I have never understood how (what pass for intelligent) people fall for the line that if the US was not in Iraq Al Qaeda would be in control. Repeat after me - Al Qaeda is a fundamentalist Sunni terrorist organization who hate Shia more than either Jews or Americans. They regard them as apostates and heretics who based on their reading of the Quran need to be killed for their beliefs something that the Quran doesn't require either for Christian or Jews.

Having said that do you believe that a country that is 60% Shia and 20% Sunni Arab (the remaining are sunni Kurds you just want out) would condone AL Qaeda in Iraq. But for American troops the Al Qaeda problem would have been solved along with the ethnic cleansing of all Sunni's years ago. It is no surprise the the Sunni elements turned on Al Qaeda once there was serious talk of the Americans pulling out. They knew that they wouldn't have a chance left to the tender mercies of the Shia. Baghdad is quiet because it has essentially been ethnically cleansed.

crazyv

before you start telling people they are falling for something you might want to remember that Saddam was a sunni and he seemed to control the majority shia just fine through intimidation and violence

Obviously Al Qaeda would never have been able to defeat Saddam. However Al Qaeda was hiding out in Iraq's lawless northern areas, where they went after the Taliban fell. So technically Hitchens is right. Many of the Al Qaeda guys from Afghanistan were taking refuge in Iraq, they weren't exactly doing anything dangerous, they were just hiding there.

You mean that "lawless area" where the Kurds had autonomy? Anyway, they may have been "hiding out" there (although we knew they were there long before America invaded Iraq and did nothing about it), but there is a big difference between "hiding out" and actually carrying out attacks.

Ansar al-Islam was a splinter group from the Kurdish forces. Yet they were fighting both the Kurds and Saddam. So it was lawless.

Al Qaeda was only "hiding out" in Afghanistan. What separates planning and hiding? A table and a map. Oh, I also forgot to mention, after the invasion they found an Ansar al-Islam chemical weapons lab in northern Iraq. They weren't anywhere near successfully developing a chemical weapon, but they were trying.

I heard that there are some White Power extremists hanging out in the American southeast. We should bomb the shit out of those cities, you know, as a preventative measure.

<removes tongue from cheek>

If Neo-Nazis were an existential threat to the West and those cities refused to hand them over I would completely support bombing them out.

Existential threat is a very odd term. I assume it means they are idealogicaly opposed to our existence at least in present form and threaten to use force against those that don't fit their worldview.

Somehow I bet we could find a handful of people that fit that description in almost any city in the country.

Existential threat is a standard term when referring to Al Qaeda vs the West or Hamas vs Israel.

And yes you probably could find a handful of people in every city, in fact I believe the government created a special department just to do that: Homeland Security. Outside the US though there is another department that handles that task: Department of Defense.

msummo:

Oh, I also forgot to mention, after the invasion they found an Ansar al-Islam chemical weapons lab in northern Iraq. They weren't anywhere near successfully developing a chemical weapon, but they were trying.

And that's supposed to be a threat?

And that's supposed to be a threat?

A group who is allied with Al Qaeda, was harboring Al Qaeda members, and eventually went on to become Al Qaeda in Iraq was developing (or at least trying to develop) chemical weapons.

You don't think that is in any way a threat?

msummo:

Existential threat is a standard term when referring to Al Qaeda vs the West or Hamas vs Israel.

And yes you probably could find a handful of people in every city, in fact I believe the government created a special department just to do that: Homeland Security. Outside the US though there is another department that handles that task: Department of Defense.

Existential threat was originally a cold war term, that was put into use in the current "war" to justify our current actions.

Clearly you had more in mind than just a stand in for Al Qaeda when you used the term as you were answering a question about White Supremacists.

Yes I know, but "existential threat" has been brought back specifically by academics like Charles Krauthammer when discussing Islamic Extremism's threat to the West. I have also heard it used in regards to Israel and Hamas several times.Neo nazi ideology is a twisted branch of Western civilization, it exists within it. It is not fundamentally opposed to it. Islamic extremism, Jihadism, Al Qaedaism, whatever you want to call it, is categorically opposed to everything the modern, secular West stands for. It is the quintessential existential threat.

A group who is allied with Al Qaeda, was harboring Al Qaeda members, and eventually went on to become Al Qaeda in Iraq was developing (or at least trying to develop) chemical weapons.

I don't suppose you happen to know where those weapons are? Oh wait, they're in Syria right? No, make that Iran.

msummo:

Yes I know, but "existential threat" has been brought back specifically by academics like Charles Krauthammer when discussing Islamic Extremism's threat to the West. I have also heard it used in regards to Israel and Hamas several times.Neo nazi ideology is a twisted branch of Western civilization, it exists within it. It is not fundamentally opposed to it. Islamic extremism, Jihadism, Al Qaedaism, whatever you want to call it, is categorically opposed to everything the modern, secular West stands for. It is the quintessential existential threat.

That doesn't really make sense in relation to your first use of the term in this thread. However, you were replying to a tongue in cheek question, so you probably threw it out there.

I still think existential threat is misapplied when taking about Al Qaedism. With communism, there was a true worldwide idealogical struggle. Nations democratically chose communist governments and rejected full throated capitalism and a segment of the American population agreed with this. Al Qaedism does not have this appeal beyond a few zealots. Sunni tribes in Iraq explicitly rejected it after a short first hand experience. The Western value system is not threatened by Al Qaeda.