LogFAQs > #914468851

Sativa_Rose posted...

I threw it out because I don't think it should be equated with Afghanistan. Really we should be considering these all separate from each other (Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, etc.) Generalizations about the "Middle East" are usually bad takes because it really does vary from country to country.

Anteaterking posted...

ISIS/Al Qaeda/etc. attacks in Europe increased after we began the war on terror, so I'm not sure that's any indication that we're succeeding. ISIS's power increased while we were active in Iraq.

The rise of ISIS corresponds with US withdrawal at the end of 2011. Had that not happened, you would not have had the ISIS caliphate which would have likely prevented some/all of the terrorist attacks in Europe.

The War on Terror really began before 9/11 anyways, but 9/11 certainly brought it to the forefront. You had the WTC bombings in 1993, the US embassy bombings in Kenya/Tanzania in 1998, and the USS Cole attack in 2000, for example.

So basically I think you are wrong in thinking that the root of the problem is actually the War on Terror rather than the terrorists themselves. If we withdraw, the problem will get worse. We can't withdraw and go back to some pre-terrorism world that never actually existed.

It also didn't help that Maliki gutted the Iraqi Army of any competent officer after we left, regardless of how you view Iraq; leaving it the way we did was a huge mistake on our part. ISIS was able to take advantage of the power vacuum and only grew to stupendous proportions after our withdrawal.
---

And when he gets to Heaven, to St. Peter he will tell, one more soldier reporting sir, I have served my time in hell.