Rand Proves What Thinking People Knew. Now To Get This To The MSM

Sorry if this was posted since the study’s release. With 78 thousand posts per day, I can’t possibly see them all. But this study could prove extremely important when trying to steer the country away from war and on to a path that actually works. To help pull us out of Iraq. And has the added benefit of not creating more terrorists in the process. It should also help to stymie the right-wing radio talk show hosts if anyone is inclined to call in and educate.
Here is the Rand Corporation study on terrorism:


U.S. Should Rethink "War On Terrorism" Strategy to Deal with Resurgent Al Qaida

Current U.S. strategy against the terrorist group al Qaida has not been successful in significantly undermining the group's capabilities, according to a new RAND Corporation study issued today.

Al Qaida has been involved in more terrorist attacks since Sept. 11, 2001, than it was during its prior history and the group's attacks since then have spanned an increasingly broader range of targets in Europe, Asia, the Middle East and Africa, according to researchers.

In looking at how other terrorist groups have ended, the RAND study found that most terrorist groups end either because they join the political process, or because local police and intelligence efforts arrest or kill key members. Police and intelligence agencies, rather than the military, should be the tip of the spear against al Qaida in most of the world, and the United States should abandon the use of the phrase "war on terrorism," researchers concluded.

"The United States cannot conduct an effective long-term counterterrorism campaign against al Qaida or other terrorist groups without understanding how terrorist groups end," said Seth Jones, the study's lead author and a political scientist at RAND, a nonprofit research organization. "In most cases, military force isn't the best instrument."

The comprehensive study analyzes 648 terrorist groups that existed between 1968 and 2006, drawing from a terrorism database maintained by RAND and the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism. The most common way that terrorist groups end -- 43 percent -- was via a transition to the political process. However, the possibility of a political solution is more likely if the group has narrow goals, rather than a broad, sweeping agenda like al Qaida possesses.

The second most common way that terrorist groups end -- 40 percent -- was through police and intelligence services either apprehending or killing the key leaders of these groups. Policing is especially effective in dealing with terrorists because police have a permanent presence in cities that enables them to efficiently gather information, Jones said.

Military force was effective in only 7 percent of the cases examined; in most instances, military force is too blunt an instrument to be successful against terrorist groups, although it can be useful for quelling insurgencies in which the terrorist groups are large, well-armed and well-organized, according to researchers. In a number of cases, the groups end because they become splintered, with members joining other groups or forming new factions. Terrorist groups achieved victory in only 10 percent of the cases studied...

http://www.rand.org/news/press/2008/07/29/index.html

AND, if I remember correctly, that was the approach that Al Gore wanted to pursue. Rand came very late to the party.

wanted to pursue. (Hence my headline.) Including Kerry, Gore, most people I know, and everyone who was against the Iraq War. But a study is different than just knowing through common sense, etc. It can be pointed to as proof. And takes away from the talking heads meme of "he said she said."

This is very important.

It was about getting control of ME oil. Terrorism was just an excuse.

they lose talking points and people will demand something different.

I hate to be cynical, but good luck with that. :donut:

For people who are no longer sure if we should still be in Iraq, this can be the rational for leaving.

For people who feel they no longer can keep up with all the noise about terrorists threats and which is a Sunni and which is a Shia and which one hates us, this study can be used as the way out of a very confusing situation.

So getting them to the table is a known path to victory at a 43% success rate

This 43% of victory vs. 7% chance of victory would make a GREAT STEALTH QUESTION DURING THE DEBATES. I hope the Left hears me, for once& acts on it. I can picture Obama asking it: "Mr McCain which path would u choose, 1 with a **history of 43% chance of successfully ending terrorism or 1 with merely 7% chance of ending terrorism?" I hope he'd take the bait.

Thanks