Security And Development Policy Group: Fill & Download for Free

Greed, lies, decit, power, influence, religious beliefs, radicals, pro war people, money etcetc…..Before ww1 and WW2 started the tension between the countries were too high, in the sense too high, one small, wrong, misunderstanding could start potentially a full blown war.And right now i think America is the number one threat to world peace and world war ||| whyPresident Trump told reporters Friday that the United States had killed Qasem Soleimani, one of Iran’s top military figures, in a bid to “stop a war.” The president, speaking at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, urged Iran not to retaliate.Map created by Joe HammerThe map shows the results of a 2013 (pre-Trump) WIN/Gallup International survey asking people which country they felt was the greatest threat to world peace.According to the survey results:The US was the overwhelming choice (24% of respondents) for the country that represents the greatest threat to peace in the world today. This was followed by Pakistan (8%), China (6%), North Korea, Israel and Iran (5%). Respondents in Russia (54%), China (49%) and Bosnia (49%) were the most fearful of the US as a threat.Interestingly, Iran was seen as the biggest threat by Americans, Canadians and Brits, but Australians viewed the US as the biggest threat.Regional rivalries were also common, for example South Koreans think of North Korea as the biggest threat to world peace, the Japanese, Vietnamese and Filipinos think of China as the biggest threat (although China views the US as the biggest threat to peace), Indians view Pakistan as the biggest threat (although Pakistan does not return the favour, instead focusing on the US as the biggest threat.2. The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty, formally Treaty Between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Elimination of Their Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles; Russian: Договор о ликвидации ракет средней и меньшей дальности / ДРСМД, Dogovor o likvidatsiy raket sredney i menshey dalnosti / DRSMD) was an arms control treaty between the United States and the Soviet Union (and its successor state, the Russian Federation). US President Ronald Reagan and Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev signed the treaty on 8 December 1987.The United States Senate approved the treaty on 27 May 1988, and Reagan and Gorbachev ratified it on 1 June 1988.The INF Treaty banned all of the two nations' land-based ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and missile launchers with ranges of 500–1,000 kilometers (310–620 mi) (short medium-range) and 1,000–5,500 km (620–3,420 mi) (intermediate-range). The treaty did not apply to air- or sea-launched missiles.By May 1991, the nations had eliminated 2,692 missiles, followed by 10 years of on-site verification inspections.Amidst continuing growth of China's missile forces, US President Donald Trump announced on 20 October 2018 that he was withdrawing the US from the treaty due to Russian non-compliance.The US formally suspended the treaty on 1 February 2019, and Russia did so on the following day in response. The US formally withdrew from the treaty on 2 August 2019.CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT.3. Brutal civil wars in Syria and Yemen, coupled with the return of great power rivalries between the US, Russia and China, have brought the world's arms trade into sharp focus.And unsurprisingly it is a thriving global industry, with the total international trade in arms now worth about $100bn (£74bn) per year, Pieter Wezeman, senior researcher at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Sipri), tells the BBC.In its latest figures, the defence industry think tank says that major weapons sales in the five years to 2017 were 10% higher than in 2008-12.And it is the United States that is extending its lead as the globe's number one arms exporter, adds Sipri.It estimates that the US now accounts for 34% of all global arms sales, up from 30% five years ago, and are now at their highest level since the late 1990s.Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionSaudi Arabia is now the world's top importer of US arms"The US has been open to supplying arms to a large variety of recipients, and there are a large number of countries ready to acquire weapons from the US," says Mr Wezeman.The US's arms exports are 58% higher than those of Russia, the world's second-largest exporter. And while US arms exports grew by 25% in 2013-17 compared with 2008-12, Russia's exports fell by 7.1% over the same period.It is Middle East states that have been among the US's biggest customers - Saudi Arabia tops the list - with the region as a whole accounting for almost half of US arms exports during 2013-17.Yemen's civil warThis comes as arms imports to the region have doubled over the past 10 years, driven by widespread conflicts across the area - most notably the civil wars in Syria and in Yemen, which the UN has called the world's worst man-made humanitarian disaster.Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionAbout 75% of Yemen's population are in need of humanitarian assistanceSince Yemen's civil war started in 2015, Saudi Arabia and eight other Arab states have carried out an air campaign in support of forces loyal to President Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi.These are fighting Houthi rebels said to be backed militarily by Iran.The UN says that as of last November, at least 5,295 civilians had been killed and 8,873 wounded, although the actual figures are likely to be much higher.The bitter conflict in Yemen has brought the ethical issues of international arms sales into sharp relief in many western countries, which have seen Saudi Arabia and its allies use their advanced weapons systems in the country."Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates were major arms importers anyway," says Sipri's Pieter Wezeman. "The major difference is that now they are using these weapons - in Yemen."Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionSaudi Arabia and eight other Arab states are carrying out air strikes to restore President Hadi's governmentThe UN says that Saudi-led coalition airstrikes continue to be the leading cause of child casualties as well as overall civilian casualties.Meanwhile, rebel forces have fired artillery indiscriminately into cities such as Taizz and Aden, killing civilians, and also fired rockets into southern Saudi Arabia."There is a clear risk that arms sales contribute to human rights violations," says Oliver Feeley-Sprague, arms trade expert at Amnesty International."There are clear violations being committed by all sides. But in general, the more weapons get supplied, the more they risk being used."The scale of the war in Yemen has led some countries to act: Norway, the Netherlands, Sweden and Germany among others, have all recently restricted arms sales to the region.China's growthAcross in China, its economic rise has been mirrored by a growing defence budget and its increasing importance as a global arms supplier.The country is now the world's fifth largest seller of arms. This puts it behind the US, Russia, France, and Germany, but ahead of the UK.Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionChina is now the world's fifth-largest weapons exporterChina's arms exports rose by 38% between 2008-12 and 2013-17, and the country now has the world's second-largest defence budget after the US - $150bn compared to the latter's $602bn in 2017.As China spends more on its defence industries, it means that it is it is also increasingly challenging the West when it comes to the technological sophistication of its weapons systems, says Meia Nouwens, research fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS)."There should be no doubt that the PLA [People's Liberation Army] today is no longer far behind the West when it comes to certain areas of defence technology," she says. "The West's superiority in the air is under growing threat."China may not yet be able to produce high-performance military jet engines, but with the rate they are innovating they are not light-years away from being able to do it."Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionChina's first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning: China is said to be planning to have four carrier battle groupsChina's increased military spending comes as it is moving from being a land-based military to becoming a naval-based power - and has poured huge sums into its growing navy.Since 2000 it has built more warships than Japan, South Korea and India combined - the total tonnage of new warships and auxiliaries launched in the last four years is greater than that of the French navy. Other countries across, such as Japan and India have responded by spending more on naval power.Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionAsian military spending: Japan's latest helicopter carrier Izumo, though officially a "destroyer", is its biggest warship since World War Two"China has grown at a staggering rate, economically, and is seeking to transform that into a military power that is consistent with a regional hegemonic position," says Veerle Nouwens, research analyst at Royal United Services Institute (Rusi).Part of this strategy includes China's efforts to export its arms. It sold weapons to 48 countries during 2013-17, with Pakistan being its top customer, and it is making inroads into some of Russia's traditional export markets.Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionIndia is also spending more; its defence imports rose 24% between 2008-12 and 2013-17 and is building six of these French-Spanish designed submarines"They are both selling to similar customers - countries that the west won't sell arms to - like Iran, Venezuela, Sudan and Zimbabwe," says Dr Lucie Beraud-Sudreau of the IISS.African conflictsIn a world where arms sales are rising, the major exception to this seems to have been Africa. Between 2008-12 and 2013-17 arms imports by African countries fell by 22%.Yet crucially, the figures here do not tell the whole story. Internationally, arms sales are measured by the total value of the contract - but this downplays the significance of small arms and light weapons to continuing conflicts in Africa, most notably South Sudan's civil war."We are not seeing significant reductions in the fighting in South Sudan, and this is clearly being fuelled by significant purchases of small arms and light weapons," says Amnesty International's Oliver Feeley-Sprague."For instance, three shiploads of machine guns, which would make a huge difference to armed groups on the ground, yet would not even show up in the statistics."In 2014 the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) came into force, with the aim of regulating the international trade in conventional weapons.It requires states to monitor arms exports, and ensure that their weapons sale don't break existing arms embargoes, or end up being used for human-rights abuses, including terrorism. Yet so far its impact has been limited, say critics."We are disappointed by the way a number of states have decided to implement it, says Amnesty's Oliver Feeley-Sprague."We think the UK, US and France among others, by continuing to sell arms to Saudi Arabia and its allies in the coalition operation in Yemen, are clearly violating the ATT's provisions."Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionAbout a third of South Sudan's population has been displaced by the conflict, which broke out in December 2013Last July, the UK's High Court ruled that the UK government's arms sales to Saudi Arabia are lawful.However, the Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT) has been given permission to appeal against this ruling, and the case will now go to the Court of Appeal.The UK government says it has "one of the most robust export control regimes in the world".The ATT may have had a bigger impact on curbing the flow of weapons to non-state actors, says Sipri's Pieter Wezeman - but so far it has not had any visible impact on the overall trade in arms.4 .Photo: Mohammed Sawaf/AFP via Getty ImagesThe body of top Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani has arrived back in Iran, as President Trump issued fresh threats against Iran over Saturday night.The latest: A funeral procession began in Ahvaz Sunday for Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis after their bodies in the southern Iranian city, a senior Iraqi-Iranian militia commander who also died in the U.S. strike in Iraq Friday, per the official IRNA, which reports their bodies will be transferred to other cities in Iran, including Tehran.Donald J. Trump✔@realDonaldTrumpThe United States just spent Two Trillion Dollars on Military Equipment. We are the biggest and by far the BEST in the World! If Iran attacks an American Base, or any American, we will be sending some of that brand new beautiful equipment their way...and without hesitation!163KThe United States just spent Two Trillion Dollars on Military Equipment. We are the biggest and by far the BEST in the World! If Iran attacks an American Base, or any American, we will be sending some of that brand new beautiful equipment their way...and without hesitation!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 5, 2020Twitter Ads info and privacyThe United States just spent Two Trillion Dollars on Military Equipment. We are the biggest and by far the BEST in the World! If Iran attacks an American Base, or any American, we will be sending some of that brand new beautiful equipment their way...and without hesitation!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 5, 2020What he's saying: Trump tweeted Saturday evening the U.S. has "targeted 52 Iranian sites" (representing the 52 Americans taken in the Iran hostage crisis of 1979-1981) and that it will attack "if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets.""They attacked us, & we hit back," Trump said in a comment retweeting a post by Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas), a former Navy SEAL, defending him late Saturday. "If they attack again, which I would strongly advise them not to do, we will hit them harder than they have ever been hit before!"Why it matters: The drone strike that resulted in Soleimani's death is the most direct confrontation from the U.S. since the Trump administration pulled out of the 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal. Iran has vowed to take revenge, according to IRNA.Trump has faced criticism over the strike that killed Soleimani from some world leaders and members of Congress, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.The big picture: Iraqi officials and Iranian-backed militias reported another deadly airstrike in Iraq 24 hours after the U.S. killed Soleimani, AP reports. It left five dead, as thousands gathered in Baghdad Saturday to mourn Soleimani and al-Muhandis.On Saturday, several rockets fell inside Baghdad's fortified Green Zone, the Jadriya neighborhood and the Balad airbase housing U.S. troops, but there were no reported deaths, the Iraqi military said, per Al Jazeera.Iraq's parliament is holding an emergency session Sunday, Reuters reports.NATO has suspended training missions in Iraq after Soleimani's death, citing security concerns, the Washington Post reports.The decision to strike: U.S. officials say they acted following the death of an American contractor the Friday before Christmas in Iraq by Iranian-sponsored militia groups. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo claimed Soleimani was "actively" planning an attack on Americans, the Washington Post reports.Trump said he's not looking to change the Iranian regime, per the New York Times.Global reaction:Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi, who formally resigned a month ago, said the attack will lead to a "dangerous escalation," NPR reports.Russia condemned the attack and blasted the Trump administration for refusing to use official channels, such as turning to the UN Security Council following protests at American embassies in Iraq, per NPR.U.K. Defense Secretary Ben Wallace said the Royal Navy was escorting British-flagged vessels in the Persian Gulf and that under international law, "the United States is entitled to defend itself against those posing an imminent threat to its citizens."Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu supported the U.S. and said, "Qassim Soleimani is responsible for the deaths of many American citizens and many other innocent people," the BBC reports.China appealed for restraint on all sides, but added, "The dangerous [U.S.] military operation violates the basic norms of international relations and will aggravate regional tensions and turbulence," per Al Jazeera.What to watch: Iran is "likely" to launch a cyberattack against the U.S. following the death of Soleimani, AP reports.The disruptions could target American manufacturing facilities, oil and gas plants and transit systems. U.S. cybersecurity officials warn businesses and government agencies to be cautious, per AP.What's next: The White House is preparing to present partners and allies with intelligence on the "imminent threat" it says prompted this attack, said Kirsten Fontenrose, who served on the National Security Council earlier in the Trump administration, during an Atlantic Council conference call.The administration is sending more U.S. troops to the region, with roughly 3,500 troops in Fort Bragg, N.C. preparing to go to Kuwait.The threat of a major escalation in Iran-US tensions appears to be rising following the death of top Iranian General Qasem Soleimani in a US air strike in Iraq.SEE RELATEDUkraine warns of ‘full-scale war’ with RussiaWhat happens if Trump’s foreign enemies unite?British warship to sail through South China SeaThe 62-year-old commander of the Quds Force of the Revolutionary Guards was widely regarded as the second-most important person in Iran, reporting directly to the country’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.The Pentagon has accused Soleimani and his elite unit of being terrorists, and claims the general was “developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members” in the region, the BBC reports.The killing has fuelled fears of a possible “World War 3”, a phrase now trending on Twitter. So are those fears justified?–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––For a concise, refreshing and balanced take on the news agenda, delivered to your inbox, sign up to the WeekDay newsletter–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––Iran-US-SyriaTensions have been growing between the US and Iran since 2018, when Washington announced it was withdrawing from the 2015 nuclear deal. An independent US report warned that the stage had been set for an all-out war - with President Trump’s decision to surround himself with hardliners in his administration increasing the risk.As The Independent noted at the time, Israel and Saudi Arabia - the two states that successfully lobbied Trump to sabotage the nuclear agreement between Tehran and international powers - “have long urged Washington to take military action against Iran”. And the US leader’s inclusion of Foreign Secretary Mike Pompeo and National Security Adviser John Bolton in his cabinet appeared to suggest he was heading in that direction.Those fears have been stoked by the killing this week of Soleimani in a drone strike on Baghdad International Airport. President Donald Trump, who ordered the attack, tweeted an image of the US flag shortly after the news broke.The BBC reports that as commander of elite special forces, Soleimani is believed to have “orchestrated covert operations, involving a web of proxy militias, across the region”.Iranian officials have warned that his killing amounts to an act of war that will be met with “harsh retaliation”.Foreign Minister Javad Zarif called the attack an “act of international terrorism”, while former Revolutionary Guards commander Mohsen Rezaei said that Iran would take “vigorous revenge on America”.And in a statement posted on the Iranian government website, President Hasan Rouhani said: “Iran and the other free nations of the region will take revenge for this gruesome crime from criminal America.”Threat of Russia to EuropeRising tensions between Russia and Ukraine reached boiling point in October 2018, when Ukraine’s then-president Petro Poroshenko voiced his concerns about a possible “full-scale war” with Russia following the seizure of three of Ukraine’s naval ships in the Azov Sea.The Guardian reports that after opening a bridge across the Kerch Strait, Russia has gradually brought the entire area under its control, causing “severe economic damage” to Ukrainian trading ports.This domination, combined with Russia’s previous advances in eastern Ukraine, have prompted calls for the West to respond. “If it chooses to let this go, Putin will be emboldened to push his aggressions not just in Ukraine but along his entire European border and beyond,” says Bloomberg.The head of the British Army, General Mark Carleton-Smith, told The Telegraph: “Russia today indisputably represents a far greater threat to our national security than Islamic extremist threats such as al-Qa’eda and Isis.“Russia has embarked on a systematic effort to explore and exploit Western vulnerabilities, particularly in some of the non-traditional areas of cyber, space, undersea warfare.”Tensions between the US and Russia have also grown over fears in Moscow that the US might deploy intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe.The US has said there are no immediate plans to do so, and dismissed Russian President Vladimir Putin’s warnings as disingenuous propaganda. However, the US decision to quit the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty over an alleged Russian violation - which Moscow denies - “has freed [the US] to start developing and deploying such missiles”, says The Guardian.Putin has said Russia does not want a new arms race, but has also dialled up his military rhetoric. In February 2019, he used a state of the nation address to threaten to develop new long-range weapons to target Western capitals and cut nuclear strike times.The problem, says Bloomberg’s Tobin Harshaw, is that Putin “is an expansionist, with dreams of restoring not so much the Soviet Union but rather the Eurasian empire the czars strove for but never quite accomplished”.In his pursuit of that ambition, “nuclear saber-rattling has become key to the Kremlin’s projection of power both at home and abroad, and could be an attempt to bring Washington to the negotiating table”, reports The Washington Post.Some analysts have seen Putin’s approach as “a tactic to try to re-engage the US in talks about the strategic balance between the two powers, which Moscow has long pushed for, with mixed results”, adds Reuters.In April last year, former comedian and actor Volodymyr Zelensky became president of Ukraine on a populist platform, with his “thumping victory” over then-president Poroshenko indicating a “strong, untapped desire to end the Russophobia that has been so prominent the last five years”, according to The National Interest.“During the campaign, Zelensky outflanked Poroshenko by promising to do anything to achieve peace, including direct negotiations with Putin,” the news agency adds.The international community got a glimpse of this new approach in June, when Zelensky made an "emotional" plea to Putin to free 24 sailors captured near Crimea.“I want to appeal to the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin,” Zelensky told journalists during a briefing. “We all have children. Return children to their parents.”South China SeaTensions are also rising in the South China Sea between the US and China. Beijing views the expanse off the coast of East Asia as sovereign territory, while Washington regards “China’s militarisation of the area as a transparent rewriting of the international rules”, says US magazine The National Interest.“Neither side is backing down - nor does either country seem interested in a compromise,” the magazine adds.During an interview in November, Vice President Mike Pence was asked about China’s failure to meet US demands over unfair trade practices, political interference and military manoeuvres in the region. Pence’s response: “Then so be it... We are here to stay.”Confrontation in the region is all but “inevitable”, says Maochun Yu, a history professor at the US Naval Academy, in Maryland.Beijing is trying to push out its borders and expand control of peripheral waters. “China’s geopolitical and geostrategic priority is to revise or change the existing international order that has been based upon a complex system of rules, laws and customs that govern various global commons including the South China Sea,” he told Foreign Policy. “Revisionism brings unavoidable confrontation.”UK-Iran tanker warsThe UK had a diplomatic run-in with Iran of its own, after Tehran attempted to prove its military might in the Strait of Hormuz, says The Independent.Iran’s seizure of the Stena Impero in the Gulf last summer came weeks after Britain helped seize oil tanker Grace 1 off Gibraltar. The UK government claimed the Iranian vessel was transporting oil to Syria, in violation of EU sanctions. Then-foreign secretary Jeremy Hunt described Iran’s retaliatory seizure as an illegal move, deeming it “utterly unacceptable”.Hunt insisted that the UK’s motives were in no way comparable to those of Iran, but Tehran appeared to disagree.In footage released by the Iranian government in July, armed troops wearing ski masks are seen rappelling onto the British tanker’s deck from a helicopter hovering overhead. Sky News described the manoeuvre as a “carbon copy” of that in the Royal Navy operation in Gibraltar, and noted that Iranians would “like the symmetry of the two operations”.The broadcaster added that Iran appeared to be sending two clear messages to the UK: “we want our tanker back” and “look at what we can do in the Persian Gulf. Do you want more?”Former first sea lord Admiral Lord West insisted that UK politicians should take those implicit warnings from Tehran seriously.“This crisis has developed as the eyes of our political establishment have been focused on the election of a new prime minister,” West wrote in an article for The Observer in July.“There are very real risks of a miscalculation or foolhardy action leading to war,” he added.In July, the UK government’s emergency security committee expressed a “desire to de-escalate” the stand-off. By September, the Stena Impero tanker was released and made its way to Dubai – an indication that even the most serious diplomatic incidents can be resolved without conflict.

I’m not going to dispute the fact that the US military has killed civilians. This has happened both accidentally and also due to the malice of service personnel who decided that malevolent behavior was acceptable and a chain of command that was either unable or unwilling to rein them in. Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs places the civilian death toll in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan at around 244,000 as of November 2018. These are deaths attributable to direct action like gunfire and artillery and airstrikes, and include civilians killed by both the US military, its allies, and its adversaries. Split evenly between the three conflict zones, that is civilian deaths of around 81,333 each (It is far more likely to be more of a 45%/45%/10% split with that 10% being Pakistan, but let’s be quick and sloppy).Now, these are only deaths in those three combat theaters, and also only ones that were able to be documented—bodies were found and some report was made of their presence or an effort was made to properly dispose of the remains. Deaths in conflict zones like Syria, Yemen, Somalia and others were not included in this study. Further, deaths from causes like starvation or disruption of medical services were not included. The modern conflicts that can be said to have evolved from the United States’ War on Terror beginning in 2001 were not restricted to just Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.However, I can tell you that your assertion that the US Armed Forces has killed “millions” of civilians is false. I interpret your statement to mean that US personnel actively and directly, through the active use of light or heavy weapons killed millions of people who were not engaged in combat. This is not just an exaggeration, but a lie.As official policy, the United States Armed Forces works very hard to minimize civilian casualties, and tries to alleviate the suffering of civilians trapped in war zones. I can attest to this personally. I served both in Afghanistan and Iraq, on the ground, and after leaving Active service, I was trained as a Civil Affairs Specialist—the military profession whose job it is to interact with civilians on the battlefield.Simply looking at the numbers, your assertion would be an impossibility. Let’s do a comparison. Between 1939–1945, somewhere between 300,000 and 750,000 German civilians (in Germany. We’re not talking about Austrians, or ethnic Germans in the rest of Germany who suffered persecution and reprisals for the Nazis’ actions) were killed during the Second World War by direct Allied activity (again, we’re talking gunfire, artillery and air raids, not disease and starvation, etc.). To keep our numbers easy, we’ll assume that the War on Terror has gone on for 19 years. So, if we assume the Second World War had gone on for 19 years, somewhere between 1 and 2.5 million German civilians would have been killed by direct hostilities.Back then, it was a very different war. Armies were much larger, and their weapons were far more imprecise. In big offensives, thousands of artillery pieces and aircraft were used, hitting the enemy with millions of tons of explosives. The US and British Bomber Commands launched massive, thousand-bomber raids to try and destroy the factories and infrastructure that fueled the German war machine, bombing entire city districts flat. This was not done simply out of hatred or for the hell of it, but because of technology. Targeting and guidance technology was too primitive to attack enemy forces and targets in any other way. At the time, the Allies didn’t want to kill heaps of German civilians, but if they wanted to prosecute the war and beat Germany, they didn’t really have much choice.Now this is from a perspective of a military force that does not want to kill civilians, but is unable or unwilling to alter its strategy, operational, and tactical practices to prevent civilian deaths. 1–2.5 million civilian deaths. Let’s look at a force that is deliberately trying to kill civilians from the same period.According to Soviet statistics researched and released in 2004, approximately 10 million civilians were killed by German and other Axis nation direct activity. This does not count famine and disease or military casualties, nor does it include Jewish victims of the Holocaust. Those number are around 901,500 on the low side. We include famine and disease for the Jews because the SS practiced a policy of deliberate starvation and denial of adequate food and healthcare to them. So, around 11.5 million Soviet citizens were actively killed by German forces and their allies between 1941–1945. If we push that out to a nineteen year period like our War on Terror, we get a figure of 43,700,000.OK, so where am I going with all of these numbers and averages? My point is this. If the US military was actively killing millions of people, even if they weren’t really trying to, the countries they are fighting in would be WAY worse off than they currently are. The impact would be so stark and horrific that you couldn’t avoid, ignore, or deny it even if you wanted to. Bodies would be everywhere, unburied, rotting, leading to disease on Black Plague levels, Muslim laws on burial be damned (disease control is one of the reasons Islamic custom calls for burial within 24 hours). Society would collapse because so many educated technical tradesmen and professionals would be dead. Food distribution would collapse entirely. Afghanistan’s role as the world’s largest producer of opium to the drug trade would be over because the poppy would lie fallow and the transport and distribution people would be greatly atritted. Psychological casualties amongst returning US service members would be something out of a horror novel or dystopian sci-fi movie, approaching almost total, along with serious casualties from disease. To continue a war in such nightmare conditions…you simply couldn’t do it for nineteen years. You’d have to create artificial soldiers or alter your policies to protect civilians better.Further, these are not very populous countries to begin with. Iraq and Afghanistan have 2019 populations listed at around 38–39 million people apiece. Most of these are children, so a World War II-level death toll would create a cascading effect as the deaths of adult caregivers led to the deaths of even more children.The most obvious reason this is nonsense is because no one is seeing it. I was in Afghanistan from November 2006 to March 2007, and in Baghdad, Iraq from November 2007 to January 2009. I was an Infantryman, tasked with additional Human Intelligence duties, so I went out into the city, amongst the people, all the time because that’s where our mission took us. People are not just plastic figures, they have families, and familial connection is very important in Afghanistan and Iraq. If we were killing so many, many people, the public hostility would have been overwhelming, no matter who had the better weapons, equipment, and training. Instead, the everyday people I met were universally hospitable, welcoming, and understanding. Even in Spring-Summer 2008 when I was involved in heavy urban fighting in the Siege of Sadr City, I never found myself in the vast fields of corpses that would accompany “millions” of dead. Surely a good percentage of these millions would have died in some of the heaviest fighting in the Iraq Occupation?So no, the US armed forces is not killing millions of civilians.Now, as for what made Osama bin Laden such an infamous terrorist and worthy of targeted killing by the United States, you have to look at the history of his activities and his beliefs. For the sake of convenience and clarity, I will quote wikipedia here:“A major component of bin Laden's ideology was the concept that civilians from enemy countries, including women and children, were legitimate targets for jihadists to kill.[60][61]According to former CIA analyst Michael Scheuer, who led the CIA's hunt for Osama bin Laden, the al-Qaeda leader was motivated by a belief that U.S. foreign policy has oppressed, killed, or otherwise harmed Muslims in the Middle East,[62]condensed in the phrase, "They hate us for what we do, not who we are." Nonetheless, bin Laden criticized the U.S. for its secular form of governance, calling upon Americans to convert to Islam and "reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling, and usury", in a letter published in late 2002.[63]His vocal criticism of Western government and society, and his claims that they were dominated by Jews, earned him respect from various sectors of the far right in Europe and North America.[64]Bin Laden believed that the Islamic world was in crisis and that the complete restoration of Sharia law would be the only way to "set things right" in the Muslim world. He opposed such alternatives as secular government,[63]as well as "pan-Arabism, socialism, communism, democracy."[65]He subscribed to the Athari (literalist) school of Islamic theology.[66]These beliefs, in conjunction with violent jihad, have sometimes been called Qutbism after being promoted by Sayyid Qutb.[67]Bin Laden believed that Afghanistan, under the rule of Mullah Omar's Taliban, was "the only Islamic country" in the Muslim world.[68]Bin Laden consistently dwelt on the need for violent jihad to right what he believed were injustices against Muslims perpetrated by the United States and sometimes by other non-Muslim states.[69]He also called for the elimination of Israel, and called upon the United States to withdraw all of its civilians and military personnel from the Middle East, as well as from every Islamic country of the world.In 1997, he condemned the United States for its hypocrisy in not labeling the bombing of Hiroshima as terrorism. In November 2001, he maintained that revenge killing of Americans was justified because he claimed that Islamic law allows believers to attack invaders even when the enemy uses human shields. However, according to Rodenbeck, "this classical position was originally intended as a legal justification for the accidental killings of civilians under very limited circumstances — not as a basis for the intentional targeting of noncombatants."[82]A few months later in a 2002 letter, he made no mention of this justification but claimed "that since the United States is a democracy, all citizens bear responsibility for its government's actions, and civilians are therefore fair targets."[83][82]Bin Laden's overall strategy for achieving his goals against much larger enemies such as the Soviet Union and United States was to lure them into a long war of attrition in Muslim countries, attracting large numbers of jihadists who would never surrender. He believed this would lead to economic collapse of the enemy countries, by "bleeding" them dry.[84]Indeed, al-Qaeda manuals clearly express this strategy. In a 2004 tape broadcast by al-Jazeera, bin Laden spoke of "bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy".[85]A number of errors and inconsistencies in bin Laden's arguments have been alleged by authors such as Max Rodenbeck and Noah Feldman. He invoked democracy both as an example of the deceit and fraudulence of Western political system—American law being "the law of the rich and wealthy"[86]—and as the reason civilians are responsible for their government's actions and so can be lawfully punished by death.[87]He denounced democracy as a "religion of ignorance" that violates Islam by issuing man-made laws, but in a later statement compares the Western democracy of Spain favorably to the Muslim world—because "the ruler there is accountable." Rodenbeck states, "Evidently, [bin Laden] has never heard theological justifications for democracy, based on the notion that the will of the people must necessarily reflect the will of an all-knowing God."[citation needed]Bin Laden was heavily anti-Semitic, stating that most of the negative events that occurred in the world were the direct result of Jewish actions. In a December 1998 interview with Pakistani journalist Rahimullah Yusufzai, bin Laden stated that Operation Desert Fox was proof that Israeli Jews controlled the governments of the United States and United Kingdom, directing them to kill as many Muslims as they could.[88]In a letter released in late 2002, he stated that Jews controlled the civilian media outlets, politics, and economic institutions of the United States.[63]In a May 1998 interview with ABC's John Miller, bin Laden stated that the Israeli state's ultimate goal was to annex the Arabian Peninsula and the Middle East into its territory and enslave its peoples, as part of what he called a "Greater Israel".[89]He stated that Jews and Muslims could never get along and that war was "inevitable" between them, and further accused the U.S. of stirring up anti-Islamic sentiment.[89]He claimed that the U.S. State Department and U.S. Department of Defense were controlled by Jews, for the sole purpose of serving the Israeli state's goals.[89]He often delivered warnings against alleged Jewish conspiracies: "These Jews are masters of usury and leaders in treachery. They will leave you nothing, either in this world or the next."[90]Shia Muslims have been listed along with "heretics, ... America, and Israel" as the four principal "enemies of Islam" at ideology classes of bin Laden's al-Qaeda organization.[91]Bin Laden was opposed to music on religious grounds,[92]and his attitude towards technology was mixed. He was interested in "earth-moving machinery and genetic engineering of plants" on the one hand, but rejected "chilled water" on the other.[93]Mujahideen in AfghanistanAfter leaving college in 1979, bin Laden went to Pakistan, joined Abdullah Azzam and used money and machinery from his own construction company to help the Mujahideen resistance in the Soviet–Afghan War.[96]He later told a journalist: "I felt outraged that an injustice had been committed against the people of Afghanistan."[97]Under CIA's Operation Cyclone from 1979 to 1989, the United States and Saudi Arabia provided $40 billion worth of financial aid and weapons to almost 100,000 Mujahideen and "Afghan Arabs" from forty Muslim countries through Pakistan's ISI.[98]British journalist Jason Burke wrote that "bin Laden's Office of Services, set up to recruit overseas for the war, received some US cash."[99]Bin Laden met and built relations with Hamid Gul, who was a three-star general in the Pakistani army and head of the ISI agency. Although the United States provided the money and weapons, the training of militant groups was entirely done by the Pakistani Armed Forces and the ISI.[100]By 1984, bin Laden and Azzam established Maktab al-Khidamat, which funneled money, arms and fighters from around the Arab world into Afghanistan. Through al-Khadamat, bin Laden's inherited family fortune[101]paid for air tickets and accommodation, paid for paperwork with Pakistani authorities and provided other such services for the jihadi fighters. Bin Laden established camps inside Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in Pakistan and trained volunteers from across the Muslim world to fight against the Soviet-backed regime, the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan. Between 1986 and 1987, bin Laden set up a military base in eastern Afghanistan for several dozen of his own Arab soldiers.[102]From this base, bin Laden participated in some combat activity against the Soviets, such as the Battle of Jaji in 1987.[102]Despite its little strategic significance, the battle was lionized in the mainstream Arab press.[102]It was during this time that he became idolised by many Arabs.[12]1988 Gilgit massacreSee also: 1988 Gilgit massacreLarge numbers of Shias in the city and surrounding region of Gilgit were killed in a massacre that occurred in response to rumours of a massacre of Sunnis by Shias,[103]in May 1988. Shia civilians were also subjected to rape.[104]The massacre is alleged by B. Raman, a founder of India's Research and Analysis Wing,[105]to have been in response to a revolt by the Shias of Gilgit during the rule of military dictator Zia-ul Haq.[106]He alleged that the Pakistan Army induced Osama bin Laden to lead an armed group of Sunni tribals, from Afghanistan and the North-West Frontier Province, into Gilgit and its surrounding areas to suppress the revolt.[107]Formation and structuring of Al-QaedaMain article: Al-QaedaBy 1988, bin Laden had split from Maktab al-Khidamat. While Azzam acted as support for Afghan fighters, bin Laden wanted a more military role. One of the main points leading to the split and the creation of al-Qaeda was Azzam's insistence that Arab fighters be integrated among the Afghan fighting groups instead of forming a separate fighting force.[108]Notes of a meeting of bin Laden and others on August 20, 1988 indicate that al-Qaeda was a formal group by that time: "Basically an organized Islamic faction, its goal is to lift the word of God, to make his religion victorious." A list of requirements for membership itemized the following: listening ability, good manners, obedience, and making a pledge (bayat) to follow one's superiors.[109]According to Wright, the group's real name was not used in public pronouncements because "its existence was still a closely held secret".[110]His research suggests that al-Qaeda was formed at an August 11, 1988, meeting between "several senior leaders" of Egyptian Islamic Jihad, Abdullah Azzam, and bin Laden, where it was agreed to join bin Laden's money with the expertise of the Islamic Jihad organization and take up the jihadist cause elsewhere after the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan.[111]Following the Soviet Union's withdrawal from Afghanistan in February 1989, Osama bin Laden returned to Saudi Arabia as a hero of jihad.[112]Along with his Arab legion, he was thought to have "brought down the mighty superpower" of the Soviet Union.[113]After his return to Saudi Arabia, bin Laden engaged in opposition movements to the Saudi monarchy while working for his family business.[112]He was also angered by the internecine tribal fighting among the Afghans.[114]The Iraqi invasion of Kuwait under Saddam Hussein on August 2, 1990, put the Saudi kingdom and the royal family at risk. With Iraqi forces on the Saudi border, Saddam's appeal to pan-Arabism was potentially inciting internal dissent. Bin Laden met with King Fahd, and Saudi Defense Minister Sultan, telling them not to depend on non-Muslim assistance from the United States and others, and offering to help defend Saudi Arabia with his Arab legion. Bin Laden's offer was rebuffed, and the Saudi monarchy invited the deployment of U.S. forces in Saudi territory.[115]Bin Laden publicly denounced Saudi dependence on the U.S. military, arguing the two holiest shrines of Islam, Mecca and Medina, the cities in which the Prophet Mohamed received and recited Allah's message, should only be defended by Muslims. Bin Laden's criticism of the Saudi monarchy led them to try to silence him. The U.S. 82nd Airborne Division landed in the north-eastern Saudi city of Dhahran and was deployed in the desert barely 400 miles from Medina.[114]Meanwhile, on November 8, 1990, the FBI raided the New Jersey home of El Sayyid Nosair, an associate of al-Qaeda operative Ali Mohamed. They discovered copious evidence of terrorist plots, including plans to blow up New York City skyscrapers. This marked the earliest discovery of al-Qaeda terrorist plans outside of Muslim countries.[116]Nosair was eventually convicted in connection to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and later admitted guilt for the murder of Rabbi Meir Kahane in New York City on November 5, 1990.In 1991, bin Laden was expelled from Saudi Arabia by its regime after repeatedly criticizing the Saudi alliance with the United States.[112][117]He and his followers moved first to Afghanistan and then relocated to Sudan by 1992,[112][117]in a deal brokered by Ali Mohamed.[118]Bin Laden's personal security detail consisted of "bodyguards ... personally selected by him." Their "arsenal included SAM-7 and Stinger missiles, AK-47s, RPGs, and PK machine guns (similar to an M60)."[119]Meanwhile, in March–April 1992, bin Laden tried to play a pacifying role in the escalating civil war in Afghanistan, by urging warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar to join the other mujahideen leaders negotiating a coalition government instead of trying to conquer Kabul for himself.[120]Sudan and return to AfghanistanIn Sudan, bin Laden established a new base for Mujahideen operations in Khartoum. He bought a house on Al-Mashtal Street in the affluent Al-Riyadh quarter and a retreat at Soba on the Blue Nile.[121][122]During his time in Sudan, he heavily invested in the infrastructure, in agriculture and businesses. He was the Sudan agent for the British firm Hunting Surveys,[123]and built roads using the same bulldozers he had employed to construct mountain tracks in Afghanistan. Many of his labourers were the same fighters who had been his comrades in the war against the Soviet Union. He was generous to the poor and popular with the people.[124][125]He continued to criticize King Fahd of Saudi Arabia. In response, in 1994 Fahd stripped bin Laden of his Saudi citizenship and persuaded his family to cut off his $7 million a year stipend.[1][126]By that time, bin Laden was being linked with Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ), which made up the core of al-Qaeda. In 1995 the EIJ attempted to assassinate the Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. The attempt failed, and Sudan expelled the EIJ.The U.S. State Department accused Sudan of being a "sponsor of international terrorism" and bin Laden of operating "terrorist training camps in the Sudanese desert". According to Sudan officials, however, this stance became obsolete as the Islamist political leader Hassan al-Turabi lost influence in their country. The Sudanese wanted to engage with the U.S. but American officials refused to meet with them even after they had expelled bin Laden. It was not until 2000 that the State Department authorized U.S. intelligence officials to visit Sudan.[123]The 9/11 Commission Report states:In late 1995, when Bin Laden was still in Sudan, the State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) learned that Sudanese officials were discussing with the Saudi government the possibility of expelling Bin Laden. CIA paramilitary officer Billy Waugh tracked down Bin Ladin in Sudan and prepared an operation to apprehend him, but was denied authorization.[127]U.S. Ambassador Timothy Carney encouraged the Sudanese to pursue this course. The Saudis, however, did not want Bin Laden, giving as their reason their revocation of his citizenship. Sudan's minister of defense, Fatih Erwa, has claimed that Sudan offered to hand Bin Laden over to the United States. The Commission has found no credible evidence that this was so. Ambassador Carney had instructions only to push the Sudanese to expel Bin Laden. Ambassador Carney had no legal basis to ask for more from the Sudanese since, at the time, there was no indictment outstanding against bin Laden in any country.[128]The 9/11 Commission Report further states:In February 1996, Sudanese officials began approaching officials from the United States and other governments, asking what actions of theirs might ease foreign pressure. In secret meetings with Saudi officials, Sudan offered to expel Bin Laden to Saudi Arabia and asked the Saudis to pardon him. U.S. officials became aware of these secret discussions, certainly by March. Saudi officials apparently wanted Bin Laden expelled from Sudan. They had already revoked his citizenship, however, and would not tolerate his presence in their country. Also Bin Laden may have no longer felt safe in Sudan, where he had already escaped at least one assassination attempt that he believed to have been the work of the Egyptian or Saudi regimes, and paid for by the CIA.Due to the increasing pressure on Sudan from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United States, bin Laden was permitted to leave for a country of his choice. He chose to return to Jalalabad, Afghanistan aboard a chartered flight on May 18, 1996; there he forged a close relationship with Mullah Mohammed Omar.[129][130]According to the 9/11 Commission, the expulsion from Sudan significantly weakened bin Laden and his organization.[131]Some African intelligence sources have argued that the expulsion left bin Laden without an option other than becoming a full-time radical, and that most of the 300 Afghan Arabs who left with him subsequently became terrorists.[123]Various sources report that bin Laden lost between $20 million[132]and $300 million[133]in Sudan; the government seized his construction equipment, and bin Laden was forced to liquidate his businesses, land, and even his horses.In August 1996, bin Laden declared war against the United States.[134]Despite the assurance of President George H. W. Bush to King Fahd in 1990, that all U.S. forces based in Saudi Arabia would be withdrawn once the Iraqi threat had been dealt with, by 1996 the Americans were still there. Bush cited the necessity of dealing with the remnants of Saddam's regime (which Bush had chosen not to destroy). Bin Laden's view was that "the 'evils' of the Middle East arose from America's attempt to take over the region and from its support for Israel. Saudi Arabia had been turned into 'an American colony".[14]He issued a fatwā against the United States, which was first published in Al Quds Al Arabi, a London-based newspaper. It was entitled "Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places."[135]Saudi Arabia is sometimes called "The Land of the Two Holy Mosques" in reference to Mecca and Medina, the two holiest places in Islam. The reference to "occupation" in the fatwā referred to US forces based in Saudi Arabia for the purpose of controlling air space in Iraq, known as Operation Southern Watch.In Afghanistan, bin Laden and al-Qaeda raised money from "donors from the days of the Soviet jihad", and from the Pakistani ISI to establish more training camps for Mujahideen fighters.[136]Bin Laden effectively took over Ariana Afghan Airlines, which ferried Islamic militants, arms, cash and opium through the United Arab Emirates and Pakistan, as well as provided false identifications to members of bin Laden's terrorist network.[137]The arms smuggler Viktor Bout helped to run the airline, maintaining planes and loading cargo. Michael Scheuer, head of the CIA's bin Laden unit, concluded that Ariana was being used as a "terrorist taxi service".[138]Early attacks and aid for attacksIt is believed that the first bombing attack involving bin Laden was the December 29, 1992, bombing of the Gold Mihor Hotel in Aden in which two people were killed.[112]It was after this bombing that al-Qaeda was reported to have developed its justification for the killing of innocent people. According to a fatwa issued by Mamdouh Mahmud Salim, the killing of someone standing near the enemy is justified because any innocent bystander will find a proper reward in death, going to Jannah (Paradise) if they were good Muslims and to Jahannam (hell) if they were bad or non-believers.[139]The fatwa was issued to al-Qaeda members but not the general public.In the 1990s, bin Laden's al-Qaeda assisted jihadis financially and sometimes militarily in Algeria, Egypt and Afghanistan. In 1992 or 1993, bin Laden sent an emissary, Qari el-Said, with $40,000 to Algeria to aid the Islamists and urge war rather than negotiation with the government. Their advice was heeded. The war that followed caused the deaths of 150,000–200,000 Algerians and ended with the Islamist surrender to the government.It has been claimed that bin Laden funded the Luxor massacre of November 17, 1997,[140][141][142]which killed 62 civilians, and outraged the Egyptian public. In mid-1997, the Northern Alliance threatened to overrun Jalalabad, causing bin Laden to abandon his Najim Jihad compound and move his operations to Tarnak Farms in the south.[143]Another successful attack was carried out in the city of Mazar-e-Sharif in Afghanistan. Bin Laden helped cement his alliance with the Taliban by sending several hundred Afghan Arab fighters along to help the Taliban kill between five and six thousand Hazaras overrunning the city.[144]In February 1998, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri co-signed a fatwa in the name of the World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders, which declared the killing of North Americans and their allies an "individual duty for every Muslim" to "liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque (in Jerusalem) and the holy mosque (in Mecca) from their grip".[145][146]At the public announcement of the fatwa bin Laden announced that North Americans are "very easy targets". He told the attending journalists, "You will see the results of this in a very short time."[147]Bin Laden and Al-Zawahiri organized an al-Qaeda congress on June 24, 1998.[148]The 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings were a series of attacks that occurred on August 7, 1998, in which hundreds of people were killed in simultaneous truck bomb explosions at the United States embassies in the major East African cities of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya. The attacks were linked to local members of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, brought Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri to the attention of the United States public for the first time, and resulted in the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation placing bin Laden on its Ten Most Wanted list.In December 1998, the Director of Central Intelligence Counterterrorist Center reported to President Bill Clinton that al-Qaeda was preparing for attacks in the United States of America, including the training of personnel to hijack aircraft.[149]At the end of 2000, Richard Clarke revealed that Islamic militants headed by bin Laden had planned a triple attack on January 3, 2000, which would have included bombings in Jordan of the Radisson SAS Hotel in Amman and tourists at Mount Nebo and a site on the Jordan River, the sinking of the destroyer USS The Sullivans in Yemen, as well as an attack on a target within the United States. The plan was foiled by the arrest of the Jordanian terrorist cell, the sinking of the explosive-filled skiff intended to target the destroyer, and the arrest of Ahmed Ressam.[150]Yugoslav Wars(September 2016)See also: Bosnian MujahideenA former U.S. State Department official in October 2001 described Bosnia and Herzegovina as a safe haven for terrorists, and asserted that militant elements of the former Sarajevo government were protecting extremists, some with ties to Osama bin Laden.[151]In 1997, Rzeczpospolita, one of the largest Polish daily newspapers, had reported that intelligence services of the Nordic-Polish SFOR Brigade suspected that a center for training terrorists from Islamic countries was located in the Bocina Donja village near Maglaj in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In 1992, hundreds of volunteers joined an "all-mujahedeen unit" called El Moujahed in an abandoned hillside factory, a compound with a hospital and prayer hall.According to Middle East intelligence reports, bin Laden financed small convoys of recruits from the Arab world through his businesses in Sudan. Among them was Karim Said Atmani, who was identified by authorities as the document forger for a group of Algerians accused of plotting the bombings in the United States.[152]He is a former roommate of Ahmed Ressam, the man arrested at the Canadian-U.S. border in mid-December 1999 with a car full of nitroglycerin and bomb-making materials.[153][154]He was convicted of colluding with Osama bin Laden by a French court.[155]A Bosnian government search of passport and residency records, conducted at the urging of the United States, revealed other former Mujahideen who were linked to the same Algerian group or to other groups of suspected terrorists, and had lived in the area 100 km (60 mi) north of Sarajevo, the capital, in the past few years. Khalil al-Deek was arrested in Jordan in late December 1999 on suspicion of involvement in a plot to blow up tourist sites. A second man with Bosnian citizenship, Hamid Aich, lived in Canada at the same time as Atmani and worked for a charity associated with Osama bin Laden. In its June 26, 1997, report on the bombing of the Al Khobar building in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, The New York Times noted that those arrested confessed to serving with Bosnian Muslims forces. Further, the captured men also admitted to ties with Osama bin Laden.[156][157]In 1999, the press reported that bin Laden and his Tunisian assistant Mehrez Aodouni were granted citizenship and Bosnian passports in 1993 by the government in Sarajevo. This information was denied by the Bosnian government following the September 11 attacks, but it was later found that Aodouni was arrested in Turkey and that at that time he possessed the Bosnian passport. Following this revelation, a new explanation was given that bin Laden "did not personally collect his Bosnian passport" and that officials at the Bosnian embassy in Vienna, which issued the passport, could not have known who bin Laden was at the time.[156][157]The Bosnian daily Oslobođenje published in 2001 that three men, believed to be linked to bin Laden, were arrested in Sarajevo in July 2001. The three, one of whom was identified as Imad El Misri, were Egyptian nationals. The paper said that two of the suspects were holding Bosnian passports.SHISH's head Fatos Klosi said that Osama was running a terror network in Albania to take part in Kosovo War under the guise of a humanitarian organisation and it was reported to have been started in 1994. Claude Kader who was a member testified its existence during his trial.[158]By 1998, four members of Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) were arrested in Albania and extradited to Egypt.[159]The mujahideen fighters were organised by Islamic leaders in Western Europe allied to him and Zawihiri.[160]During his trial at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, former Serbian President Slobodan Milošević quoted from a purported FBI report that bin Laden's al-Qaeda had a presence in the Balkans and aided the Kosovo Liberation Army. He claimed bin Laden had used Albania as a "launchpad for violence" in the region and Europe. He claimed that they had informed Richard Holbrooke that KLA was being aided by Al-Qaeda but the US decided to cooperate with the KLA and thus indirectly with Osama despite the 1998 United States embassy bombings earlier. Milošević had argued that the United States aided the terrorists, which culminated in its backing of the 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia during the Kosovo War.[161][162][163][164]September 11 attacksSee also: September 11 attacks and Videos and audio recordings of Osama bin LadenGod knows it did not cross our minds to attack the Towers, but after the situation became unbearable—and we witnessed the injustice and tyranny of the American-Israeli alliance against our people in Palestine and Lebanon—I thought about it. And the events that affected me directly were that of 1982 and the events that followed—when America allowed the Israelis to invade Lebanon, helped by the U.S. Sixth Fleet. As I watched the destroyed towers in Lebanon, it occurred to me punish the unjust the same way: to destroy towers in America so it could taste some of what we are tasting and to stop killing our children and women.—Osama bin Laden, 2004[165]After his initial denial,[166][167][168]in the wake of the attacks, bin Laden announced, "what the United States is tasting today is nothing compared to what we have tasted for decades. Our umma has known this humiliation and contempt for over eighty years. Its sons are killed, its blood is spilled, its holy sites are attacked, and it is not governed according to Allah's command. Despite this, no one cares".[169]In response to the attacks, the United States launched the War on Terror to depose the Taliban regime in Afghanistan and capture al-Qaeda operatives, and several countries strengthened their anti-terrorism legislation to preclude future attacks. The CIA's Special Activities Division was given the lead in tracking down and killing or capturing bin Laden.[170]The Federal Bureau of Investigation has stated that classified[171]evidence linking al-Qaeda and bin Laden to the September 11 attacks is clear and irrefutable.[172]The UK Government reached a similar conclusion regarding al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden's culpability for the September 11 attacks, although the government report noted that the evidence presented is not necessarily sufficient to prosecute the case.[173]Bin Laden initially denied involvement in the attacks. On September 16, 2001, bin Laden read a statement later broadcast by Qatar's Al Jazeera satellite channel denying responsibility for the attack.[174]In a videotape recovered by U.S. forces in November 2001 in Jalalabad, bin Laden was seen discussing the attack with Khaled al-Harbi in a way that indicates foreknowledge.[175]The tape was broadcast on various news networks on December 13, 2001. The merits of this translation have been disputed. Arabist Dr. Abdel El M. Husseini stated: "This translation is very problematic. At the most important places where it is held to prove the guilt of bin Laden, it is not identical with the Arabic."[176]In the 2004 video, bin Laden abandoned his denials without retracting past statements. In it he said he had personally directed the nineteen hijackers.[177][178]In the 18-minute tape, played on Al-Jazeera, four days before the American presidential election, bin Laden accused U.S. President George W. Bush of negligence in the hijacking of the planes on September 11.[177]According to the tapes, bin Laden claimed he was inspired to destroy the World Trade Center after watching the destruction of towers in Lebanon by Israel during the 1982 Lebanon War.[179]Through two other tapes aired by Al Jazeera in 2006, Osama bin Laden announced, "I am the one in charge of the nineteen brothers. ... I was responsible for entrusting the nineteen brothers ... with the raids" (May 23, 2006).[180]In the tapes he was seen with Ramzi bin al-Shibh, as well as two of the 9/11 hijackers, Hamza al-Ghamdi and Wail al-Shehri, as they made preparations for the attacks (videotape broadcast September 7, 2006).[181]Identified motivations of the September 11 attacks include the support of Israel by the United States, presence of the U.S. military in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and the U.S. enforcement of sanctions against Iraq.Criminal chargesOn March 16, 1998, Libya issued the first official Interpol arrest warrant against bin Laden and three other people. They were charged for killing Silvan Becker, agent of Germany's domestic intelligence service, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, in the Terrorism Department, and his wife Vera in Libya on March 10, 1994.[81][182]Bin Laden was still wanted by the Libyan government at the time of his death.[183][184]Osama bin Laden was first indicted by a grand jury of the United States on June 8, 1998 on a charges of "conspiracy to attack defense utilities of the United States" and prosecutors further charged that bin Laden was the head of the terrorist organization called al-Qaeda, and that he was a major financial backer of Islamic fighters worldwide.[185]On November 4, 1998, Osama bin Laden was indicted by a Federal Grand Jury in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on charges of Murder of U.S. Nationals Outside the United States, Conspiracy to Murder U.S. Nationals Outside the United States, and Attacks on a Federal Facility Resulting in Death[186]for his alleged role in the 1998 United States embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. The evidence against bin Laden included courtroom testimony by former al-Qaeda members and satellite phone records, from a phone purchased for him by al-Qaeda procurement agent Ziyad Khaleel in the United States.[187][188]However the Taliban ruled not to extradite Bin Laden on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence published in the indictments and that non-Muslim courts lacked standing to try Muslims.[189]Bin Laden became the 456th person listed on the FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list, when he was added on June 7, 1999, following his indictment along with others for capital crimes in the 1998 embassy attacks. Attempts at assassination and requests for the extradition of bin Laden from the Taliban of Afghanistan were met with failure before the bombing of Afghanistan in October 2001.[190]In 1999, U.S. President Bill Clinton convinced the United Nations to impose sanctions against Afghanistan in an attempt to force the Taliban to extradite him.[191]Years later, on October 10, 2001, bin Laden appeared as well on the initial list of the top 22 FBI Most Wanted Terrorists, which was released to the public by the President of the United States George W. Bush, in direct response to the September 11 attacks, but which was again based on the indictment for the 1998 embassy attack. Bin Laden was among a group of thirteen fugitive terrorists wanted on that latter list for questioning about the 1998 embassy bombings. Bin Laden remains the only fugitive ever to be listed on both FBI fugitive lists.Despite the multiple indictments listed above and multiple requests, the Taliban refused to extradite Osama bin Laden. They did however offer to try him before an Islamic court if evidence of Osama bin Laden's involvement in the September 11 attacks was provided. It was not until eight days after the bombing of Afghanistan began in October 2001 that the Taliban finally did offer to turn over Osama bin Laden to a third-party country for trial in return for the United States ending the bombing. This offer was rejected by President Bush stating that this was no longer negotiable, with Bush responding "there's no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he's guilty."[192]On June 15, 2011, federal prosecutors of the United States of America officially dropped all criminal charges against Osama bin Laden following his death in May.[193]Bin Laden TLDR: He was a terrorist. He was perfectly OK with killing innocents unconnected to the politics he approached as a deliberate tactic to frighten and intimidate others into giving him what he wanted. He was a threat to the people and governments of multiple countries, and he practiced and preferred the use of violent conflict to pursue his goals.Thanks to Wikipedia.