(Click on Image to Enlarge)
New York Times: ISIS or Al Qaeda? American Officials Split Over Top Terror Threat
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration’s top intelligence, counterterrorism and law enforcement officials are divided over which terrorist group poses the biggest threat to the American homeland, the Islamic State or Al Qaeda and its affiliates.
The split reflects a rising concern that the Islamic State poses a more immediate danger because of its unprecedented social media campaign, using sophisticated online messaging to inspire followers to launch attacks across the United States.
Many intelligence and counterterrorism officials warn, however, that Qaeda operatives in Yemen and Syria are capitalizing on the turmoil in those countries to plot much larger “mass casualty” attacks, including bringing down airliners carrying hundreds of passengers.
WNU Editor: I would add Iran to this mix .... and I would label them as the most dangerous. Iran's strategic goals, resources, and allies far dwarf what Al Qaeda or the Islamic State could ever hope of assembling .... but in today's world .... the West has chosen to turn a blind eye to what the Iranian mullahs have done, are doing, and will do.
Update: This is a good analysis .... Islamic State v al-Qaeda: the battle within jihad (The Telegraph).
2 comments:
WNU Editor,
They arn't arguing about which group is more dangerous, in order to focus their effort, as the NYT Article claims,
As Emptywheel, MoA, Col. Pat Lang, The Angry Arab all have noted,
Instead, with Division 30's decimation being the latest aspect of the anti-Assad Campaign's failure,
And with the U.S. being regularly punked by their so called "allies", ( eg. Learning about Houthi's Scud launches from Twitter feeds, not the Saudi's),
They are trying to figure out who to back, Al Quida, or ISIS, and how they can "sell" that to the U.S. public.
There was already a trial run by trying to "isolate" the Korrisan Group from Al Quida, while the NYT "pimped" Al Nusra as "moderates",
But the destruction of Division 30 proved that Al Quida didn't really appreciate the attempt at splitting rather than lumping.
So, back the Turks, Saudi's and ISIS, lose Kurdistan but win Syria and Sunni Iraq,
Or back the Israeli, Saudi, Gulf States and Al Quida play, win Yemen, Lybia, the Syrian Golan, the Lebanese Border, keep Kurdistan but lose most of Syria, (Assad/ISIS) split and Sunni Iraq.
And then in the end, which choice is going to generate the most blowback, politically and with dead Americans?
Jay .... A part of me is afraid that blow-back is all but guaranteed now. I just shudder to think how big it is going to be when it happens.
Post a Comment