It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Ultimately, the debate about Al Qaeda’s current status centers on the important question of whether it is growing or declining in strength. In the wake of the Afghanistan and Iraq military campaigns, when the predicted terrorist attacks on the United States and its interests did not materialize, what is the current level of threat to the United States? Most believe that the denial of safe havens and arrests of senior leaders have seriously crippled the organization when judged by its earlier form. However, it may be evolving into something new. For terrorist groups, periods of evolution can be particularly dangerous. Organizations in transition can be especially vulnerable to disruption and destruction, but they can also be less predictable and prone to lash out in order to cause additional damage, rally flagging supporters, and/or prove their continuing viability. With respect to Al Qaeda, evidence of new sophisticated operations, a possible succession plan in action, central coordination of attacks, and growing international ties, all increasingly converging on a common international agenda hostile to the United States and its allies, may give U.S. officials new reason for concern. In the short term at least, even successes in counterterrorist operations against a more decentralized organization can lead to greater difficulty in collecting reliable intelligence, as the paths of communication are increasingly unfamiliar, the personalities are changing, and the locations of operatives are more diffuse. While the long term trajectory is very difficult to assess, for the time being it seems that Al Qaeda (or its successors) has emerged from a period of inactivity and remains a very serious threat, requiring concentrated attention and vigorous countermeasures on the part of its prospective targets.
Originally posted by JacKatMtn
I understand what you are saying, but the way I am taking it is that Al-Qaeda is the umbrella under which many outfits with different names falls under.
Originally posted by JacKatMtn
I understand what you are saying, but the way I am taking it is that Al-Qaeda is
the umbrella under which many outfits with different names falls under.
They somehow have organized these groups to work as a team despite small differences between them there is one thing they agree on..
The west must be destroyed.
Some of the groups associated or merged into are, Egyptian Islamic Jihad, Abu Nidal Organization, Abu Sayyaf, Hizbollah, 'Asbat al-Ansar, Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya, Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, Jemaah Islamiya, are a few with association to Al-Qaeda.
This organization between groups makes it more difficult to eliminate and to refer to each individually will only cause confusion, just look at all the "new" al-qaeda groups who have been kidnapping people in Iraq, everyday there is a new name to deal with, it is much easier to put them under the umbrella of Al-Qaeda so some sort of focus can be achieved.
Did any of you happen to see Al Qeada 2.0, I believe it was on National Geo or the Discovery Times channel last night. I explained who, how, why and the widespread reach that Al-Qeada has. THey are going from a centralized grouping that is easier to find and hit to a more diverse leadership structure throughout the South Pacific largely right now, but also including cells in Middle Eastern countries, europe and America.