“When you remove a leader of a terrorist group, lower level members rise to the top.” No kidding, really? When a leader of a jihad group is killed, he is replaced? How many years of research and analysis did it take, and how many degrees did he have to attain, for this genius to arrive at this conclusion?
Max Abrahms, who describes himself as “#Terrorism Theorist / Northeastern Prof / Council on Foreign Relations / Center for Cyber & Homeland Security,” is the quintessential establishment foreign policy analyst, a hack fronting policies that have failed again and again and again, and that Abrahms, and the establishment in general, don’t even realize have failed. He epitomizes the muddled thinking that dominates establishment foreign policy analysis today, and that desperately needs to be swept out and replaced. This is the “terrorism theorist” who has said, “When a leader of a militant group has been taken out, the group tends to become even more extreme” — which he repeats here with a slight variation. The subtext is that jihad leaders should not be killed, as doing so only makes jihadis angry. And now we also learn from this great mind that when jihad leaders are killed, others are likely to replace them.
Why are we losing the war against the forces of the global jihad? Because politically correct mediocrities such as Max Abrahms are looked to for expert analysis that they are abjectly incapable of delivering, as their primary operative credential is their determination to ignore and deny the jihadis’ motivating ideology.
Meanwhile, the Newsweek article from which the Abrahms quote is taken is no less moronic. We learn that “Adnani’s replacement could be as radical.” You don’t say! Surely the caliph was going to choose someone as moderate as the day is long for the job — no doubt he is dialing Zuhdi Jasser’s number even now! And Abrahms tells us that “in the case of the Islamic State, it’s hard to believe that Adnani’s replacement will be more extreme than he is.” How could he be? If Abrahms and other establishment analysts were to study the Qur’an and Sunnah, they would see that Adnani was just as extreme as his guiding texts were, no more no less, and could deduce that his replacement was likely to be also no more or less “extreme” and “radical” than those texts dictated. But they refuse to look at that data, and instead content themselves with Deep Thoughts such as “When you remove a leader of a terrorist group, lower level members rise to the top.” No wonder we’re in the fix we’re in.
“Does the Death of Abu Mohammad al-Adnani Spell the End for ISIS?,” by Jack Moore, Newsweek, August 31, 2016:
The Islamic State militant group (ISIS) announced the death of Abu Mohammad al-Adnani—its most prominent schemer, both abroad and online—via its official Amaq news agency late Tuesday. It said he was killed while “surveying operations to repel the military campaigns against Aleppo” in northern Syria.
While it remains unclear who killed Adnani, with Washington and Moscow issuing opposed claims of responsibility Wednesday, one would assume that the revelation would be detrimental to ISIS’s aim of presenting itself as an entity of superior military might.
Adnani, whose real name was Taha Sobhi Falaha, served as the group’s most important figure behind self-proclaimed caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, acting as its chief propagandist and orchestrator of external operations—specifically, attack plans outside of ISIS territory in Iraq and Syria.
The operation that Adnani oversaw included different arms of foreign fighters who plotted atrocities in Europe, Asia and the Arab world. This internal secret service is now known as the Emni and may have had involvement in a series of attacks abroad, including the Paris attacks, the Brussels bombings and the Istanbul airport attack, which left hundreds dead.
As ISIS has continued to lose territory, Adnani had been at the forefront of ensuring that the group adapted to maintain its role as the flag-bearer of global jihad by remaining in news headlines around the world.
His death will deal a severe blow to the group’s operations and recruitment. But Adnani’s replacement could be as radical. Experts are clear that, while ISIS’s power is diminishing with the loss of key leaders, territory and revenue, it will continue unabated its violent campaign to hold onto its territory and to attack the West.
“When the leaders of terrorist groups are killed, the group tends to become more radical. A group in the immediate aftermath of leadership loss is more likely to direct its violence against civilian targets,” says Max Abrahms, professor of political science at Northeastern University and member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
“When you remove a leader of a terrorist group, lower level members rise to the top and suddenly they are in power and that’s why the target selection of the group tends to change,” he continues. “However, in the case of the Islamic State, it’s hard to believe that Adnani’s replacement will be more extreme than he is.”…

Aardvark says
Just keep bumping off the leaders, then, as fast as possible. Sooner or later there will be no lower-level members left…
Angemon says
Took the words right out of my mouth. Erm, fingertips and keyboard 🙂
Westman says
Let’s hope the constant leadership replacement includes increasing incompetence until they finally drown while looking up in the rain.
DP111 says
Start at both ends. Also hit the middle.
Hit the financiers, top and bottom.
Lioness says
Really? From 1.6 Billion muslims there will be no one left to replace the dead leaders? Even if one is killed every single day, that’s only 365 dead leaders a year. I have no energy to do the math on this one, but I have a feeling it will take a very long time to run out of leaders for ISIS.
June says
Scum always rises to the top.
Emilie Green says
Well, if nothing else, he does have an impressive muffin top.
Frank Scarn says
Actually Jack Handey’s Deep Thoughts are a lot, and I mean a lot, more insightful that our CFR hero analyst.
Praeceptor Maximus says
When will these morons learn that Islam cannot be divorced from terrorism, for terrorism is the beating heart of Islam. Islam has a mandate to kill. From killing the apostates to killing non-Muslims. It is a command from Allah. Every Muslim is obligated to kill for the cause of Allah; and those who do not are called hypocrites by Allah. They have to fight until the whole world fall under the rule of Islam. Islam itself is a doctrine of terrorism. Muhammad was a terrorist. Allah is the deity (or the demon) of terrorism and terrorists.
4:84. Then fight in Allah’s cause – Thou art held responsible only for thyself – and rouse the believers. It may be that Allah will restrain the fury of the Unbelievers; for Allah is the strongest in might and in punishment.
Can anyone truly read this verse and not think of the way the western world has rolled up the red carpet to welcome the Muslims. ALLAH WILL RESTRAIN THE FURY OF UNBELIEVERS.
2:216. Warfare is ordained for you, though it is hateful unto you; but it may happen that ye hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that ye love a thing which is bad for you. Allah knows, ye know not.
Allah has ordained warfare for Muslims. They have no choice but to fight. Allah insists upon it and treats it like medicine by saying that warfare is good for them even though they may not like it.
I suggest someone send these people a copy of the Quran along with the Hadith; perhaps then they understand what is really going on with Islam and terrorism.
abel & solomon says
The following is taken from The Undoing:Islam by its own words, the exceptional free e-book that’s turning heads in some very high places. Get your copy or read it online here;- http://abelandsolomon.simplesite.com/424568444 , for the bigger picture read our full length book Islamic Apocalypse;- https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01AS09LYW
666 – The Mark of the Beast
The Book of Revelation (13:15) says that the False Prophet causes those who will not worship the image of the Beast to be killed. Isn’t that what the Koran does; (9:5); “Kill the unbelievers…”? Are you aware of any other religion which orders its followers to kill everyone else? Revelation (20:4) even says the Christian martyrs will be “beheaded”, which is what the Koran commands in verse (8:12) “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads… ” Another clue to the identity of the Beast comes from Revelation verses (13:16-18); “Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the Beast, for it is the multitude of a man and its number is 666”. The Greek symbols for 666 were handwritten on St John’s original manuscript of the book as well as in early copies such as the Codex Vaticanus and they are uncannily similar to the Arabic word “Bismillah” meaning “in the name of Allah”. In fact, the handwritten Greek symbols are its mirror image accompanied by two crossed swords, a symbol for both Islam and jihad. Google “666 Allah” and see!
World War III and Satan’s Throne
It seems like the Apocalypse is very near, an end time prophecy that is materialising now talks about Iraq, Isaiah (13:16) says; “Their children will be smashed to death before their eyes; their houses will be looted, and their wives raped.” This is exactly what the Islamic State have been doing. We also now know from recently discovered documents that both Al Qaeda and the Islamic State have deliberately sought to provoke a worldwide military conflict between Islam and the rest of the world. There are a number of Islamic nations too which are being driven by Apocalyptic theology. These Muslims deeply believe that it is their duty to Allah to push the world towards a final great Armageddon; “Proclaim this among the nations: Prepare for holy war; rouse the warriors; let all the men of war advance and attack! …Let the nations be roused…. Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision! For the day of the LORD is near in the valley of decision.” (Joel 3:9,12,14)
Armageddon; the Valley of Decision
Indeed, we are already in that war, it is wrongly called the “war on terror” but it really is a sort of war between Islam and the “West”. As the true Islam of Mohammed and his Koran are the very root of this “terror”, (and don’t forget that over 95% of all terrorism in the world is Islamist), we are currently in a World War III of ideas and ideals under another name. A spiritual and intellectual war of ideas and ideals. But a physical one too.
citycat says
Death throes of the ISIS part of Islam? Eventually?
When and if ISIS is gone, it will simply have metamorphosed into peaceful immigrant jihadists taking over Europe et al.
Maybe
Berengaria says
A sort of Chain of Command in the Terrorist Organization! The BO Military has a similar program, only Dem,BO Generals select some Buck Sergeant, who is given Millions of Dollars to hand out to Muslim Favorites in ME! Sort of a BO Chain of Command!
Wellington says
Following this line of “logic,” then no attempt should have been made to kill Hitler—–or Osama bin Laden——or Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi——–or——or——or——.
A la Mark Twain, there are fools, damn fools and then there are academic fools.
mortimer says
Continuing the Nazi analogy…if Hitler had lost Goebbels, his bunkum would have been harder to sell.
With the loss of this key propagandist, ISIS troops will be less motivated.
They probably realize their leaders are embezzling ISIS money. More than likely, the troops are demoralized right now.
Red Bee says
A better option is to hold them as captives. As Machiavelli pointed out this will make it more difficult for a successor to establish his authority because the old leader is still around; he did not defeat the old alpha male.
Guy Macher says
Just keep killing the Islamic leaders. Do not worry if another joker named Mohamed takes his place.
Mirren10 says
Oh, God, my **eyes** !!!
Will you please stop using this photograph, Robert, every time I see that smug, smarmy, deeply stupid face my foot itches to kick it, and my stomach is not a happy bunny.
Guest says
Max if we wanted your opinion we will ask for it.
gravenimage says
CFR “expert” Max Abrahms: “When you remove a leader of a terrorist group, lower level members rise to the top”
……………………..
More of the idea that we should not defend against Jihad; that it will only lead to more Jihad.
Closely related to the idea that the cause of Jihad is defense against it…
Tim Zak says
A review of studies done by C. Kirchofer (link below) discusses targeting of ideological and institutional leadership
“1997, when Israel attempted to poison Hamas political leader Khaled Meshal in Jordan. That effort backfired miserably. …Nevertheless, Israel’s leadership decided it was time to try this particular tactic again in 2003 by targeting Hamas leader Abdel Aziz Rantissi. ”
Evidently credible threats directly affect key interests and leaders on all sides, but increasing attention is being put on ancillary actors.? Are we willing to kill the indispensable enablers? Can we credibly keep killing people in sufficient need of killing. Messages redundantly honed in their scripture and teaching traditions permit degenerative forms to re-emerge in puritanical cruelty. There is some evidence of useful results of certain killings of select polemicists and networked ideologues among the grievance mongers Hamas.
The complexity of the systems are huge, so you’re wrong if you have easy answers.. Disruption operations, deterrence policies or the blatant depopulation of pools of potential hostilities. For all this casual talk about categorical slaughter, or the illusion that we’re a few politicians away from sending the religious impulse into dormancy. The truth is that warfare is evolving more in the direction of specific targeting on both a large and small scale, There is the question of when to begin with, when and why? Are you serious in proposing systematically depleting populations of candidate hostile actors. If you can disrupt their operations, what level of disruption do you aim to achieve?
What responses to evoke in whom for whom you chose their timing? Targeted killings are useful asymmetrically as well as for many purposes to the interests of neither state, man or religion.
http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/510/html
gravenimage says
For all this casual talk about categorical slaughter, or the illusion that we’re a few politicians away from sending the religious impulse into dormancy.
………………………..
Good grief. This isn’t about some generic “religious impulse”, this is about the savagery of Islam.
Mazo says
Max Abrahms spends most of his time attacking Clinton, and bashing the Obama administration and saying Assad needs to win. And he gets called establishment.
LOL
Last time, center right Mike Weiss was called “hard left”for absolutely no reason
The far leftists like Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka support Assad and they hate Clinton and Obama.
Islofob IS-1 says
CFR is the “Think Tank ” of the progressive globalists , and they hold the ears of the “leaders” in Washington.
They are NOT stupid, they have a agenda, that you can bet on.
These groups want to fight wars without killing.
Related viewing, watch the film ” Eye in the Sky” , then remember the Second World War.
It maps the current leaderships position on conflicts around the world.
And the Globalists @ the UN seeks to control the Internet, and is set to take it over at the end of this month.
Control the pipeline, you control the message, and the people.