Why Do They Bait Me?

A reader left a comment suggesting I write about a bunch of things regarding Al Qaeda's grievances. While I often respond to such requests, this is a big subject I don't really have time to deal with properly. I've written a lot about it in the past and I'm sure will do so in the future, but it's usually regarding some small, manageable part of the issue.

However, let make a few short, sweet answers to the points raised.

I would like LA Guy to write a bit more about what he thinks Al Qaeda's grievances are

While Al Qaeda is both all over the place physically (these days not so much a single-minded army as a widespread philosophy that inspires groups all over the world) as well as ideologically (they're quite willing to opportunistically adopt Western criticism of the West--Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky, whatever--as their own, even to the point of incoherence), their basic grievance isn't that hard to understand--they oppose modernity. They wish to establish a caliphate, and have the Muslim world, indeed, the entire world, ruled by their form of sharia. Gone would be democracy, free speech, women's rights, gay rights, freedom of religion, due process, open scientific inquiry and almost everything else that signifies a modern liberal society. They don't believe in compromise and favor violence and terrorism to achieve their ends. Any group they see that supports freedom or democracy, or even just opposes Al Qaeda's totalitarianism, they're against. Furthermore, Al Qaeda naturally prefers others not to fight them, much less capture and kill their leaders, as they attempt to impose their rule over others.

and why they are not legitimate

There are a number of reasons, but the main one is the same as that for, say, the Nazis (and I don't like comparing groups to Nazis, because it's too often a cheap debating tactic, but this is one case where the comparison is apt)--their goals are not legitimate, and should not be respected. Even if we assume (for either Nazis or Al Qaeda) clear goals and a coherent philosophy, this would not make them, or the reasons they give for their beliefs, legitimate.

and why they (or Arab/Islam Anti-Americanism generally) are as popular as they are

This question has a lot of complex answers (many of them not redounding to the credit of the anti-Americans), so I'm going to leave it alone for now, except to note as popular as their ideas are, they're not that popular in the Muslim world, and there are actually plenty of signs they're getting less popular.

(i.e. what does legitimacy matter when whatever it is, its inspiring too many people to commit too many horrific acts).

It matters because we need to know if their problem (with us and others) is one of perception or substance. If it's perception, our job is to fix that perception (which I'm not saying is easy, especially when your opponents don't live in places where they can hear the truth). If it's substance, then our job is to change ourselves.

To defeat the enemy, it must be understood.

I think everyone agrees with this (as long as you don't confuse "understand" with "sympathize"). The question is who has the best understanding of the enemy. Furthermore, once you've achieved an understanding, that doesn't mean there's any clear strategy on how to deal with them--especially since they will try to adapt to any move you make.

(& the current strategy seems not be acheiving either aim)

It may seem so, but the question is, once again, reality or perception?

Our current strategy only deals so much with trying to "understand" the terrorists, because 1) you never have perfect information and 2) partial information can be (must be) enough to act on. We feel we already understand the situation well enough to make certain moves.

As far as defeating them, we've let things go for so long that it may be the present generation (or two) of Muslims is lost, and so a tougher fight is necessary than there might have otherwise been. Our current strategy actually goes to root causes (which Al Qaeda seems to recognize, thus their need--against the predictions of those who opposed the war--to make Iraq their central struggle, and to oppose at all costs a democratic state there), which may mean a tougher fight than the easier but less effective means so many against the war support. It's certainly hard to imagine anything more likely to encourage our enemy than retreat.