may later expand to a more global focus. If we disengage we will not change the dynamics of the regionally focused groups. The Taliban in Afghanistan was a reaction to the poor ruling of the Afghani warlords in the early 90’s. The regionally focused Taliban later allied with the globally focused Al-Qaeda.

Home Rule.

Third, based on what I have read and observed, I do think the Islamic terrorist threat is larger than what we are made to believe. When Obama was elected in 2008 he made a pretty quick change in his foreign policy. He initially went from closing Guantanamo to stepping up drone use. It is possible that this change due to him learning of the full range of threats against the US. Also, after Benghazi, security consultants sometimes mention the number of real threats against the US on a yearly basis and it was in the hundreds or something like that. The author and journalist Ahmed Rashid, who often travels in Pakistan and Afghanistan, also mentions multiple times in his books that the terrorist threat against the US is very real.

They hate us because we're free should have gone out with Bush. Obama is now part of the Washington military industrial complex bubble. One problem One hammer One solution.

I know that comes off as snarky but my perspective is that government solutions to other peoples problems put us in a position to be fighting a religious war balancing extremist against extremist playing one against the other continuously in that greater region. There is no clean escape ever. If you've noticed, humans are often very bad at things. Things like saying "we can't" when someone in a higher position asks you to do the impossible. Ask a CIA dirt bag if he can make a clean kill with a drone and he'll lie right to your face. Ask a General if smart bombs will avoid civilian casualties and you'll get the same. Ask the NSA to give you the complete picture and they'll give you an unusable digital snap shot of all. Live in that bubble of limited intelligence and limited answers long enough and before you know it you'll spying on the goddamn Germans for Christ's sake! This is drifting into a never vote major party vote again rant so I'll just stop.

As I said, I don’t think drones are an ideal solution. The consequences of using them, terrorist recruiting and unpopularity among Muslim countries, are currently hurt us. However, if the terrorist threat is large enough to justify action against particular Islamic groups, it is the best option we have.

If.