Al Qaeda: Dead or Alive?
After reading the first article “Bin Laden’s dead. Al Qaeda’s not” from The New York Times, there are several very strong, very valid arguments, however, in my opinion the strongest of these arguments comes from the statement “Believing that their religion requires them to act violently against nonbelievers in the West and impure, apostate Muslim elites, the Islamist extremists will not be stopped by the elimination of Al Qaeda's leader or even by the eradication of Al Qaeda itself.” (Clark, 2011, p. 23) I believe this to be a deductive form of reasoning. I believe that the writer is stating that the ‘religion’ requires them to act with violence, not that Al Qaeda requires it, therefore, as a religion, the death of Bin Laden is really just the death of a religious leader; that Al Qaeda is only a name, not their true religious belief. This religious belief is a very radical form of Muslim, and in that region, 97 to 100% of the population are Muslim (Islamic Web, 2008), so it stands to reason that more acts of terrorism are to come. With the actions that have continued to occur since Bin Laden’s death, leads me to believe in the validity of this statement. In the second New York Times article “4 questions he leaves behind”, I believe this statement to be the strongest, valid argument; The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday that at the time of the 9/11 attacks, Al Qaeda had maybe 200 members; today, it is vaster and "more far-reaching than before the U.S. sought to take it down." I also believe this to be a deductive form of reasoning. The writer has taken a direct quote from a very valid and reliable source, and used it to make a counter-point to the statements made by others concerning this issue. The writer goes on to say