The Shield metaphor limps a bit.
Certainly by providing them with a nearby and obvious target on traditionally muslim terrain, we have focused jihadi attention on that target and probably discouraged other avenues of attack by encouraging a commitment of personnel and resources more "locally."
It is important to evaluate whether or not we have enhanced jihadi recruiting and resource donation so much that they will be able to fight the "local" struggle AND resume long range attacks (results since 2004 indicate a provisional "no.") OR if we are winning the war of attrition and forcing them to expend resources and lives faster than they can be recouped.
I don't know that we have clear answers for that, at least not in the public sphere.
Bookmarks