Al Qaeda and other militant Islamic groups will not simply lay down their arms when (and it is a when, not an if) democracy overtakes currently-fundamentalist countries. Rather, they may begin to fight harder against the wave of democratic revolutions around the world.
But in a day and age when terrorism is stateless and nomadic (Al Qaeda 'sleeper' cells exist in every major democratized first- and third-world nation), does democracy really destroy terrorism, or does it simply distribute large groups of terrorists into small nomadic 'tribes' of extremists?
After all, it's clear from events in Iraq that death and destruction (in the name of democracy) are not deterrents to terrorism; they have instead made the Iraqi terrorists stronger and more organized. If democracy sweeps over the Middle East in waves (as current events indicate it may do), will terrorist networks weaken, or will they simply become harder to track as they spread throughout the world?
But in a day and age when terrorism is stateless and nomadic (Al Qaeda 'sleeper' cells exist in every major democratized first- and third-world nation), does democracy really destroy terrorism, or does it simply distribute large groups of terrorists into small nomadic 'tribes' of extremists?
After all, it's clear from events in Iraq that death and destruction (in the name of democracy) are not deterrents to terrorism; they have instead made the Iraqi terrorists stronger and more organized. If democracy sweeps over the Middle East in waves (as current events indicate it may do), will terrorist networks weaken, or will they simply become harder to track as they spread throughout the world?
