More News Fun

The Rand Corporation recently undertook a study of terrorism and how to battle it, and has concluded several things.

First, that the most successful campaigns against terrorist groups across history have been carried out by local police or intelligence agencies, or because the terrorists decided to begin negotiating with the authorities and working from the inside, but rarely was military force found to be a significant factor in defeat of a terrorist group.

So essentially, while the Bush administration talks a big game, and derides the Clinton administration for not doing enough, the Rand Corporation says that the way Clinton handled the fight against terrorism was far more likely to succeed than the Bush way.

The second conclusion that I find interesting is that "Calling the efforts a war on terrorism raises public expectations -- both in the United States and elsewhere -- that there is a battlefield solution. It also tends to legitimize the terrorists' view that they are conducting a jihad (holy war) against the United States and elevates them to the status of holy warriors. Terrorists should be perceived as criminals, not holy warriors."

So apparently, the Bush administration is batting zero for zero on this (and that doesn't even count forcing out Richard Clark, considered to be one of the highest experts on terrorism in this country).

Who are the Rand Corporation? A nonprofit global policy think tank, generally known for rigorous, non-partisan analysis and policy recommendations, according to several sources (that particular phrasing comes from Wikipedia), also often seen as pro-military. Clearly not some left-wing lunatic fringe organization.

Liam.