Al-Qaida and Taliban threat is exaggerated, says security thinktank

[steve2470]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/07/al-qaida-taliban-threat-afghanistan

The threat posed by al-Qaida and the Taliban is exaggerated and the western-led counter-insurgency campaign in Afghanistan risks becoming a "long, drawn-out disaster", one of the world's leading security thinktanks warned today.

According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), the west's counter-insurgency strategy has "ballooned" out of proportion to the original aim of preventing al-Qaida from mounting terrorist attacks there, and must be replaced by a less ambitious but more sensible policy of "containment and deterrence".

The critique of the US- and British-backed military policy is contained in the latest strategic survey from the IISS, a respected but usually uncontroversial body. IISS officers made clear today they have departed from their normal practice because of the serious threat to the west's security interests in pursuing the current Afghan strategy.

In an effort to ignite a fresh debate and bring about a new approach towards Afghanistan, they challenge claims, not least from David Cameron, that the presence of thousands of British troops in Afghanistan is necessary to prevent al-Qaida from returning and thus increasing the threat to the UK.

[old mark]

1. Yeah, but Bush HAD TO HAVE his wars, so any excuse was used....Rec. nt

[Romulox]

2. Bush is gone. War remains.

Rec as well.

[BeFree]

3. Eh?

Bloody 'Truthers'?

[Tippy]

4. K&R

[jberryhill]

5. IISS

http://www.iiss.org/about-us/iiss-governance-and-advisory-structure/the-council/

The current members of the IISS Council are:

...

HRH Prince Faisal bin Salman bin Abdulaziz

[L0oniX]

6. Duh!

[wondersz1]

7. War has finally ended.

Lastly, the war in Iraq is gone. Really, I've never heard about Saddam sponsoring terrorism. Was it after all worth of all the war effort, including human toll and huge spending? Take a look at oil prices.

[Robb]

8. IISS has been wrong, and right.

In 2005, Chipman and the IISS said Iran would have the bomb by now.

I believe at this point in history we are excused if we choose exercise a certain amount of skepticism regarding anything done "...because of the serious threat to the west's security interests."

Edited to change date, it was 2005.