Une très bonne analyse ici : AlQuaida clairement décrit comme une FRANCHISE à la MacDo !!!` et une très bonne vision des "Talibans, bannière sous laquelle on met tout et n’importe quoi en ce moment !!!

 Some predicted that al-Qaeda would even inspire copycat movements, much as McDonald’s inspired Burger King. Groups with no connection to Osama bin Laden — and no interest in being connected to him — might imitate some of his methods and tactics. By definition, the members of such groups would be civilians, sometimes living ordinary lives. They would not be combatants in the ordinary sense of the word. They would not wear uniforms, follow rules or organize themselves into anything resembling a traditional army. And they could not, therefore, be fought only with traditional military methods.`

Too often over the past seven years, it has been easy to forget this initial analysis. After all, most of our major military efforts since 2001 have, at least early on, involved rather more concrete enemies, whom we have fought in specific places, using traditional means. The initial assault on Afghanistan was, in fact, a proxy war, not a postmodern, post-globalization game of tricks and mirrors. The same was true in Iraq : We overthrew a dictator, toppled his statues and set up an occupation regime. 

Only now, for that matter, do we comprehend the degree to which the very word "Taliban" is misleading : Though the term implies a definite group with clear goals, American commanders in Afghanistan understand very well that what they call the "Taliban" is an amalgamation of insurgents, some of whom fight for tribal interests, others for money and only some for a clear-cut ideological cause.

Perhaps the Mumbai gunmen will, like some of those in the Afghan Taliban, also turn out to be members of a homegrown, locally based, ad hoc organization with its own eccentric goals and training methods. Or perhaps they will turn out to belong to a definite group with a clear ideology, which would, of course, be easier all around. Surely the point, though, is that we should be well-prepared to deal with either — and wary of mistaking one for the other.