Do We Need Al-Qaeda?

Gustavo de Las Casas argues that the world is better off with an Al-Qaeda organization that is not dead, but instead just constantly held on life support. He writes:

It is tempting to draw up an organizational chart of al Qaeda and think that if the important nodes can be identified and destroyed, the rest of the network will follow. But if al Qaeda is shut down and its middle management decimated, eager fanatics around the globe would no longer gravitate toward a centralized base. Their alternative? To form their own no-name networks and band up with any other al Qaeda survivors. Killing off al Qaeda would do little to reduce Islamist terrorism. It would only make the world of terrorism more chaotic....we should take full advantage of the simple fact that the net which unites the worst Islamist terrorists also snares them.

Hopefully, this debate is happening in the upper echelons of the White House, because if Las Casas's logic is correct, then it's time for the U.S. and NATO to leave Afghanistan. If the preference is for weak jihadi groups rather than dead ones, then Af-Pak may have now earned the stamp "Mission Accomplished," at least on the basis of defeating Al-Qaeda.

If the logic is incorrect, then a surge in troops in Af-Pak may be necessary as a means of procuring total elimination of Al-Qaeda.

But now for a second question -- is elimination of Al-Qaeda even possible?