Three years ago, Saudi cleric Salman al Awdah, and 25 like-minded preachers, issued a religious ruling, that it was justifiable for Iraqis to fight American "invaders." Al Awdah had also been a supporter of Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda. But now al Awdah has changed his tune, as have many of his supporters, and he has come out against Islamic terrorism. This has ignited a controversy on pro-Islamic terror web sites, because al Awdah has long been seen as a major supporter of bin Laden among the senior Saudi clergy. While the Saudi government has been pressuring senior clerics to at least stop encouraging Saudis to support al Qaeda, the switch to being anti-al Qaeda appears to be a recognition that most Moslems have come to view the slaughter of so many Iraqis by terrorists as beyond the pale.
Our jihadi enemies are in retreat. Fighting them wasn't a bad idea.
First of all, when we weren't fighting back, the enemy didn't need to expand their ranks. Much like there were more Nazis fighting in 1944 than in 1940, surely once we started fighting the jihadis they reacted by trying to mobilize more resources. That's what wars are. Each side wants to win and tries to mobilize more resources to fight. Heck, our Army and Marine Corps are bigger now than in 2001. It is no surprise that the enemy would recruit more, too.
But to win you must fight even if the act of fighting obviously means more violence. Or are you really going to argue that when only we are being attacked, that counts as lower violence levels and is superior to more violence that includes our side fighting back?
In reality, before the Iraq War, jihad was all fun for Moslems when only distant infidels were dying and nothing bad happened to Moslems in response. Now that jihadis are killing plenty of Moslems who most Moslems don't consider worthy of killing, it is no longer so much fun.
To win you have to fight. It pains me to have to point out the bleeding obvious, but the need is there.
