Err... no. After all, in war gaming, US military personnel routinely play they other side. In a very famous one for example, the Millennium War Games, Paul Van Riper, a marine Lt. Col., played commander of the Red Team in a simulated Middle Eastern scenario. Among the things he did was using mosques and motorcycle couriers to communicate, and an attack strategy based on the Al Qaeda attack on the USS Cole. He won, incidentally.

I'd in fact argue that there is a LOT of ethical value in role-playing from your enemy's point of view. Besides the obvious military value of learning how your enemy thinks, it actually helps you humanize them, which makes the nasty business of war a little more human. If you only see conflict from your side's point of view, you are far more likely to demonize the enemy and frame things in terms of abstractions like "good vs. evil."

Whether you treat it as "just a game" or training to enter the military (gaming has become huge in military recruitment) or a way to understand geopolitics, playing Al Qaeda will probably help.