What Would Al Qaeda See in A John Kerry Victory?

[Dari]

While highly doubtful, should John Kerry win in November, I believe that they would consider that a victory and plan less attacks within the country (in the short-term). But what they do next would may bring the world to its knees.

Seeing Bush out of the way, the hydra may turn its focus on the twin cities of Mecca and Medina, and the greater House of Saud. More importantly, the terror network would turn towards the heavily fortified oil infrastructure in the Kingdom, which house 25% of global reserves. Just by attacking these strucures could increase the terror premium up to $20, on top of what oil may currently be the going rate. That could bring the price of oil to $50-80 a barrel. At those prices, the global economy would slow to a crawl. Worse, any action by Western powers to assist the Saudis could inflame the insensitivies of Muslims. Saudi Arabia would be left to defend itself against the terrorists. That would mean leaning farther to the right and putting an absolute stop to any reforms. This will only feed the nexus for more power in the Kingdom, creating a deadly cycle. There are already elements within the Kingdom who openly "understand" the plight of bin Laden. Who knows, the terror could spread to other reform-minded kingdoms in the Gulf.

With Kerry's lineage having no understanding of oil, let alone being in close contact with the House of Saud like the Bush Clan, a Kerry Administration would have no choice but to send more troops to the middle east to safeguard what we can. Furthermore, Israel may be used as a way to calm the situation. I doubt that either situation would help. The only way out would be to formulate a new energy policy relying less on MidEast oil. Until then, Al Qaeda may deal a severe blow to the world economy without ever leaving home.

Should Bush stay in office, Al Qaeda would find it hard to ignore those oil facilities. Nevertheless, Bush would be under far less (domestic) pressure to help out a friend. With death at its door, and a powerful ally in Washington, the House of Saud would most likely do whatever is necessary to deal that problem. Perhaps the princes could side with the reformists and do away with the wahhabis, breaking the bond that held the kingdom together for so long. Saudi Arabia would probably go as far as coming to terms with its Shi'ites, who are hated (more than Jews) in the Kingdom, and form a loose understanding with the new Iraq and Iran.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I think they want Bush. Bin Laden hoped for an Iraqi war, and Bush gave it to him. Bush channels Bin Laden.

 

[Infohawk]

Your hypothesis has far too many wild assumptions to deal with. Here is my analysis:

Al-Queada wouldn't care either way. They want the US to stop interfering in Muslim nations (no troops essentially) and to stop supporting Israel. Under either President this is not going to happen. Their fanaticism will continue. (The sentiment among moderate Muslims would improve if Kerry were elected IMO).

Also, historically Al-Queada has not seemed to care about what many neocons consider appeasement. When France and Germany didn't support the Iraq war, did Al-Queada stop threatening those two countries? No. They still labeled them ennemies and they consider them ennemies for being in Afghanistan.

 

[Perknose]

What Infohawk said, and said well. :beer:

 

[chrisms]

At this point in time, and from I see on the news many people agree with me, it is "highly doubtful" that Bush will be re-elected at this point. The slant I see in media today isn't as patriotic as it used to be, I see news programs assuming that everyone is against the president.

 

[0roo0roo]

because you know, al queda loves democrats and liberal values

they only attacked the twin towers because they were full of liberal jews, not americans.

 

[MAW1082]

By definition, John Kerry would want to be less involved in "the rest of the world" than a conservative candidate. John Kerry, however, would not be a candidate whose views the al-Qaeda network would suppport.

OSB would advocate the complete absence of foreign militaries from Arab lands.

The majority of Americans would not support this view at this time.

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: Perknose
What Infohawk said, and said well. :beer:

to be honest, i can both what infohawk is saying, and what dari is saying happening. the terrorists might decide to continue to attack the US without fear of retribution [or at least minimal retribution] because of Kerrys military stance [personally, i would judge Kerry as anti-military]. so, they continue to attack, unfettered, and hopefully bring the great satan to its knees.

on the other hand, i can also see what dari proposes happening as well. now that there is a 'weak' president in the white house, and fear no pre-emptive strikes, they can go about trying to covertly or indirectly bring the great satan to its knees - economically. not only that, but it would bring about economic decline for the whole world, thus punishing anyone who (a) helped the US out during the war on terror/Iraq -or- (b) doesnt outwardly support an Islamic state.

either way, it pays to be forward thinking and prepare contingency plans, just in case.

and if daris proposal is the one that pans out, im going to be major pissed if i cant drive my muscle cars around anymore! :|

 

[Red Dawn]

I don't know, the Dub has shown Bin Laden to be a Prophet to his followers and probably has done more to swell his ranks with fresh recruits. On the other hand he might see Kerry as one who could garner the support of nations so far reluctant to go at the war with the determination needed to defeat those subhuman abominations to all that is right. Whether he (Kerry) could bring this about is another question.

 

[arsbanned]

Wow, they're subhuman? Huh. Loin somethin' new every day.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: arsbanned
Wow, they're subhuman? Huh. Loin somethin' new every day.

Hey making ones enemies seem less than human makes wiping them off the face of the earth seem more palatable

 

[BugsBunny1078]

I think the truth actually is starting to sink into American's heads. Immediately after 9-11 people were still loathe to say, yes Islam is evil and must be destroyed. We want to be tolerant and love all mankind. Now more and more terrorism and we see that yes all Islam does support OBL who is likely the anti-christ himself or one of his precursors. As it becomes increasingly clear that this is a Holy war which you are being thrust into like it or not. It is everyone in the world vs. Islam as Islam is the evil that must be destroyed in order to insure survival for the rest of us. I don't like it anymore than anyone else but Islam is not exactly giving us a choice for peace. This battle was foretold and so is the outcome. It is up to us to fight it in our time.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: BugsBunny1078
I think the truth actually is starting to sink into American's heads. Immediately after 9-11 people were still loathe to say, yes Islam is evil and must be destroyed. We want to be tolerant and love all mankind. Now more and more terrorism and we see that yes all Islam does support OBL who is likely the anti-christ himself or one of his precursors. As it becomes increasingly clear that this is a Holy war which you are being thrust into like it or not. It is everyone in the world vs. Islam as Islam is the evil that must be destroyed in order to insure survival for the rest of us. I don't like it anymore than anyone else but Islam is not exactly giving us a choice for peace. This battle was foretold and so is the outcome. It is up to us to fight it in our time.

You sound as nutty as a fruitcake

 

[sandorski]

Who knows really? All I know is that a subtle hint is being presented that not re-electing Bush means the Terrorists win. Poppycock.

 

[bozack]

I also feel Al will view Kerry in office as a win and could very realisitically see Dari's scenerio playing out...makes sense. I feel they will try even harder to maximize american casualites in Iraq as they know Kerry will be more prone to pull out wheras Bush would not....either way it should be interesting.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: bozack
I also feel Al will view Kerry in office as a win and could very realisitically see Dari's scenerio playing out...makes sense. I feel they will try even harder to maximize american casualites in Iraq as they know Kerry will be more prone to pull out wheras Bush would not....either way it should be interesting.

Makes sense, as a Lame Duck President Bush wouldn't have to worry about getting re-elected so he could do as he pleases and totally disregard the wishes of the American Public.

 

[NeoV]

"Kerry is anti-military"

You are an idiot. Kerry understands the military 1000 times better than GW, or Dick Cheney, ever will. He FOUGHT IN A WAR himself, he knows exactly what the troops are up against - I assure you he will be at a few funerals, unlike GW, and he won't try to hide pictures of the caskets coming home.

"Kerry's lineage has no understanding of oil" - Let me get this straight - GW bankrupts two different oil companies, is friends with Ken Lay, and now he is an oil expert? I'm fairly certain that the majority of presidential candidates in the past 50 years have all had a fairly good understanding of the world economy and the importance of oil. Sure, Kerry doesn't have close ties to the royal Saud family - but I think that is a good thing - instead of blotting out 20 pages of intelligence reports that contain critical remarks and info about the Saudi involvement in 9/11, a Kerry administration, IMO, would be more apt to share that intelligence - let's not forget that, what, 15 of the hijackers were Saudi?

"I want to drive my muscle car" - gee, sorry for your tremendous loss, we should all have to make such huge sacrifices. At some point, terrorist-induced or not, we are going to have to move towards more fuel-efficient cars - fuel cells, hybrids, as-yet-unseen technologies - there is a finite supply of oil in the world, and with the explosion of auto use in the two most populated countries on the planet, China and India, that supply is being used up at a higher rate than ever before. We can take a proactive stance and start to change now, or we can be caught with our pants down should a scenario like the one in this thread play out.

Remember GW making fun of Gore's proposal to offer tax-breaks to hybrid or electric car owners? "I don't drive an electric car - do you?" - to a group in Michigan. Doesn't seem quite so funny now, does it? Nevermind the fact that tax breaks for such car owners became policy despite it being made fun of - but Kerry is the one who flip-flops, right?

 

[Bowfinger]

What Would Al Qaeda See in A John Kerry Victory?

A formidable foe.

Not only would they lose their smirking recruiter and unwitting ally in the White House, they would face a real War on Terror: focused, effective, and with renewed cooperation from the rest of the world.

 

[Kindjal]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
What Would Al Qaeda See in A John Kerry Victory?

A formidable foe.

Not only would they lose their smirking recruiter and unwitting ally in the White House, they would face a real War on Terror: focused, effective, and with renewed cooperation from the rest of the world.

I completely agree. And as a bonus we'll get a president who actually reads!

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

A formidable foe.

Not only would they lose their smirking recruiter and unwitting ally in the White House, they would face a real War on Terror: focused, effective, and with renewed cooperation from the rest of the world.

Totally disagree, and his past actions are enough to prove it...like I said before, if things get too hot he will not hesitate to pull out of Iraq and then blame the whole thing on the previous admin, Al Q will get the chance to move in there in force and dominate...Kerry will be too busy dolling out payoffs to his liberal cronies in mass and focusing on his hair and botox treatments

 

[SuperTool]

Al Qaeda wants Dubya.
1. He got the US military bogged down in Iraq, taking focus off Al Qaeda
2. He created another power vacuum for them to exploit in Iraq
3. He divided the anti-terror coalition
4. Iraq is sucking up resources that could be used to go after Al Qaeda or to shore up homeland security.

Bottom line, he didn't finish the job on Osama before he moved on to Iraq, and that's gonna cost us plenty down the road. The longer Bush is in power, the more our resources continue to be misplaced, and the more at risk we become. It is crucial that we get rid of Bush in November.

 

[beyoku]

Originally posted by: BugsBunny1078
I think the truth actually is starting to sink into American's heads. Immediately after 9-11 people were still loathe to say, yes Islam is evil and must be destroyed. We want to be tolerant and love all mankind. Now more and more terrorism and we see that yes all Islam does support OBL who is likely the anti-christ himself or one of his precursors. As it becomes increasingly clear that this is a Holy war which you are being thrust into like it or not. It is everyone in the world vs. Islam as Islam is the evil that must be destroyed in order to insure survival for the rest of us. I don't like it anymore than anyone else but Islam is not exactly giving us a choice for peace. This battle was foretold and so is the outcome. It is up to us to fight it in our time.

errr, In the battle of "the world VS. Islam" - They win according to the books.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
A formidable foe.

Not only would they lose their smirking recruiter and unwitting ally in the White House, they would face a real War on Terror: focused, effective, and with renewed cooperation from the rest of the world.

Totally disagree, and his past actions are enough to prove it.

Really? Care to share what past actions "prove" Kerry would not wage an effective, focused war or terrorism?

..like I said before, if things get too hot he will not hesitate to pull out of Iraq and then blame the whole thing on the previous admin,

Which is 100% where the blame belongs. They got us into that quagmire over the objections of the world, adopting a strategy they were warned would not work. Nonetheless, I think Kerry is less likey to abandon Iraq than King George. Kerry recognizes our responsibility to mitigate the damage we did to Iraq. I don't think Bush suffers from such integrity issues.

Al Q will get the chance to move in there in force and dominate

With the U.S. out of the way, I don't think the Iraqis will allow al Qaeda to dominate anything. I think Iraqis want their country back. That's not to say the new Iraqi regime will be wonderful. It just won't be dominated by al Qaeda.

...Kerry will be too busy dolling out payoffs to his liberal cronies in mass

As opposed to Dick and George dolling out payoffs to their greedy cronies (e.g., Halliburton, the energy industry)? Thanks, but I'd rather rely on a Republican Congress limiting Kerry's handouts than on George's fiscal responsiblity and integrity.

and focusing on his hair and botox treatments

Instead of remedial English and Geography lessons?



George W. Bush is Osama bin Laden's wet dream. OBL could not have hoped for a more inflammatory and incompetent response to 9/11.

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: Dari
While highly doubtful, should John Kerry win in November, I believe that they would consider that a victory and plan less attacks within the country (in the short-term). But what they do next would may bring the world to its knees.

Seeing Bush out of the way, the hydra may turn its focus on the twin cities of Mecca and Medina, and the greater House of Saud. More importantly, the terror network would turn towards the heavily fortified oil infrastructure in the Kingdom, which house 25% of global reserves. Just by attacking these strucures could increase the terror premium up to $20, on top of what oil may currently be the going rate. That could bring the price of oil to $50-80 a barrel. At those prices, the global economy would slow to a crawl. Worse, any action by Western powers to assist the Saudis could inflame the insensitivies of Muslims. Saudi Arabia would be left to defend itself against the terrorists. That would mean leaning farther to the right and putting an absolute stop to any reforms. This will only feed the nexus for more power in the Kingdom, creating a deadly cycle. There are already elements within the Kingdom who openly "understand" the plight of bin Laden. Who knows, the terror could spread to other reform-minded kingdoms in the Gulf.

With Kerry's lineage having no understanding of oil, let alone being in close contact with the House of Saud like the Bush Clan, a Kerry Administration would have no choice but to send more troops to the middle east to safeguard what we can. Furthermore, Israel may be used as a way to calm the situation. I doubt that either situation would help. The only way out would be to formulate a new energy policy relying less on MidEast oil. Until then, Al Qaeda may deal a severe blow to the world economy without ever leaving home.

Should Bush stay in office, Al Qaeda would find it hard to ignore those oil facilities. Nevertheless, Bush would be under far less (domestic) pressure to help out a friend. With death at its door, and a powerful ally in Washington, the House of Saud would most likely do whatever is necessary to deal that problem. Perhaps the princes could side with the reformists and do away with the wahhabis, breaking the bond that held the kingdom together for so long. Saudi Arabia would probably go as far as coming to terms with its Shi'ites, who are hated (more than Jews) in the Kingdom, and form a loose understanding with the new Iraq and Iran.

I smell some BS

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
A formidable foe.

Not only would they lose their smirking recruiter and unwitting ally in the White House, they would face a real War on Terror: focused, effective, and with renewed cooperation from the rest of the world.

Totally disagree, and his past actions are enough to prove it.

Really? Care to share what past actions "prove" Kerry would not wage an effective, focused war or terrorism?

..like I said before, if things get too hot he will not hesitate to pull out of Iraq and then blame the whole thing on the previous admin,

Which is 100% where the blame belongs. They got us into that quagmire over the objections of the world, adopting a strategy they were warned would not work. Nonetheless, I think Kerry is less likey to abandon Iraq than King George. Kerry recognizes our responsibility to mitigate the damage we did to Iraq. I don't think Bush suffers from such integrity issues.

Al Q will get the chance to move in there in force and dominate

With the U.S. out of the way, I don't think the Iraqis will allow al Qaeda to dominate anything. I think Iraqis want their country back. That's not to say the new Iraqi regime will be wonderful. It just won't be dominated by al Qaeda.

...Kerry will be too busy dolling out payoffs to his liberal cronies in mass

As opposed to Dick and George dolling out payoffs to their greedy cronies (e.g., Halliburton, the energy industry)? Thanks, but I'd rather rely on a Republican Congress limiting Kerry's handouts than on George's fiscal responsiblity and integrity.

and focusing on his hair and botox treatments

Instead of remedial English and Geography lessons?



George W. Bush is Osama bin Laden's wet dream. OBL could not have hoped for a more inflammatory and incompetent response to 9/11.

The irony of the Iraq campaign was that the right-wing in this country invaded Iraq, expecting their liberals to take over (Iraq has always been seen as the educated class of the Middle East). However, the religious nuts smelled an opportunity and hijacked the leadership. Like many of the liberals in the United States (who wouldn't fight in a war if their lives depended on it), the liberals in Iraq have acquiesced. To complicate matters even more, the Sunni's hate the Shi'ites more than Al Qaeda hates Jews. With the help of the United States and the international community, we can do something about this. Only economic prosperity can do away with religious fanaticism.