NationStates Jolt Archive

Tell me... what percentage of the insurgency in Iraq do you think Musab was in control of?

I'm glad they got the guy, but I am not going to pretend that his death is some sort sign that we are winning this "War on Terror" or that his death will even hinder AQ in the slightest.

What would be funny is if they give the bounty to the Iraqi informants who pointed out where Zarqawi was and that money is used to fund the war effort.

I'd laugh.

Some people think it's a good thing.
Some people don't care.
Some people think it's a bad thing.
I bet it doesn't make a difference in the history of the world.

It's not like they killed Einstein before he invented his theories or something.
Huh? :confused:

What would be funny is if they give the bounty to the Iraqi informants who pointed out where Zarqawi was and that money is used to fund the war effort.

I'd laugh.

given that the psyop was intended to drive a wedge in the insurgency (and make for a good single person symbolic enemy for the viewers at home), i would not be surprised in the slightest if some faction of the resistance forwarded the info. i hope they do get some cash out of it.

that merge just confused the hell out of me

Tell me... what percentage of the insurgency in Iraq do you think Musab was in control of?

I'm glad they got the guy, but I am not going to pretend that his death is some sort sign that we are winning this "War on Terror" or that his death will even hinder AQ in the slightest.


Tell me-can you put a name to any other individual terrorist in the area ?

Is there anyone else you could name, a figurehead or otherwise? They kill nameless insurgents everyday.

So- maybe he contolled 5%....maybe 50 %.

He was bin laden's man there and now he's a corpse.

Next

Tell me-can you put a name to any other individual terrorist in the area ?

Is there anyone else you could name, a figurehead or otherwise? They kill nameless insurgents everyday.

So- maybe he contolled 5%....maybe 50 %.

He was bin laden's man there and now he's a corpse.

Next

nex? - not just a person - iran more likely.

yeah they've got capitalism right, money money money - don't look back, don't care, walk all over whoever's left behind, money money money more money. oops,.... getting drowned, ... damn it! no more time left to make more money!

i guess depends on how you define 'winner' ...
Capitalism drives progress. What kind of nations invent the most new technology? Communists like the USSR and China certainly didn't. Look at standard of living and life expectancy. Both are higher in capitalist, western style nations.

that merge just confused the hell out of me

Yeah, they got me too. Shame, as the other thread had my blood boiling.

that merge just confused the hell out of me
Me too. I was in the middle of a post. Where are all my DK smack-downs? Dammit. I was on a roll. Who gives a crap about some dead terrorist? :(

Feh. I'm going to get some coffee.

odd how there can be three or four different threads at any given time mocking President Bush, Christianity or the United States, but these threads are all wrapped up in one now.

odd how there can be three or four different threads at any given time mocking President Bush, Christianity or the United States, but these threads are all wrapped up in one now.

Those threads are usually diverse enough to be left alone I would presume - and if not, they are merged. I've seen enough of them merged to be sure of that.

Or shall we wheel out that old chestnut, 'Mod Bias'?

yeah live longer work longer - the uk is slowly increasing the retirement age ... lovely!

who said there's just two models out there,... the problem is that capitalism which is meant to fight monopolies, has become one; it's going against its own rules. no competition, no progress. what competition has capitalism got... none, it's the only thing surviving; we simply don't know what else is available. the money making money monster has gone too far.

Capitalism drives progress. What kind of nations invent the most new technology? Communists like the USSR and China certainly didn't. Look at standard of living and life expectancy. Both are higher in capitalist, western style nations.

The USSR and China put more effort into stealing technology than developing it.

But now we'll hear how wonderful their nations were and how the US is an evil fake democracy.

But not from anyone that matters.

Tell me-can you put a name to any other individual terrorist in the area ?

Is there anyone else you could name, a figurehead or otherwise? They kill nameless insurgents everyday.

jeebus w. kristoph! that's cause he's essentially a myth, a spook, an invention of a u.s. military psyops program. you know his name (and not the names of the various actual leaders of the homegrown iraqi resistance, who are behind for the overwhelming majority of all attacks over there) because the u.s. military decided to make his name known in iraq and internationally.

Tell me-can you put a name to any other individual terrorist in the area ?

Is there anyone else you could name, a figurehead or otherwise? They kill nameless insurgents everyday.

So- maybe he contolled 5%....maybe 50 %.

He was bin laden's man there and now he's a corpse.

Next

No because the military hasnt boosted anyone elses reputation yet. Give them time and we'll have a new figurehead to give a face to the insurgency.

Did you know who Musab was before Iraq? I'm betting no. And he had a lot of blood on his hands before Iraq. The US made Musab plain and simple... without the Iraq war and the US giving him a name by announcing it, we still wouldn't know who he was.

You gotta name one person as the head evil guy so that when you get him you can claim victory even though his death changes nothing really.

Do you think AQ will fall apart or that there will be less bombings now?

From what I have heard Musab was in control of about 12% of the insurgency when he died BECAUSE he was thrust into the role as the main AQ in Iraq leader by the US military - This I heard from a guy on the radio who has studied his life and wrote a book about him. I am trying to find that information now but I seem to be having trouble locating it at the moment.


Also he may have been with AQ BUT he was possibly a rival of OBL
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5460474

Those threads are usually diverse enough to be left alone I would presume - and if not, they are merged. I've seen enough of them merged to be sure of that.

Or shall we wheel out that old chestnut, 'Mod Bias'?


Nope-just an observation from my point of view.

of course, unless you come from a powerful nation with nuclear capabilities you don't matter

however; the ussr is not the alternative, was just as bad... gotta move on and develope new systems that doesn't use people for cheap labour, doesn't destroy environment justto lower costs etc etc... you know the drill.

The USSR and China put more effort into stealing technology than developing it.

But now we'll hear how wonderful their nations were and how the US is an evil fake democracy.

But not from anyone that matters.

I am confused I thought this thread was about a terrorist that died to DK promoting Genocide... to a dead terrorist again... when did capitolism enter the thread. I am confused

Nope-just an observation from my point of view.

Quite...

I am confused I thought this thread was about a terrorist that died to DK promoting Genocide... to a dead terrorist again... when did capitolism enter the thread. I am confused

Welcome to the bizarre world of NS General.

The USSR and China put more effort into stealing technology than developing it.

But now we'll hear how wonderful their nations were and how the US is an evil fake democracy.

But not from anyone that matters.


of course, unless you come from a powerful nation with nuclear capabilities you don't matter

however; the ussr is not the alternative, was just as bad... gotta move on and develope new systems that doesn't use people for cheap labour, doesn't destroy environment justto lower costs etc etc... you know the drill.

jeebus w. kristoph! that's cause he's essentially a myth, a spook, an invention of a u.s. military psyops program. you know his name (and not the names of the various actual leaders of the homegrown iraqi resistance, who are behind for the overwhelming majority of all attacks over there) because the u.s. military decided to make his name known in iraq and internationally.


Right! Which makes me wonder why (well make it seem like) they are less concerned about the majority of insurgent fighters who are targetting US forces, or at least less concerned about having a boogey man attributed to them to go after to claim more victories.

No because the military hasnt boosted anyone elses reputation yet. Give them time and we'll have a new figurehead to give a face to the insurgency.

Did you know who Musab was before Iraq? I'm betting no. And he had a lot of blood on his hands before Iraq. The US made Musab plain and simple... without the Iraq war and the US giving him a name by announcing it, we still wouldn't know who he was.

You gotta name one person as the head evil guy so that when you get him you can claim victory even though his death changes nothing really.

Do you think AQ will fall apart or that there will be less bombings now?

From what I have heard Musab was in control of about 12% of the insurgency when he died BECAUSE he was thrust into the role as the main AQ in Iraq leader by the US military - This I heard from a guy on the radio who has studied his life and wrote a book about him. I am trying to find that information now but I seem to be having trouble locating it at the moment.


Also he may have been with AQ BUT he was possibly a rival of OBL
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5460474

See-I read that bin laden appointed him.

I had heard of zaqawi before Iraq when he was wanted for a plot to kill a US diplomat in Amman and kill some Jordanian leader.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe we're both right.

You and I are better off now though.

Actually, there is a vast, right wing conspiracy behind everything. Nothing is as it seems. It is up to pot-smoking, long haired protesters to save us all by exposing the right wing agenda through poorly constructed arguments utilizing all-caps as valid method for making a point.

Quite...


there's no need to be condescending with me.

I'm arguing that people don't always recognize others as fellow human beings and that it's easy to get people to see those outside their cultural group as an enemy who can and should be killed. I'm arguing that this is a mental artifact from our early evolution and that in some situations we revert to that type of thinking and put people outside our group into the enemy category. If the US is hit hard enough, and smallpox would easily hit us hard enough, we would instinctively put everyone who we percieve to be related to the terrorists into the enemy category and seek to eliminate them.

That might be what you wish you'd set, but it's pretty far from what you did say.

"Your" girl?

Oh the joys of casual chauvinism!

She's not your girl.

Don't be jealous yootopia boy.


[QUOTE=Yootopia]Calling Arabs "goat humping towel heads" isn't racist nowadays?

I wasn't aware that all Arabs stood before TV cameras preaching hatred towards "The great satan" and shooting their AKs in the air like monkeys. M'bad.

Wow... the standards on racism must have dropped.

Oh the joys of sweeping generalisations.

Fine - all of the US troops are slack-jawed idiots who shoot civilians down when they get pissed off, and vandalise mosques.

You'd have a tough time proving that all US troops shoot civilians who aren't really hadjis in disguise, or bomb Mosques that Insurgents HAVEN'T been using to mortar local bases.
There. That's equally as valid as your statement.

I do. What they do is kill invaders. Every day.

They're doing a better number on Iraqi civilians. Much better. Only a few US troops a day die in Iraq, compared to 400 a day in France during WW2. Never even mentioned Re-enlistment is popular.

As in Haliburton, whose other job is to work as "private contractors" i.e. murderors for hire who can act without fear of war crimes tribunals?

They maintain water and electrical lines, deliver stuff to US bases (gourmet foods really do keep morale up), and protect some US officials. No, Halliburton doesn't offer war-fighting capabilites. They WILL fight if you corner them or if they are attacked, but they don't go out and look for it.

Most of the people fighting back don't actually want an elected government. Most of them want to get Saddam out of that sham trial and back as the leader...

Good, baathists. Also known as scum. More to kill.

Yes, so that they can kill more of them...

Yep, they were "free" to pick whoever the Coalition wanted in power.

I guess you never heard that almost every political, religious, and secular party fielded a candidate huh? The coalition has NO say in Iraqi political matters.

You'd best be paying reparations when you leave.
Hayul no, I've spent money fixing your own oil lines, keeping you safe, killing your thugs, and running things. If anything, give me free oil for a few years to be fair. But in truth, we will ask nothing. Only thing we left in France (Other than freedom) was the bodies of our fallen servicemen.

New for 2009! The Syrians!

Israel gets first dibs

America....America....

A famous song begins with those 2 words...I'll let you fill in the rest.

See-I read that bin laden appointed him.

I had heard of zaqawi before Iraq when he was wanted for a plot to kill a US diplomat in Amman and kill some Jordanian leader.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe we're both right.

You and I are better off now though.


I dont know about who appointed who to do what, but the story claims:

Bruce Hoffman, a terorrism expert at the Rand Corporation, says Abu Musab al-Zarqawi moved into Iraq from Jordan because of a desire to follow in the footsteps of Osama bin Laden as an Islamist rebel. But Hoffman says admiration of bin Laden may have turned to rivalry.


anyway I do agree that it's good he is gone although I don't think it will change my life one bit. Unless his death makes a butterfly flap it's wings in Los Angeles Causing a Tsnami in Japan.

[QUOTE=DesignatedMarksman]She's not your girl.

Don't be jealous yootopia boy.


don't know why but thought yootopia was a girl... could be wrong and of course it doesn't matter ... i guess you missed her/his point there DM.

anyway,... good on you being such a patriotic person; i will take this opportunity to thank america, this new baby country for showing us all in europe and beyond how it's done!

And another thing, it really annoys me when the news goes on about Taliban fighters. The taliban is to islam what catholicism is to christianity. It's just a religious group. It just so happens that AQ members seem to like saying their part of this religious group to give them another reason to fight.


THe Taliban is the largest and most powerful from of Islam? I fail to see the comparrision between the Catholic CHurch and the Taiban.

yeah they've got capitalism right, money money money - don't look back, don't care, walk all over whoever's left behind, money money money more money. oops,.... getting drowned, ... damn it! no more time left to make more money!

i guess depends on how you define 'winner' ...
Capitalism is the driving force behind technological development. Westernized capitalist countries have the highest standards of living, life expectancies, and the most civil liberties on average.

[QUOTE=DesignatedMarksman]She's not your girl.

Don't be jealous yootopia boy.


don't know why but thought yootopia was a girl... could be wrong and of course it doesn't matter ... i guess you missed her/his point there DM.

anyway,... good on you being such a patriotic person; i will take this opportunity to thank america, this new baby country for showing us all in europe and beyond how it's done!

I think what probably hacked utopia off is the fact I used "my girl" When referring to me she uses the phrase "My man". I'm pretty sure mantopia is up in arms!

You're welcome. What country, might I ask? We do a lot of good around the globe noone seems to notice anymore, save those who are doing it themselves.

Here is zarqawis letter, in English for us Infidels.

English Translation of Ayman al-Zawahiri's letter to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
10/12/2005 12:00:00 AM


In the name of God, praise be to God, and praise and blessings be upon the Messenger of God, his family, his Companions, and all those who follow him.


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


The gracious brother/Abu Musab, God protect him and watch over him, may His religion, and His Book and the Sunna of His Prophet @ aid him, I ask the Almighty that he bless him, us, and all Muslims, with His divine aid, His clear victory, and His release from suffering be close at hand. Likewise, I ask the Almighty to gather us as He sees fit from the glory of this world and the prize of the hereafter.

1-Dear brother, God Almighty knows how much I miss meeting with you, how much I long to join you in your historic battle against the greatest of criminals and apostates in the heart of the Islamic world, the field where epic and major battles in the history of Islam were fought. I think that if I could find a way to you, I would not delay a day, God willing.

2-My dear brother, we are following your news, despite the difficulty and hardship. We received your last published message sent to Sheikh Usama Bin Ladin, God save him. Likewise, I made sure in my last speech-that Aljazeera
broadcast Saturday, 11 Jumadi I, 1426h, 18 June 2005-to mention you, send you greetings, and show support and thanks for the heroic acts you are performing in defense of Islam and the Muslims, but I do not know what Aljazeera broadcast. Did this part appear or not? I will try to attach the full speech with this message, conditions permitting.

Likewise, I showed my support for your noble initiative to join with your brothers, during a prior speech I sent to the brothers a number of months ago, but the brothers' circumstances prevented its publication.

3-I want to reassure you about our situation. The summer started hot with operations escalating in Afghanistan. The enemy struck a blow against us with the arrest of Abu al-Faraj, may God break his bonds. However, no Arab brother was arrested because of him. The brothers tried-and were successful to a great degree-to contain the fall of Abu al-Faraj as much as they could.

However, the real danger comes from the agent Pakistani army that is carrying out operations in the tribal areas looking for mujahedeen.

4-I want to keep corresponding with you about the details of what is going on in dear Iraq, especially since we do not know the full truth as you know it. Therefore, I want you to explain to me your situation in a little detail, especially in regards to the political angle. I want you to express to me what is on your mind in regards to what is on my mind in the way of questions and inquiries.




A-I want to be the first to congratulate you for what God has blessed you with in terms of fighting battle in the heart of the Islamic world, which was formerly the field for major battles in Islam's history, and what is now the place for the greatest battle of Islam in this era, and what will happen, according to what appeared in the Hadiths of the Messenger of God @ about the epic battles between Islam and atheism. It has always been my belief that the victory of Islam will never take place until a Muslim state is established in the manner of the Prophet in the heart of the Islamic world, specifically in the Levant, Egypt, and the neighboring states of the Peninsula and Iraq; however, the center would be in the Levant and Egypt. This is my opinion, which I do not preach as infallibile, but I have reviewed historical events and the behavior of the enemies of Islam themselves, and they did not establish Israel in this triangle surrounded by Egypt and Syria and overlooking the Hijaz except for their own interests.

As for the battles that are going on in the far-flung regions of the Islamic world, such as Chechnya, Afghanistan, Kashmir, and Bosnia, they are just the groundwork and the vanguard for the major battles which have begun in the heart of the Islamic world. We ask God that He send down his victory upon us that he promised to his faithful worshipers.

It is strange that the
Arab nationalists also have, despite their avoidance of Islamic practice, come to comprehend the great importance of this province. It is like a bird whose wings are Egypt and Syria, and whose heart is Palestine. They have come to comprehend the goal of planting Israel in this region, and they are not misled in this, rather they have admitted their ignorance of the religious nature of this conflict.

What I mean is that God has blessed you and your brothers while many of the Muslim mujahedeen have longed for that blessing, and that is Jihad in the heart of the Islamic world. He has, in addition to that, granted you superiority over the idolatrous infidels, traitorous apostates, and those turncoat deviants.

This is what God Almighty has distinguished you and your brothers with over the mujahedeen before you who fought in the heart of the Islamic world, and in Egypt and Syria to be precise, but this splendor and superiority against the enemies of Islam was not ordained for them.

God also blessed you not only with the splendor of the spearhead of Jihad, but with the splendor as well of the doctrines of monotheism, the rejection of polytheism, and avoidance of the tenets of the secularists and detractors and inferiors, the call to the pure way of the Prophet, and the sublime goal that the Prophet @ left to his companions {. This is a blessing on top of blessing on top of blessing which obliges you and your noble brothers to be constantly thankful and full of praise. The Almighty said: (If ye are grateful, He is pleased with you) and the Almighty says: (If ye are grateful, I will add more unto you.)

B-Because of this, we are extremely concerned, as are the mujahedeen and all sincere Muslims, about your Jihad and your heroic acts until you reach its intended goal.

You know well that purity of faith and the correct way of living are not connected necessarily to success in the field unless you take into consideration the reasons and practices which events are guided by. For the grandson of the Prophet Imam al Hussein Bin Ali }, the Leader of the Faithful Abdallah Bin al-Zubair }, Abdul Rahman Bin al-Ashath , and other great people, did not achieve their sought-after goal.

C-If our intended goal in this age is the establishment of a caliphate in the manner of the Prophet and if we expect to establish its state predominantly-according to how it appears to us-in the heart of the Islamic world, then your efforts and sacrifices-God permitting-are a large step directly towards that goal.

So we must think for a long time about our next steps and how we want to attain it, and it is my humble opinion that the Jihad in Iraq requires several incremental goals:

The first stage: Expel the Americans from Iraq.

The second stage: Establish an Islamic authority or amirate, then develop it and support it until it achieves the level of a caliphate- over as much territory as you can to spread its power in Iraq, i.e., in Sunni areas, is in order to fill the void stemming from the departure of the Americans, immediately upon their exit and before unIslamic forces attempt to fill this void, whether those whom the Americans will leave behind them, or those among the un-Islamic forces who will try to jump at taking power.

There is no doubt that this amirate will enter into a fierce struggle with the foreign infidel forces, and those supporting them among the local forces, to put it in a state of constant preoccupation with defending itself, to make it impossible for it to establish a stable state which could proclaim a caliphate, and to keep the Jihadist groups in a constant state of war, until these forces find a chance to annihilate them.

The third stage: Extend the jihad wave to the secular countries neighboring Iraq.

The fourth stage: It may coincide with what came before: the clash with Israel, because Israel was established only to challenge any new Islamic entity.

My raising this idea-I don't claim that it's infallible-is only to stress something extremely important. And it is that the mujahedeen must not have their mission end with the expulsion of the Americans from Iraq, and then lay down their weapons, and silence the fighting zeal. We will return to having the secularists and traitors holding sway over us. Instead, their ongoing mission is to establish an Islamic state, and defend it, and for every generation to hand over the banner to the one after it until the Hour of Resurrection.

(3) The Muslim masses-for many reasons, and this is not the place to discuss it-do not rally except against an outside occupying enemy, especially if the enemy is firstly Jewish, and secondly American. 4

If the matter is thus, we must contemplate our affairs carefully, so that we are not robbed of the spoils, and our brothers did not die, so that others can reap the fruits of their labor.

D-If we look at the two short-term goals, which are removing the Americans and establishing an Islamic amirate in Iraq, or a caliphate if possible, then, we will see that the strongest weapon which the mujahedeen enjoy - after the help and granting of success by God - is popular support from the Muslim masses in Iraq, and the surrounding Muslim countries.

So, we must maintain this support as best we can, and we should strive to increase it, on the condition that striving for that support does not lead to any concession in the laws of the Sharia.


And it's very important that you allow me to elaborate a little here on this issue of popular support. Let's say:

(1) If we are in agreement that the victory of Islam and the establishment of a caliphate in the manner of the Prophet will not be achieved except through jihad against the apostate rulers and their removal, then this goal will not be accomplished by the mujahed movement while it is cut off from public support, even if the Jihadist movement pursues the method of sudden overthrow. This is because such an overthrow would not take place without some minimum of popular support and some condition of public discontent which offers the mujahed movement what it needs in terms of capabilities in the quickest fashion. Additionally, if the Jihadist movement were obliged to pursue other methods, such as a popular war of jihad or a popular intifadah, then popular support would be a decisive factor between victory and defeat.

(2) In the absence of this popular support, the Islamic mujahed movement would be crushed in the shadows, far from the masses who are distracted or fearful, and the struggle between the Jihadist elite and the arrogant authorities would be confined to prison dungeons far from the public and the light of day. This is precisely what the secular, apostate forces that are controlling our countries are striving for. These forces don't desire to wipe out the mujahed Islamic movement, rather they are stealthily striving to separate it from the misguided or frightened Muslim masses. Therefore, our planning must strive to involve the Muslim masses in the battle, and to bring the mujahed movement to the masses and not conduct the struggle far from them.

This, in my limited opinion, is the reason for the popular support that the mujahedeen enjoy in Iraq, by the grace of God.

As for the sectarian and chauvinistic factor, it is secondary in importance to outside aggression, and is much weaker than it. In my opinion-which is limited and which is what I see far from the scene-the awakening of the Sunni people in Iraq against the Shia would not have had such strength and toughness were it not for the treason of the Shia and their collusion with the Americans, and their agreement with them to permit the Americans to occupy Iraq in exchange for the Shia assuming power.

(4) Therefore, the mujahed movement must avoid any action that the masses do not understand or approve, if there is no contravention of Sharia in such avoidance, and as long as there are other options to resort to, meaning we must not throw the masses-scant in knowledge-into the sea before we teach them to swim, relying for guidance in that on the saying of the Prophet @ to Umar bin al-Khattab<: lest the people should say that Muhammad used to kill his Companions.

Among the practical applications of this viewpoint in your blessed arena:

(A) The matter of preparing for the aftermath of the exit of the Americans: The Americans will exit soon, God willing, and the establishment of a governing authorityas soon as the country is freed from the Americans-does not depend on force alone. Indeed, it's imperative that, in addition to force, there be an appeasement of Muslims and a sharing with them in governance and in the Shura council and in promulgating what is allowed and what is not allowed. In my view-which I continue to reiterate is limited and has a distant perspective upon the events-this must be achieved through the people of the Shura and who possess authority to determine issues and make them binding, and who are endowed with the qualifications for working in Sharia law. They would be

elected by the people of the country to represent them and overlook the work of the

authorities in accordance with the rules of the glorious Sharia.

And it doesn't appear that the Mujahedeen, much less the al-Qaida in the Land of Two Rivers, will lay claim to governance without the Iraqi people. Not to mention that that would be in contravention of the Shura methodology. That is not practical in my opinion.

You might ask an important question: What drives me to broach these matters while we are in the din of war and the challenges of killing and combat?

My answer is, firstly: Things may develop faster than we imagine. The aftermath of the

collapse of American power in Vietnam-and how they ran and left their agents-is noteworthy. Because of that, we must be ready starting now, before events overtake us, and before we are surprised by the conspiracies of the Americans and the United Nations and their plans to fill the void behind them. We must take the initiative and impose a fait accompli upon our enemies, instead of the enemy imposing one on us, wherein our lot would be to merely resist their schemes.

Second: This is the most vital part. This authority, or the Sharia amirate that is necessary, requires fieldwork starting now, alongside the combat and war. It would be a political endeavor in which the mujahedeen would be a nucleus around which would gather the tribes and their elders, and the people in positions, and scientists, and merchants, and people of opinion, and all the distinguished ones who were not sullied by appeasing the occupation and those who defended Islam.

We don't want to repeat the mistake of the Taliban, who restricted participation in governance to the students and the people of Qandahar alone. They did not have any representation for the Afghan people in their ruling regime, so the result was that the Afghan people disengaged themselves from them. Even devout ones took the stance of the spectator and, when the invasion came, the amirate collapsed in days, because the people were either passive or hostile. Even the students themselves had a stronger affiliation to their tribes and their villages than their affiliation to the Islamic amirate or the Taliban movement or the responsible party in charge of each one of them in his place. Each of them retreated to his village and his tribe, where his affiliation was stronger!!

The comparison between the fall of Kabul and the resistance of Fallujah, Ramadi, and Al Qaim and their fearless sisters shows a clear distinction, by God's grace and His kindness. It is the matter towards which we must strive, that we must support and strengthen.

Therefore, I stress again to you and to all your brothers the need to direct the political action equally with the military action, by the alliance, cooperation and gathering of all leaders of opinion and influence in the Iraqi arena. I can't define for you a specific means of action. You are more knowledgeable about the field conditions. But you and your brothers must strive to have around you circles of support, assistance, and cooperation, and through them, to advance until you become a consensus, entity, organization, or association that represents all the honorable people and the loyal folks in Iraq. I repeat the warning against separating from the masses, whatever the danger.

(2) Striving for the unity of the mujahedeen: This is something I entrust to you. It is between you and God. If the mujahedeen are scattered, this leads to the scattering of the people around them. I don't have detailed information about the situation of the mujahedeen, so I ask that you help us with some beneficial details in this, and the extent of the different mujahedeen movements' readiness to join the course of unity.

(3) Striving for the ulema: From the standpoint of not highlighting the doctrinal differences which the masses do not understand, such as this one is Matridi or this one is Ashari or this one is Salafi, and from the standpoint of doing justice to the people, for there may be in the world a heresy or an inadequacy in a side which may have something to give to jihad, fighting, and sacrifice for God. We have seen magnificent examples in the Afghan jihad, and the prince of believers, Mullah Muhammad Omar - may God protect him - himself is of Hanafi adherence, Matridi doctrine, but he stood in the history of Islam with a stance rarely taken. You are the richer if you know the stances of the authentic ulema on rulers in times of jihad and the defense of the Muslim holy sites. And more than that, their stances on doing justice to the people and not denying their merit.

The ulema among the general public are, as well, the symbol of Islam and its emblem. Their disparagement may lead to the general public deeming religion and its adherents as being unimportant. This is a greater injury than the benefit of criticizing a theologian on a heresy or an issue.

Of course, these words of mine have nothing to do with the hypocritical traitors who are in allegiance with the crusaders, but I wish to stress the warning against diminishing the ulema before the general public.

Also, the active mujahedeen ulema - even if there may be some heresy or fault in them that is not blasphemous - we must find a means to include them and to benefit from their energy. You know well -what I am mentioning to you- that many of the most learned ulema of Islam such as Izz Bin Abdul Salam, al-Nawawi, and Ibn Hajar - may God have mercy on them - were Ashari. And many of the most eminent jihadists, whom the Umma resolved unanimously to praise such as Nur al-Din Bin Zanki and Salahal-Din al-Ayyubi - were Ashari. The mujahedeen sultans who came after them - who didn't reach their level - whom the ulema and the historians lauded such as Sayf al-Din Qatz, Rukn al-Din Baybars, al-Nasir Muhammad Bin-Qallawun, and Muhammad al-Fatih, were Ashari or Matridi. They fell into errors, sins, and heresies. And the stances of Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiya regarding al-Nasir Muhammad Bin Qallawun and his extolling of him and his inciting him to jihad - despite the prosecutions and prison which befell the sheikh in his time - are well known.

If you take into account the fact that most of the Umma's ulema are Ashari or Matridi, and if you take into consideration as well the fact that the issue of correcting the mistakes of ideology is an issue that will require generations of the call to Islam and modifying the educational curricula, and that the mujahedeen are not able to undertake this burden, rather they are in need of those who will help them with the difficulties and problems they face; if you take all this into consideration, and add to it the fact that all Muslims are speaking of jihad, whether they are Salafi or non-Salafi, then you would understand that it is a duty of the mujahed movement to include the energies of the Umma and in its wisdom and prudence to fill the role of leader, trailblazer, and exploiter of all the capabilities of the Umma for the sake of achieving our aims: a caliphate along the lines of the Prophet's, with God's permission.

I do not know the details of the situation where you are, but I do not want us to repeat the mistake of Jamil al-Rahman , who was killed and whose organization was shattered, because he neglected the realities on the ground.

(4) The position on the Shia: This subject is complicated and detailed. I have brought it up here so as not to address the general public on something they do not know. But please permit me to present it logically:

(A) I repeat that I see the picture from afar, and I repeat that you see what we do not see. No doubt you have the right to defend yourself, the mujahedeen, and Muslims in general and in particular against any aggression or threat of aggression.

(B) I assert here that any rational person understands with ease that the Shia cooperated with the Americans in the invasion of Afghanistan, Rafsanjani himself confessed to it, and they cooperated with them in the overthrow of Saddam and the occupation of Iraq in exchange for the Shia's assumption of power and their turning a blind eye to the American military presence in Iraq. This is clear to everybody who has two eyes.

(C) People of discernment and knowledge among Muslims know the extent

of danger to Islam of the Twelve'er school of Shiism. It is a religious school

based on excess and falsehood whose function is to accuse the companions of Muhammad { of heresy in a campaign against Islam, in order to free the way for a group of those who call for a dialogue in the name of the hidden mahdi who is in control of existence and infallible in what he does. Their prior history in cooperating with the enemies of Islam is consistent with their current reality of connivance with the Crusaders.

(D) The collision between any state based on the model of prophecy with the Shia is a matter that will happen sooner or later. This is the judgment of history, and these are the fruits to be expected from the rejectionist Shia sect and their opinion of the Sunnis.

These are clear, well-known matters to anyone with a knowledge of history, the ideologies, and the politics of states.

(E) We must repeat what we mentioned previously, that the majority of Muslims don't comprehend this and possibly could not even imagine it. For that reason, many of your Muslim admirers amongst the common folk are wondering about your attacks on the Shia. The sharpness of this questioning increases when the attacks are on one of their mosques, and it increases more when the attacks are on the mausoleum of Imam Ali Bin Abi Talib, may God honor him. My opinion is that this matter won't be acceptable to the Muslim populace however much you have tried to explain it, and aversion to this will continue.

Indeed, questions will circulate among mujahedeen circles and their opinion makers about the correctness of this conflict with the Shia at this time. Is it something that is unavoidable? Or, is it something can be put off until the force of the mujahed movement in Iraq gets stronger? And if some of the operations were necessary for selfdefense, were all of the operations necessary? Or, were there some operations that weren't called for? And is the opening of another front now in addition to the front against the Americans and the government a wise decision? Or, does this conflict with the Shia lift the burden from the Americans by diverting the mujahedeen to the Shia, while the Americans continue to control matters from afar? And if the attacks on Shia leaders were necessary to put a stop to their plans, then why were there attacks on ordinary Shia? Won't this lead to reinforcing false ideas in their minds, even as it is incumbent on us to preach the call of Islam to them and explain and communicate to guide them to the truth? And can the mujahedeen kill all of the Shia in Iraq? Has any Islamic state in history ever tried that? And why kill ordinary Shia considering that they are forgiven because of their ignorance? And what loss will befall us if we did not attack the Shia? And do the brothers forget that we have more than one hundred prisoners - many of whom are from the leadership who are wanted in their countries - in the custody of the Iranians? And even if we attack the Shia out of necessity, then why do you announce this matter and make it public, which compels the Iranians to take counter measures? And do the brothers forget that both we and the Iranians need to refrain from harming each other at this time in which the Americans are targeting us?

All of these questions and others are circulating among your brothers, and they are monitoring the picture from afar, as I told you. One who monitors from afar lacks many of the important details that affect decision-making in the field.

However, monitoring from afar has the advantage of providing the total picture and observing the general line without getting submerged in the details, which might draw attention away from the direction of the target. As the English proverb says, the person who is standing among the leaves of the tree might not see the tree.

One of the most important factors of success is that you don't let your eyes lose sight of the target, and that it should stand before you always. Otherwise you deviate from the general line through a policy of reaction. And this is a lifetime's experience, and I will not conceal from you the fact that we suffered a lot through following this policy of reaction, then we suffered a lot another time because we tried to return to the original line.

One of the most important things facing the leadership is the enthusiasm of the supporters, and especially of the energetic young men who are burning to make the religion victorious. This enthusiasm must flow wisely, and al-Mutanabbi says:

Courage in a man does suffice but not like the courage of one who is wise.

And he also says:

Judiciousness precedes the courage of the courageous which is second

And when the two blend in one free soul it reaches everywhere in the heavens.

In summation, with regard to the talk about the issue of the Shia, I would like to repeat that I see that matter from afar without being aware of all the details, I would like my words to be deserving of your attention and consideration, and God is the guarantor of success for every good thing.

(5) Scenes of slaughter:

Among the things which the feelings of the Muslim populace who love and support you will never find palatable - also- are the scenes of slaughtering the hostages. You shouldn't be deceived by the praise of some of the zealous young men and their description of you as the shaykh of the slaughterers, etc. They do not express the general view of the admirer and the supporter of the resistance in Iraq, and of you in particular by the favor and blessing of God.

And your response, while true, might be: Why shouldn't we sow terror in the hearts of the Crusaders and their helpers? And isn't the destruction of the villages and the cities on the heads of their inhabitants more cruel than slaughtering? And aren't the cluster bombs and the seven ton bombs and the depleted uranium bombs crueler than slaughtering? And isn't killing by torture crueler than slaughtering? And isn't violating the honor of men and women more painful and more destructive than slaughtering?

All of these questions and more might be asked, and you are justified. However this does not change the reality at all, which is that the general opinion of our supporter does not comprehend that, and that this general opinion falls under a campaign by the malicious, perfidious, and fallacious campaign by the deceptive and fabricated media. And we would spare the people from the effect of questions about the usefulness of our actions in the hearts and minds of the general opinion that is essentially sympathetic to us.

And I say to you with sure feeling and I say: That the author of these lines has tasted the bitterness of American brutality, and that my favorite wife's chest was crushed by a concrete ceiling and she went on calling for aid to lift the stone block off her chest until she breathed her last, may God have mercy on her and accept her among the martyrs. As for my young daughter, she was afflicted by a cerebral hemorrhage, and she continued for a whole day suffering in pain until she expired. And to this day I do not know the location of the graves of my wife, my son, my daughter, and the rest of the three other families who were martyred in the incident and who were pulverized by the concrete ceiling, may God have mercy on them and the Muslim martyrs. Were they brought out of the rubble, or are they still buried beneath it to this day?

However, despite all of this, I say to you: that we are in a battle, and that more than half of this battle is taking place in the battlefield of the media. And that we are in a media battle in a race for the hearts and minds of our Umma. And that however far our capabilities reach, they will never be equal to one thousandth of the capabilities of the kingdom of Satan that is waging war on us. And we can kill the captives by bullet. That would achieve that which is sought after without exposing ourselves to the questions and answering to doubts. We don't need this.

E-I would like you to explain for us another issue related to Iraq, and I think without a doubt that you are the most knowledgeable about it. Can the assumption of leadership for the mujahedeen or a group of the mujahedeen by non-Iraqis stir up sensitivity for some people? And if there is sensitivity, what is its effect? And how can it be eliminated while preserving the commitment of the jihadist work and without exposing it to any shocks? Please inform us in detail regarding this matter.

F-Likewise I would like you to inform us about the Iraqi situation in general and the situation of the mujahedeen in particular in detail without exposing the security of the mujahedeen and the Muslims to danger. At the least, we should know as much as the enemy knows. And allow us to burden you with this trouble, for we are most eager to learn your news.

G-I have a definite desire to travel to you but I do not know whether that is possible from the standpoint of traveling and getting settled, so please let me know. And God is the guarantor of every good thing.

5-Please take every caution in the meetings, especially when someone claims to carry an important letter or contributions. It was in this way that they arrested Khalid Sheikh. Likewise, please, if you want to meet one of your assistants, I hope that you don't meet him in a public place or in a place that is not known to you. I hope that you would meet him in a secure place, not the place of your residence. Because Abu alFaraj - may God set him free and release him from his torment - was lured by one of his brothers, who had been taken into custody, to meet him at a public location where a trap had been set. 6-The brothers informed me that you suggested to them sending some assistance. Our situation since Abu al-Faraj is good by the grace of God, but many of the lines have been cut off. Because of this, we need a payment while new lines are being opened. So, if you're capable of sending a payment of approximately one hundred thousand, we'll be very grateful to you.

7-The subject of the Algerian brothers at our end, there are fears from the previous experiences, so if you're able to get in touch with them and notify us of the details from them, we would be very grateful to you.

8-As for news on the poor servant,

A-During an earlier period I published some publications:

(1) Allegiance and exemption - A Faith transmitted, a lost reality.

(2) Strengthening the Banner of Islam - an article emphasizing the authority's commitment to monotheism.

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?

(3) Wind of Paradise - an article about: Most Honorable Sacrifices of the Believers - Campaigns of Death and Martyrdom.

I endeavored in this article to include what was written on the subject as much as I could. I also strived to verify every word in it, and it's an issue that took me almost a year or more.

(4) The Bitter Harvest - The Muslim Brotherhood in 60 Years - Second Edition 1426h - 2005m.

In this edition, I wanted to delete all the extreme phrases for which there's no proof, and I referred to the book a number of times, then I wrote a new preface. In it I pointed out a dangerous trend of the Brotherhood, especially in the circumstances of the New Crusader War which was launched on the Islamic Umma. In my opinion, this edition is better than the first with respect to the calmness of the presentation instead of being emotional. The Brotherhood's danger is demonstrated by the weakening of the Islamic Resistance to the campaign of the Crusaders and their supporters. God is the only one who is perfect.

(5) I have also had fifteen audio statements published and six others that were not published for one reason or another. We ask God for acceptance and devotion.

I will enclose for you the written statements and what I can of the audio and video statements with this message, God willing. If you find they are good, you can publish them. We seek God's assistance.

(6) I don't know if you all have contact with Abu Rasmi? Even if it is via the Internet, because I gave him a copy of my book (A Knight under the banner of the Prophet@) so he could attempt to publish it, and I lost the original. Al-Sharq al-Awsat newspaper published it truncated and jumbled. I think that the American intelligence services provided the aforementioned newspaper with it from my computer which they acquired, because the publication of the book coincided with a publication of messages from my computer in the same newspaper. So if you can contact him and get the original of the book, if that is possible for you all, then you can publish it on your blessed website and then send a copy to us, if that is possible.

B-As for my personal condition, I am in good health, blessings and wellness thanks to God and His grace. I am only lacking your pious prayers, in which I beg you not to forget me. God Almighty has blessed me with a daughter whom I have named (Nawwar), and Nawwar means: the timid female gazelle and the woman who is free from suspicion, and technically: it is the name of my maternal aunt who was a second mother to me and who stood with me during all the difficult and harsh times. I ask God to reward her for me with the best reward, and have mercy on her, our mothers and the Muslims.

9-My greetings to all the loved ones and please give me news of Karem and the rest of the folks I know, and especially:

By God, if by chance you're going to Fallujah, send greetings to Abu Musab alZarqawi.

In closing, I ask God entrust you all with His guardianship, providence and protection, and bless you all in your families, possessions and offspring and protect them from all evil and that He delight you all with them in this world and the next world, and that He bestow upon us and you all the victory that he promised his servants the Believers, and that He strengthen for us our religion which He has sanctioned for us, and that He make us safe after our fear.Peace, God's blessings and mercy to you.

Your loving brother

Abu Muhammad

THe Taliban is the largest and most powerful from of Islam? I fail to see the comparrision between the Catholic CHurch and the Taiban.

No way.

Toss up between Sunnis, shiites, and wahabbis.

Capitalism is the driving force behind technological development. Westernized capitalist countries have the highest standards of living, life expectancies, and the most civil liberties on average.

OH NOESSS!!111!!!

Yes, true. All of it.

the War on Terror will go on until the West gets the balls to commit genocide.
I guess comments such as this is what one would call "aiding and abetting" the terrorists? With an "extremist" comment such as this, you align yourself with some pretty scary individuals of historical significance whose infamy is well documented. Very sad to say the least.

Rah Rah The dog is dead.

Praise the Lord. A glorious day indeed now that the #1 knucklehead in Iraq is in Hell.

Rah Rah The dog is dead.

Praise the Lord. A glorious day indeed now that the #1 knucklehead in Iraq is in Hell.


Why was he number one again? What percentage of the insurgency did he lead? OH yeah... it's because the US helped him gain street cred by pumping his name out there incessantly as if killing Musab would actually have any effect on anything.

Why do you suppose the US military pays more attention to the cowardly suicide bombers rather than the majority of the insurgency who targets teh coalition forces? I wonder if it is akin to how the po po will go after harmless pot smokers before they challenge tweaked out and violent crack/meth heads :confused:

Why was he number one again? What percentage of the insurgency did he lead? OH yeah... it's because the US helped him gain street cred by pumping his name out there incessantly as if killing Musab would actually have any effect on anything.

Why do you suppose the US military pays more attention to the cowardly suicide bombers rather than the majority of the insurgency who targets teh coalition forces? I wonder if it is akin to how the po po will go after harmless pot smokers before they challenge tweaked out and violent crack/meth heads :confused:

You only have one chance to get a suicide bomber.

Rah Rah The dog is dead.

Praise the Lord. A glorious day indeed now that the #1 knucklehead in Iraq is in Hell.
Too bad we didn't take him out when he was sitting in the no-fly zone in 2002, before the invasion. Too bad he was left alone so the Bush administration could try to use him as an example of a Saddam-al Qaeda connection, even though the two hated each other and Zarqawi was in that part of Iraq so he'd be safe from Hussein.

So how many lives did that decision to not go after Zarqawi then cost the world? How many US soldiers are dead now because we didn't take him out when we had the chance? How many Iraqis? How many innocents?

Yeah--hurrah he's dead. But why the hell wasn't he dead sooner, when it was easier to get to him? And how much extra death has come from that poor decision by the Bush administration?

You only have one chance to get a suicide bomber.


That doesnt make any sense, nor does it answer the question.

Suicide bombers will get themselves killed without any help from the US. Plus there are plenty of chances to get suicide bombers... they don't live for a single day or train for a single day.

Still why put a higher focus on the lesser threat to the US military?

Musab wasnt a suicide bombera anyway, he had idiots lining up to do that for him. Guess whose foreign policy helped him get such massive numbers to recruit.

Too bad we didn't take him out when he was sitting in the no-fly zone in 2002, before the invasion. Too bad he was left alone so the Bush administration could try to use him as an example of a Saddam-al Qaeda connection, even though the two hated each other and Zarqawi was in that part of Iraq so he'd be safe from Hussein.

So how many lives did that decision to not go after Zarqawi then cost the world? How many US soldiers are dead now because we didn't take him out when we had the chance? How many Iraqis? How many innocents?

Yeah--hurrah he's dead. But why the hell wasn't he dead sooner, when it was easier to get to him? And how much extra death has come from that poor decision by the Bush administration?


yea right like when clinton decided NOT to kill bin laden ?

#1 knucklehead in Iraq

he wasn't the #1 anything, anywhere. do try to keep up.

"Sen. Talent's Remarks on the Death of Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi

The killing of Al-Zarqawi is another success for U.S. and Iraqi forces in a very necessary fight. He was the most visible, most violent, and most radical of the foreign fighters in Iraq. Last night’s attack was the culmination of many weeks of intelligence gathering by U.S. and Iraqi forces. The intelligence obtained from the strike on this safe house provided coalition forces with information leading to attacks on seventeen subsequent locations in the Baghdad area. It’s important to understand that this success was the result of good intelligence gathering. We don’t know the details on how that intelligence was gathered but we can speculate with a degree of certainty that Iraqi forces and Iraqi contacts were crucial to this important success. That shows the importance of having Iraq as an ally in the global war on terror. This close cooperation between U.S. and Iraqi forces, with Iraqi forces increasingly shouldering the burden, is how we will defeat the insurgents and allow our service men and women to come home as soon as possible. "



Democrats call Zarqawi killing a stunt
By Amy Fagan
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
June 8, 2006


4:09 p.m.

Some Democrats, breaking ranks from their leadership, today said the death of terrorist leader Abu Musab Zarqawi in Iraq was a stunt to divert attention from an unpopular and hopeless war.

"This is just to cover Bush's [rear] so he doesn't have to answer" for Iraqi civilians being killed by the U.S. military and his own sagging poll numbers, said Rep. Pete Stark, California Democrat. "Iraq is still a mess -- get out."

Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio Democrat, said Zarqawi was a small part of "a growing anti-American insurgency" and that it's time to get out.

"We're there for all the wrong reasons," Mr. Kucinich said.

Officially, Democratic leaders reacted positively to the news and praised the troops that successfully targeted al Qaeda's leader in Iraq with 500-pound bombs at his safe house 30 miles from Baghdad.

"This is a good day for the Iraqi people, the U.S. military and our intelligence community," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.

President Bush said that yesterday's killing of the 39-year-old Jordanian-born terrorist offers an opportunity to "turn the tide" in the war and that Tuesday he will discuss with Iraqi leaders "how to best deploy America's resources in Iraq."

A senior White House official cautioned that Mr. Bush was not hinting at possible early reductions in U.S. troops there, according to Reuters news agency.

Meanwhile, Democrats sprinkled caveats throughout their praise.

"That is good news; he was a dreadful, vicious person," said Sen. Kent Conrad, North Dakota Democrat. Mr. Conrad added that he hopes the military can get Osama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri, another top al Qaeda leader.

"They're even more important," he said.

Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, Michigan Democrat, said it was good news but added, "I think we have a long way to go."

Republicans called Zarqawi's death a positive step and thanked Iraqi citizens for standing up to a threat against their nascent Democracy.

"I am more optimistic than ever that a free and stable Iraq can be achieved," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee.

Victory is just around the corner (again), I'm sure.

Why was he number one again? What percentage of the insurgency did he lead? OH yeah... it's because the US helped him gain street cred by pumping his name out there incessantly as if killing Musab would actually have any effect on anything.

what i find particularly sad is that the msm has already demonstrated that the whole thing is a psyop program (months ago, even) aimed at a completely marginal figure, but then jumps right up and pretends like it was real all along. i can't tell if that's evidence that they are completely compromised or merely grossly incompetent.

That doesnt make any sense, nor does it answer the question.

Suicide bombers will get themselves killed without any help from the US. Plus there are plenty of chances to get suicide bombers... they don't live for a single day or train for a single day.

Still why put a higher focus on the lesser threat to the US military?

Musab wasnt a suicide bombera anyway, he had idiots lining up to do that for him. Guess whose foreign policy helped him get such massive numbers to recruit.

Suicide bombers will kill themselves killing others. You make it seem as if they splatter themselves in empty closets. They don't. They work WITH the insurgency-the insurgents recruit them to strike targets-civilian and military.

Probably fanatical islam...they've been doing this for years ya know-Cole, which was before GWB really started dropping the hammer on hadjis 'round the world.

snip
Not a single mention of the Jordanians intel being crucial either I see.

Tut tut.

yea right like when clinton decided NOT to kill bin laden ?

So Clinton was an idiot in not killing. Did he force Bush to do the same thing?

yea right like when clinton decided NOT to kill bin laden ?
Clinton did try--he missed, and he says it is the greatest regret of his presidency that he didn't get him. The Bush administration, however, has had precious little to say on this act of extremely poor judgment, and I doubt they ever will.

The US should give the body back to his followers and carpet bomb the funeral.

Wonder how many terrorists, future car bombers, and insurgents you will get in that one act? :D

The US should give the body back to his followers and carpet bomb the funeral.

Wonder how many terrorists, future car bombers, and insurgents you will get in that one act? :D

500?

Then bomb those 500 seperate funerals. And you'd create what, 5,000?

Then bomb those 5,000 seperate funerals. Create another 10,000....

See the problem with that train of thought?

Suicide bombers will kill themselves killing others. You make it seem as if they splatter themselves in empty closets. They don't. They work WITH the insurgency-the insurgents recruit them to strike targets-civilian and military.

Probably fanatical islam...they've been doing this for years ya know-Cole, which was before GWB really started dropping the hammer on hadjis 'round the world.

And as I said AQ is the extreemely small minority in Iraq. Why elevate their status as if they are the top threat? The majority of insurgents, who are native to Iraq (unlike AQ and the suicide bombers), are the ones targetting the coalition forces and are who I would classify as the real top threat.

I think his death matters because AQ in Iraq didn't work like the real AQ network does.

If you kill Bin Laden or al-Zawahiri today, it will do absolutely nothing. AQ is an idea by now, the people that did the bombings in Madrid and London, and who've been arrested everywhere worked alone. They just got inspiration from the web, and had their own problems in life. It can't be defeated by weapons.

But AQ in Iraq is an actual organisation. It had leaders, officers, footsoldiers and so on. Al-Zarqawi was their boss, and not only that - he was a huge media figure, a symbol moreso than a man. His followers will probably get in trouble with each other over who succeeds him for a few weeks (unless they're more loyal than I thought, in which case there are probably contingency plans in place).

But that new leader will not have the credibility, and he will not have the media presence yet. That will make recruitment more difficult, and it takes an important symbol from the movement. Not that that will last though, in their eternal struggle to define a good v evil situation, US media will pounce on whoever turns out to be the new guy.

And then there is still the possibility that the new guy will be more in line with AQ ideology as exported by Bin Laden. And that would mean a likely end to the constant attacks on other Muslims. The 'new' targets would then simply be foreign forces and the Iraqi government, not mosques and markets. Which has got to be a good thing, at least for the civilians who might get spared.

2 down (Hussein & Zarqawi), 1 (bin Laden) to go!
I think it's interesting that two of those three targets have only been created after you went out to strike back. Makes for an interesting trend, doesn't it? ;)

He is DEAD ...very much so...his own dickheads seem to have turned him in...now I think thats a stretch...just to throw suspision and force dissent...BUT the fact remains .....SOMEONE ratted thee bastard OUT .


Thats a GOOD thing...the Iraqi people ...who BTW ...VOTED ...and chose a Government ? They need these assholes to die .

No matter what the left wing idiots think... I choose the people who VOTED ...all 12 million of them ..over the cry babies ...


all the morons who mourn the asswipes death .

just out of interest, do the US military even try and capture people anymore?

we saw it with the hussein brothers and now here. just launch a rocket and thats that? seems either lacking in ambition or confidence in the ground troops

unless they didnt want him talking for some reason

just out of interest, do the US military even try and capture people anymore?

we saw it with the hussein brothers and now here. just launch a rocket and thats that? seems either lacking in ambition or confidence in the ground troops

unless they didnt want him talking for some reason
From my understanding, a small team was operating in the area and got eyes on. With a ten man team it is hard to set up a perimeter and move in on him from there. The only safe option is to call in fire support on the position and go after any movement after the strike.

just out of interest, do the US military even try and capture people anymore?

we saw it with the hussein brothers and now here. just launch a rocket and thats that? seems either lacking in ambition or confidence in the ground troops

unless they didnt want him talking for some reason


Sure ...you want catptured ? CALL THE COPS !!!!!!!!!!

just out of interest, do the US military even try and capture people anymore?

we saw it with the hussein brothers and now here. just launch a rocket and thats that? seems either lacking in ambition or confidence in the ground troops

unless they didnt want him talking for some reason

Maybe the administration were worried he was going to talk about the time him and Bush snorted lines of coke together back when they were frat buddies.

Sure ...you want catptured ? CALL THE COPS !!!!!!!!!!
Why? The military is perfectly capable of capturing people (Hussein himself for example).

They obviously made a judgment call.

Shame though, it would have been nice to see him on trial.

He is DEAD ...very much so...his own dickheads seem to have turned him in...now I think thats a stretch...just to throw suspision and force dissent...BUT the fact remains .....SOMEONE ratted thee bastard OUT .
Actually, no. The news says US Special Forces followed someone who didn't know they were there.

/OT Wow... this damn thing grew up didn't it. My first thread to anywhere close to the 60 page limit.

Sure ...you want catptured ? CALL THE COPS !!!!!!!!!!
It's true though. People called him a criminal, and a criminal should really face a trial.

I can understand that in this case they probably needed to act super-quick because he would've tended to move around all the time. So the only way to make sure was to get planes to do it. But still, in general it's better to capture your enemies than to just kill them (and perhaps a bunch of civilians close-by as may have been the case here, not sure).

Sounds like a very firm Godwin to me.

Big fucking deal. Godwin's Law has no relevance in content or context.


So, why do most of these people who spew the virulence about me and my suggestions of mass sterlization give the most extreme benefit of the doubt to the Iranian President

Strawman. I don't necessarily give any benefit of doubt to the Iranian President, yet I think you're a disgusting, sad sack of shit because you advocate genocide.

, who not only makes genocidal remarks, but denies the WW II Holocaust, and is trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and threatens to "wipe Israel off the map".

Isn't he a much more realistic threat than I am? Or is there a double standard?

It's not about "threats."

Look at it this way, since you're a fucking nazi and see Muslims as subhumans: Iran's president is only disgracing himself, while you, a supposedly civilized Westerner, are disgracing yourself and your kind. You're proving that you're no better or different than any terrorist - and showing that if you were born in Iran, you'd have been flying the planes into the buildings.

Fuck off, in other words. :)

Why? The military is perfectly capable of capturing people (Hussein himself for example).

They obviously made a judgment call.

Shame though, it would have been nice to see him on trial.

I'm glad he's dead to be honest, it spares some of the friends and relatives of his victims the hardship of re-living his crimes and denies him the platform to speak that he would have been given if this had come to trial.

???????????????

this idiot ...that got BOMBED ...killed HOW many IRAQI civillians ....outside of just beheading hostages ..and blowing up military targets....


ARE YOU NUTS ?


He should have been CAPTURED ?

By who ? Who's life would you sacrifice to capture him ?

Name one . OR threee or a squad or two .

Who CAPTURES him so YOU feel better ?

???????????????

this idiot ...that got BOMBED ...killed HOW many IRAQI civillians ....outside of just beheading hostages ..and blowing up military targets....


ARE YOU NUTS ?


He should have been CAPTURED ?

By who ? Who's life would you sacrifice to capture him ?

Name one . OR threee or a squad or two .

Who CAPTURES him so YOU feel better ?

And how many innocent people did the US slaughter when bombing alleged "al-Zarqawi safehouses" because they decided for some reason that killing him was preferable to capturing him?

Fuck off, in other words. :)

Wow, I don't think I've ever seen a smiley used more inappropriately.

He should have been CAPTURED ?
Yes. Is the concept of a criminal being captured so foreign to you? Then he would've been put on trial, sentenced to death for thousands of counts of murder (a few actually caught on camera) and hung.
And it would've been a legitimate trial, and a victory not just for the US military, but primarily for the Iraqi legal state. This now is not - it is a victory for the US military, and perhaps one for those Iraqis who won't die because of it, but it certainly isn't much of a victory for the Iraqi government, which once again could do nothing by itself and had to wait for the US to solve their problems.

Who CAPTURES him so YOU feel better ?
US Special Forces. Hell, if you don't want to do it, I'm sure the German KSK would love to help out. Or GSG-9, they have more experience with that sort of thing.
And as I said above, it's not about feeling better, it's also got clear-cut political reasons.

And how many innocent people did the US slaughter when bombing alleged "al-Zarqawi safehouses" because they decided for some reason that killing him was preferable to capturing him?

How many innocent people did Al-Zarqawi kill while trying to kill US soldiers?

an intellegent response based on reality:

From my understanding, a small team was operating in the area and got eyes on. With a ten man team it is hard to set up a perimeter and move in on him from there. The only safe option is to call in fire support on the position and go after any movement after the strike.

moronic responses from a keyboard warrior:
Sure ...you want catptured ? CALL THE COPS !!!!!!!!!!
???????????????

this idiot ...that got BOMBED ...killed HOW many IRAQI civillians ....outside of just beheading hostages ..and blowing up military targets....


ARE YOU NUTS ?


He should have been CAPTURED ?

By who ? Who's life would you sacrifice to capture him ?

Name one . OR threee or a squad or two .

Who CAPTURES him so YOU feel better ?

which misses the points that he was:
a: of intellegence value,
b: a trophy capture to put on trial and
c: at least 6 civilians including a baby died in the bombing.

Ultra, grow the fuck up, there are other ways of dealing with life than blowing everything up all the time. it was a legitimate question about why the US military chose that course of action over any other.

???????????????

this idiot ...that got BOMBED ...killed HOW many IRAQI civillians ....outside of just beheading hostages ..and blowing up military targets....
And? What does that have to do with him being captured?


ARE YOU NUTS ?
No. I'm quite sane.


He should have been CAPTURED ?
Maybe.

By who ?
Iraqi/Coalition forces.

Who's life would you sacrifice to capture him ?
The soldiers. The people who do their job and get paid for it. Don't forget, civilians died in the bombing too.


Who CAPTURES him so YOU feel better ?

Honestly, I don't feel any different. He never affected me personally, nor did he affect the 6 billion or so other people on the planet, so me feeling better is a non runner.

My point was that it might been possible. Might.

Holding him to account for his crimes might have been a nice and fitting end to someone like him.

Yes. Is the concept of a criminal being captured so foreign to you? Then he would've been put on trial, sentenced to death for thousands of counts of murder (a few actually caught on camera) and hung.
And it would've been a legitimate trial, and a victory not just for the US military, but primarily for the Iraqi legal state. This now is not - it is a victory for the US military, and perhaps one for those Iraqis who won't die because of it, but it certainly isn't much of a victory for the Iraqi government, which once again could do nothing by itself and had to wait for the US to solve their problems.


The only problem would have been where to have the trial and protecting the judge and prosecution.

How many innocent people did Al-Zarqawi kill while trying to kill US soldiers?

Does it matter? You don't need to prove to me that al-Zarqawi, if he was in fact guilty of what he was accused of, was no angel. I'm not particularly sympathetic to him or his organization. Of course, I'm not particularly sympathetic to the gang of murderous criminals that invaded the country and allowed him to do what he did, either.

an intellegent response based on reality:



moronic responses from a keyboard warrior:



which misses the points that he was:
a: of intellegence value,
b: a trophy capture to put on trial and
c: at least 6 civilians including a baby died in the bombing.

Ultra, grow the fuck up, there are other ways of dealing with life than blowing everything up all the time. it was a legitimate question about why the US military chose that course of action over any other.


Yeah ..wwell if the JORDAINIANS and other intelligence people didnt have him swearing to never be CAPTURED alive and the fact he has always been said to wear a BOMB belt...and other reasons ...I may even say it was WORTH ..ONE ...American LIFE to capture him...

BUT ...



IT wasnt ...

he aint worth the pig blanket they bury him in .

Not to mention the ONE life or ...what ever it would take to CAPTURE his worthless ass .

The only problem would have been where to have the trial and protecting the judge and prosecution.
Yeah. But I'd suspect that a) the trial wouldn't take very long, and b) the US could help the Iraqis organise the trial, as they're doing with Saddam at the moment.

Yeah ..wwell if the JORDAINIANS and other intelligence people didnt have him swearing to never be CAPTURED alive and the fact he has always been said to wear a BOMB belt...and other reasons ...I may even say it was WORTH ..ONE ...American LIFE to capture him...

BUT ...



IT wasnt ...

he aint worth the pig blanket they bury him in .

Not to mention the ONE life or ...what ever it would take to CAPTURE his worthless ass .

but it was worth 6 innocent iraqi lives to blow him up? :gundge:

do the job right or get the fuck out i say

IT wasnt ...

he aint worth the pig blanket they bury him in .

Not to mention the ONE life or ...what ever it would take to CAPTURE his worthless ass .
But you read it before, right? A number of Iraqi civilians died in this strike. Where they worth it for some reason, but Americans wouldn't be?

How many innocent people did Al-Zarqawi kill while trying to kill US soldiers?

Supplementary point: It's not just US soldiers he's trying to kill, but rather people that drink and sell alcohol, people that sell music, people that listen to music, women that don't wear purdah, people that dance, women that walk about in the streets without men, women that drive, women that attend higher educational facilities, christians, atheists, foreign aid workers, foreign construction workers, members of the new Iraqi government, members of the Iraqi police force and Shiite muslims to name but a few.

Which more or less explains why the overwhelming majority of Iraqis and even most of the insurgents, despise the man.

But you read it before, right? A number of Iraqi civilians died in this strike. Where they worth it for some reason, but Americans wouldn't be?


EXCUSE ME BUT .......NAME the INOCENT Iraqis who were HANGING with THE GUY WITH the TWENTY FIVE MILLION DOLLAR PRICE ON HIS HEAD ...for BEING A ...... TERRORIST ?????????????????????





name just one .

No matter what the left wing idiots think...

Name one left wing idiot who is mourning his death.

I do not wish anyone's death, not even Zarqawi's. I do not believe in killing and I believe we need to learn to rise above its use. I would not, given the opportunity, go back in time and kill - oh say - Hitler as a kid.

It would have been nice to see him captured and put on trial by an Iraqi court of law and given the opportunity to defend himself and given the opportunity for a fair trial by a jury of his peers with a representative to speak on his behalf.

That would have shown him, and the world, that we are better than him. It would have shown the world that we believe in justice and rights for *ALL*, but instead, we just blew him up. Much like he would have done to us.

I wish he would have been taken alive, but I certainly don't mourn him.

We will probably see a reduction in CIVILIAN casualties in Iraq, because the Iraqi nationalist insurgents mainly target Americans, Iraqi soldiers, and Iraqi police, while Al-Qaeda favors civilian targets. Until, of course, they get a new leader. Still, while he is a martyr, it also has to be disheartening for Al-Qaeda in Iraq that their leader got blown to bits.

Meanwhile, kudos to the Jordanian intelligence for nabbing this guy!

EXCUSE ME BUT .......NAME the INOCENT Iraqis who were HANGING with THE GUY WITH the TWENTY FIVE MILLION DOLLAR PRICE ON HIS HEAD ...for BEING A ...... TERRORIST ?????????????????????





name just one .

You realise two 500lb bombs are going to do a lot of damage to surrounding homes don't you?

It hardly the fault of the woman and unborn child that this fuckwit decided to have a meeting in/near their house.

Out of interest, where did these claims that six civilains died originate? From the Times website it states "Al-Zarqawi’s deputy and spiritual adviser, Abu Abdul Rahman, also died along with five others who have yet to be identified."

So that makes it only "five civilians" for a start. Furthermore, I think it's highly unlikely that those five un-identified individuals were civilians given that they were liasing in a terrorist safehouse with someone like Zarqawi at the time the bombs were dropped.

EDIT: Okay, I didn't realise when I made this post that a woman and a child also died in the bombing.

watch the fuckin movie they made on purpose...JUST so the friggin tree huggers couldnt complain...TOOO MUCH...


TWO 500 lb bombs...

DEAD terrorist assholes.

NO collateral damage ..that wasnt invented by morons who would appologise for terrorist .

Ya know, if they really wanted to show the insurgents that insurgency is a bad thing, they would wrap al-Zarqawi's head in the skin of a pig and bury it in an unknown grave somewhere. This might actually act as a deterrent - it means he can't ever go to paradise.:mp5:

watch the fuckin movie they made on purpose...JUST so the friggin tree huggers couldnt complain...TOOO MUCH...


TWO 500 lb bombs...

DEAD terrorist assholes.

NO collateral damage ..that wasnt invented by morons who would appologise for terrorist .

So anyone criticising now is a 'Tree Hugger'?

name just one .
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/08/world/middleeast/08cnd-iraq.html?ex=1149912000&en=32b81e5316a5e20a&ei=5087%0A
Six people were killed in the strike: Mr. Zarqawi, his spiritual adviser and four other people including a woman and a child, the military said.

The neighbours said they had no idea, the area was full of refugees. That was what SBS World News said yesterday evening. He wouldn't have been wearing a name tag. But you have a point - there is a chance that these people knew. President Maliki seems to have indicated as much:
Mr Maliki said that seven other leading lieutenants of Zarqawi, including two women who were working as spies for him, were killed in the air strike. Sources close to Zarqawi's family said one of his three wives was among the dead.
http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=129632&region=6

By the way, this was what Nick Berg's father had to say: "Revenge is something that I do not follow [and] I do not wish for against anybody."

Nonetheless, this is not the first air strike either.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/08/1097089560091.html?from=storylhs
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-06/20/content_340903.htm
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/06/19/iraq.main/

Name one left wing idiot who is mourning his death.

I do not wish anyone's death, not even Zarqawi's. I do not believe in killing and I believe we need to learn to rise above its use. I would not, given the opportunity, go back in time and kill - oh say - Hitler as a kid.

It would have been nice to see him captured and put on trial by an Iraqi court of law and given the opportunity to defend himself and given the opportunity for a fair trial by a jury of his peers with a representative to speak on his behalf.

That would have shown him, and the world, that we are better than him. It would have shown the world that we believe in justice and rights for *ALL*, but instead, we just blew him up. Much like he would have done to us.

I wish he would have been taken alive, but I certainly don't mourn him.


Who's life would you sacrifice to make your point ? Who is that unlucky person ? And his family ?

watch the fuckin movie they made on purpose...JUST so the friggin tree huggers couldnt complain...TOOO MUCH...
Tree hugger? *looks around* Who? What? :confused:


TWO 500 lb bombs...



NO collateral damage .

In a residential area, two 500lb bombs aren't going to cause collateral damage?

Now that's just stupid Ultraextreme.

name just one .
You did see the part about a baby being killed in the strike, didn't you?

Or do you prefer to visit the sins of the fathers upon their sons?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/08/world/middleeast/08cnd-iraq.html?ex=1149912000&en=32b81e5316a5e20a&ei=5087%0A


The neighbours said they had no idea, the area was full of refugees. That was what SBS World News said yesterday evening. He wouldn't have been wearing a name tag. But you have a point - there is a chance that these people knew. President Maliki seems to have indicated as much:

http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=129632&region=6

By the way, this was what Nick Berg's father had to say: "Revenge is something that I do not follow [and] I do not wish for against anybody."

Nonetheless, this is not the first air strike either.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/08/1097089560091.html?from=storylhs
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-06/20/content_340903.htm
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/06/19/iraq.main/


Not for anything ...I have heard everything his dad has to say...he is in the local news almost every day and since he is running for office in delaware ( Green Party )...he's even got more exposure...

The dude is a nut...if my son was BEHEADED and the video distributed WORLDWIDE....there would be no place for that scum bag to hide .. I would DIE looking for him just to take a shot..so be it if I didnt succeed ..I would die happy just knowing I tried .

I watched the video of his SON being beheaded...

I know the enemy we face..

So whats your point ?

Not for anything ...I have heard everything his dad has to say...he is in the local news almost every day and since he is running for office in delaware ( Green Party )...he's even got more exposure...

The dude is a nut...if my son was BEHEADED and the video distributed WORLDWIDE....there would be no place for that scum bag to hide .. I would DIE looking for him just to take a shot..so be it if I didnt succeed ..I would die happy just knowing I tried .

I watched the video of his SON being beheaded...

I know the enemy we face..

So whats your point ?
I don't know.... what's yours? :confused:

You did see the part about a baby being killed in the strike, didn't you?

Or do you prefer to visit the sins of the fathers upon their sons?


so the ASSHOLE surrounds himself with BABIES to protect him ?

Whats are you trying to say ?


Thats a good thing ?

at this point Ultra is on a wind up. or he is 15

otherwise he has the exact same outlook of civilian deaths as not to be worried about as the death cult extremists he claims to oppose. but that sort of subtlty of argument is probably beyond him

Name one left wing idiot who is mourning his death.

I do not wish anyone's death, not even Zarqawi's. I do not believe in killing and I believe we need to learn to rise above its use. I would not, given the opportunity, go back in time and kill - oh say - Hitler as a kid.

It would have been nice to see him captured and put on trial by an Iraqi court of law and given the opportunity to defend himself and given the opportunity for a fair trial by a jury of his peers with a representative to speak on his behalf.

That would have shown him, and the world, that we are better than him. It would have shown the world that we believe in justice and rights for *ALL*, but instead, we just blew him up. Much like he would have done to us.

I wish he would have been taken alive, but I certainly don't mourn him.

I believe that it is not life per se but rather what we choose to do with it that gives it value. I do not for instance believe that there is any equivocation to be drawn between the death of say a committed and compassionate teacher working in an inner-city comprehensive and the death of someone of Zarqawi's ilk. I believe that his death was just not merely in accordance with utilitarian notions of "the greater good" but also with respect to a more individualised notion of justice.

so the ASSHOLE surrounds himself with BABIES to protect him ?

Whats are you trying to say ?


Thats a good thing ?
It points out that innocent people were killed in getting him. Try to keep your arguments straight.

I don't know.... what's yours? :confused:

Dont you think that if you cried over a real martyr you may get a little more sympathy ?


You are defending a monster .


You make it possible for that moron and those like him to exist .

Think about THAT for a minute...people thought HITLER was doing the RIGHT thing to.

Invoke any rule you want BUT that comparison IS sooooooooo valid for this point..

LOOK at the PERSON you are defending...and dont give me the dead BABY bullshit....


DEAD babies his victims will never have . try that .

try poor dead headless people left in bags.

TRY ....you know its a worthless cause if your dumb enough to defend that asshole .

I believe that it is not life per se but rather what we choose to do with it that gives it value. I do not for instance believe that there is any equivocation to be drawn between the death of say a committed and compassionate teacher working in an inner-city comprehensive and the death of someone of Zarqawi's ilk. I believe that his death was just not merely in accordance with utilitarian notions of "the greater good" but also with respect to a more individualised notion of justice.

its not his death per say we are worried about. its the people living in the houses nearby.

there is a question of whether its tactically sound to kill rather than capture

Dont you think that if you cried over a real martyr you may get a little more sympathy ?


You are defending a monster .


You make it possible for that moron and those like him to exist .

Think about THAT for a minute...people thought HITLER was doing the RIGHT thing to.

Invoke any rule you want BUT that comparison IS sooooooooo valid for this point..

LOOK at the PERSON you are defending...and dont give me the dead BABY bullshit....


DEAD babies his victims will never have . try that .

try poor dead headless people left in bags.

TRY ....you know its a worthless cause if your dumb enough to defend that asshole .

What the....

*head spinning*

Who am I defending now? If you could tell me, it would really help, because I don't have the slightest fucking clue what you are talking about.

Monkey, purple, dishwasher, lollipop, sky, mandolin.

Yeah.....

I watched the video of his SON being beheaded...
But you obviously failed to connect on the same level that he did. Because it seems to have made him realise that nothing will bring his boy back. Not revenge, not violence, not surrender, not appeasement.
His son is dead, and that is that. Few people can face a fact like that and remain rational enough to step away and make the rational conclusions. He obviously can.

I know the enemy we face..
Oh, please. All you know is Hollywood movies and the world they created in your head.
None of us know "the enemy". Most of us don't even know ourselves, because our lives have been protected. We never had to find out, but Mr. Berg for example did.

So whats your point ?
I wonder what yours is, to be honest. Instead of justice, you advocate destruction and revenge, yet you don't seem to see a problem.
Which tells me that you would go as low as comparisons with your Enemy of the Day (tm) allow, that you really have no concept of personal ethics or morality, that really there is no difference between your view of the world, and Zarqawi's.

Tell me where I went wrong, dude. Prove to me that I'm not talking to a potential mass murderer right now.

interesting

this website (http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htmurph/articles/20060607.aspx) wrote the following yesterday:

Zarqawi Scheduled for Martyrdom

June 7, 2006: The relationship between terrorist leader Abu Musab al Zarqawi and and the mainline al Qaeda leadership continues to deteriorate. Zarqawi's recent audio messages have not only attacked the U.S. and the Shia-dominated government in Iraq, but also Iran. He's even claiming that the U.S., Iran, and Shia in general, are in cahoots to destroy Islam. He has also called for continued attacks against Shia.

Except for his verbal attacks on the U.S. and the Iraqi government, he is almost totally distanced himself from the central leadership. Other al Qaeda leaders have been trying to down play anti-Iranian and anti-Shia rhetoric, and have been strongly discouraging attacks on civilians.

Given that Zarqawi has become a loose cannon and that his actions are handicapping Al Qaeda's efforts, it seems reasonable to expect that an accident may befall him at some point in the near future. If handled right it can be made to look like he went out in a blaze of glory fighting American troops or that he was foully murdered. Either way, al Qaeda gets rid of a problem and gains another "martyr."

funny that, no?

How do you "capture" a person who vows to blow himself up ?

and according to all the "intelligence " you have gotten..including his LOCATION...he is wearing a suicide bombers belt ?

WHO do you choose to die to try to take him prisoner ?

Name the guy YOU choose to sacrifice his life to try to capture him .

its not his death per say we are worried about. its the people living in the houses nearby.

there is a question of whether its tactically sound to kill rather than capture

I was responding to Keruvalia on the above point. With respect to whether it's tactically sound to kill as opposed to capture, I personally feel that it would make little difference - the trial would have in all likelihood attracted so much publicity it would have been a charade. With respect to the "collateral damage" incurred by this attack I feel that if Zarqawi's capture could have been guaranteed they should have made greater efforts to avoid loss of civilian life, however if this were not the case then I would support the bombing. The slightly callous principle of "the greater good" would have to triumph.

But you obviously failed to connect on the same level that he did. Because it seems to have made him realise that nothing will bring his boy back. Not revenge, not violence, not surrender, not appeasement.
His son is dead, and that is that. Few people can face a fact like that and remain rational enough to step away and make the rational conclusions. He obviously can.


Oh, please. All you know is Hollywood movies and the world they created in your head.
None of us know "the enemy". Most of us don't even know ourselves, because our lives have been protected. We never had to find out, but Mr. Berg for example did.


I wonder what yours is, to be honest. Instead of justice, you advocate destruction and revenge, yet you don't seem to see a problem.
Which tells me that you would go as low as comparisons with your Enemy of the Day (tm) allow, that you really have no concept of personal ethics or morality, that really there is no difference between your view of the world, and Zarqawi's.

Tell me where I went wrong, dude. Prove to me that I'm not talking to a potential mass murderer right now.



I would kill the person with my own hands that killed my son for no good damm reason . NO doubt . Say what you will .

You sound like someone who has lived a VERY insulated life.

in the real world shit is diferent .

people who think like you are sheep ready for slaughter...thats a fact .
Ask the JEWS .

ask the Bosnians...the Armenians....the Ukaranians..etc...ad nauseum ...call me when planes stop crashing and heads stop lopping...and graves stop filling...

Peace and love will kill you faster than a bomb .

But you keep on living in delusion land...


I trust in Mr . Ruger...and his boys Smith 'n weson...and Remington and colt .

How do you "capture" a person who vows to blow himself up ?

and according to all the "intelligence " you have gotten..including his LOCATION...he is wearing a suicide bombers belt ?

Link/Source to that claim please?

WHO do you choose to die to try to take him prisoner ?

Name the guy YOU choose to sacrifice his life to try to capture him .

Tough shit. Thats what being in command is all about. Being ready to send your subordinates out to on a mission knowing they could die at any given time. You don't like it, you don't belong in the Command.

I'd sacrifice you though. ;)

interesting

this website (http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htmurph/articles/20060607.aspx) wrote the following yesterday:



funny that, no?

The Times is reporting that it was members of the Sunni insurgency who cut a deal with US forces and sold him out.

How do you "capture" a person who vows to blow himself up ?
In such a case one could still have shot him dead with a sniper rifle. Still not necessarily a reason to flatten a house an potentially other houses around it, potentially with innocent people getting hurt.

In such a case one could still have shot him dead with a sniper rifle. Still not necessarily a reason to flatten a house an potentially other houses around it, potentially with innocent people getting hurt.

I dont see how those around him were innocent of anything.

your delusional if you think otherwise.


Look at the photo's of the bomb blast.

then ask how many would have died trying to take him alive in an assualt .

Not a hard decision AT ALL .

I dont see how those around him were innocent of anything.
And the same goes for the more than fifty civilians who died in previous strikes on locations he was supposed to be at, but wasn't?

Look at the photo's of the bomb blast.
I did.

then ask how many would have died trying to take him alive in an assualt .
Not a hard decision AT ALL .
You don't trust your special forces operators very much, do you.

And the same goes for the more than fifty civilians who died in previous strikes on locations he was supposed to be at, but wasn't?


I did.


You don't trust your special forces operators very much, do you.


I trust them to be smart enough not to die when they do not have to .

Ultraextreme Sanity, you are the worst kind of prick, sitting behind a keyboard somewhere in america lecturing everyone.

your glorification of death and staggering disregard for civilian deaths tell me you are far closer to the zaquari mindset than any same person should be comfortable with. if you were born in iraq, you would be hacking heads off with the best of them on the strenght of tonights performance. actually, you probably dont have the stones for the action, you would be one of those loudmouth clerics who scream and shout about killing the infidel.

you sound like a thoroughly horrible bastard.

I dont see how those around him were innocent of anything.

Al-Z was a nutjob. The people living around him had no choice in the matter.


your delusional if you think otherwise.

Look at the photo's of the bomb blast.

then ask how many would have died trying to take him alive in an assualt .

Not a hard decision AT ALL .

Not as many as you suggest. He would not have had a large security detail as that would draw attention. If we wanted to capture him, the guys that would do it could take them down. If they couldn't, we could have called on the SAS and the G ahh heck I just blanked on the German special forces name.

Killing him and that nice video helped out a great deal political-wise. The shrub's numbers are in the toilet and he can now say we nailed this ass. The same for Blair.

It does help Iraq that he is gone.

The news reports I heard have said that Sunnis pointed him out. Anybody else hear of this?

I trust them to be smart enough not to die when they do not have to .

You really don't know any of them do you?

Just about all of them would have loved the chance to waste that asshole.

Ultraextreme Sanity, you are the worst kind of prick, sitting behind a keyboard somewhere in america lecturing everyone.

your glorification of death and staggering disregard for civilian deaths tell me you are far closer to the zaquari mindset than any same person should be comfortable with. if you were born in iraq, you would be hacking heads off with the best of them on the strenght of tonights performance. actually, you probably dont have the stones for the action, you would be one of those loudmouth clerics who scream and shout about killing the infidel.

you sound like a thoroughly horrible bastard.


Excuse me ?

Glorify what ?


I'll save the name calling and such for someone who gives a shit what you think.


The RIGHT guy DIED along with his followers .

Now say what you will to try to change that simple fact .

ask me if I care .

last I LOOKED the peole of Iraq were runnig around celibrating the assholes death ..


Maybe YOU should send his family...that disowned hinm ...a sympathy card ..

Excuse me ?

Glorify what ?


I'll save the name calling and such for someone who gives a shit what you think.


The RIGHT guy DIED along with his followers .*

Now say what you will to try to change that simple fact .

ask me if I care .

in your own time you can figure out the contradictions in that post.

you are scum

good night all.




*some of whom were of course, just neighbours of a house he happened to have a meeting near

Al-Z was a nutjob. The people living around him had no choice in the matter.



Not as many as you suggest. He would not have had a large security detail as that would draw attention. If we wanted to capture him, the guys that would do it could take them down. If they couldn't, we could have called on the SAS and the G ahh heck I just blanked on the German special forces name.

Killing him and that nice video helped out a great deal political-wise. The shrub's numbers are in the toilet and he can now say we nailed this ass. The same for Blair.

It does help Iraq that he is gone.

The news reports I heard have said that Sunnis pointed him out. Anybody else hear of this?


Actually the rumor is someone in his own organization pointed him out....and 17 other spots were hit at the same time his was...


I guess the Iraqi's got tired of being blown the hell up .

either that or his own dudes got tired of blowing up Muslims...

Actually the rumor is someone in his own organization pointed him out....and 17 other spots were hit at the same time his was...


I guess the Iraqi's got tired of being blown the hell up .

either that or his own dudes got tired of blowing up Muslims...


Good Ridens to the death of that pile of decaying fecal matter

Who's life would you sacrifice to make your point ?

I don't have to answer that because there are already hundreds of thousands of men and women who have volunteered to sacrifice their lives to make my point.

So ....

However, if I did have to truly make this decision, I'd say .... you.

Excuse me ?

Glorify what ?


I'll save the name calling and such for someone who gives a shit what you think.


The RIGHT guy DIED along with his followers .

Now say what you will to try to change that simple fact .

ask me if I care .

last I LOOKED the peole of Iraq were runnig around celibrating the assholes death ..


Maybe YOU should send his family...that disowned hinm ...a sympathy card ..

Family that disowned him? The guy has no family history whatsoever.

Get off your fucking high horse. It's true that he died with some followers, but some innocents were also killed in the process.

Family that disowned him? The guy has no family history whatsoever.
Well, that may not be quite right...

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/391DEB60-34D8-4139-8388-C3A64C0F4474.htm

Family that disowned him? The guy has no family history whatsoever.

Get off your fucking high horse. It's true that he died with some followers, but some innocents were also killed in the process.


and your so sure of this ?


What innocents died ? Who are they ? Who is claiming this ?

You claim it as a fact ...is it ?

High horse my ass.


I wouldnt sacrifice ONE persons life..when a nice five hundred pound bomb ...or two...would do the job... so thats a BAD thing ?????

WHAT FUCKING UNIVERSE DO YOU LIVE IN ?


Again ...WHAT INNOCENTS DIED ?????


tell me so I can grieve .

tell me so I can grieve .
Dude, I posted three links of previous airstrikes, killing dozens.

And in this case, so far unconfirmed statements from the Iraqi PM only account for three of the six people killed.

You just deny that innocent people died, you're not after really finding out.

He got owned.

Well this will at least mess up the Terrorists... For at least a few days. There will be allot of massed not well thought out attacks soon.

What's funny but that message from his group is signed. Abu Abdul-Rahman al-Iraqi. The spiritual Adviser...

He was inside the building also. He's dead too. So who signed it?

Dude, I posted three links of previous airstrikes, killing dozens.

And in this case, so far unconfirmed statements from the Iraqi PM only account for three of the six people killed.

You just deny that innocent people died, you're not after really finding out.


I deny nothing...never had...

THIS air strike not others..WHAT innocent died ?

THIS air strike that killed the head of Al Queda in Iraq and his followers at the meeting...


SHOW proof...not accusations .

What innocents would they even let be around them ?

THE MOST WANTED GUY IN IRAQ ?

25 million dollar bounty ....he would let someone ..who may recognise him close ???


Again ...what innocents ?????????

No bullshit...in this case what innocents ???

What innocents died ? Who are they ? Who is claiming this ?

THE FUCKING BABY! HOW MANY FUCKING TIMES DO WE HAVE TO TELL YOU THAT?!

Jesus Christ. Are you capable of retaining information? Hell, are you even capable of reading?

THE FUCKING BABY! HOW MANY FUCKING TIMES DO WE HAVE TO TELL YOU THAT?!

Jesus Christ. Are you capable of retaining information? Hell, are you even capable of reading?


What baby ?

What baby ?
The one that was killed when the bombs were dropped. Are you dense?

What baby ?
He was hiding in a house, there was also a Family in that house sheltering him. There was a baby in the family. Everyone went Boom. Including the Baby.

But that's the Parents fault for hiding an international Terrorist.

he wasn't the #1 anything, anywhere. do try to keep up.

He was the Number 1 terror leader in Iraq. Do try to keep up.

yea right like when clinton decided NOT to kill bin laden ?

That is indeed true.

THIS air strike not others..
Why not the others? Exactly the same situation - they thought they knew where he was, they bombed the place and killed innocent civilians.

What baby ?
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/08/world/middleeast/08cnd-iraq.html?ex=1149912000&en=32b81e5316a5e20a&ei=5087%0A
Six people were killed in the strike: Mr. Zarqawi, his spiritual adviser and four other people including a woman and a child, the military said.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=849742006
People living in the village expressed disbelief. "Zarqawi. Zarqawi. Zarqawi. That's all we hear about. Zarqawi was not here. This home belonged to displaced people," said a resident, holding a teddy bear and a child's knapsack from the rubble.

Clinton did try--he missed, and he says it is the greatest regret of his presidency that he didn't get him. The Bush administration, however, has had precious little to say on this act of extremely poor judgment, and I doubt they ever will.

Unfortunately there were a few times that he passed up the opportunity despite having a predator armed with a missile targeting him.

What innocents died ? Who are they ? Who is claiming this ?

You claim it as a fact ...is it ?

I wouldnt sacrifice ONE persons life..when a nice five hundred pound bomb ...or two...would do the job... so thats a BAD thing ?????

Again ...WHAT INNOCENTS DIED ?????

tell me so I can grieve .

I don't know where you've gotten this idea so firmly entrenched in your head that had the US sent in ground forces there would have been a massacre. If you're privy to some kind've insider knowledge on this one then please by all means share it with us.

They have not been identified yet but among the dead are a woman and a child. The Times is reporting: "The two bombs killed al-Zarqawi, his aides and a woman and child." Here is your source:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-2216462,00.html

Now grieve away.

I personally am willing to put my faith in the US military and believe that their detailed intelligence, tactical knowledge and information which they are privy to supersedes that of my armchair psuedo-knowledge and have faith that they made the right call on this matter.

Whilst you have done your best to persuade me otherwise I still hold firm to this.

On a more general note I wish to say that I find it thoroughly disheartening when a person becomes so consumed by the pursuit of vengeance and loathing that they lose track of what we are fighting for, when they appear all too willing to disregard the very civility and compassion that make us better than these barbaric nihilists and who would eagerly whore out the values of the very nations they purport to defend.

Why not the others? Exactly the same situation - they thought they knew where he was, they bombed the place and killed innocent civilians.


Like I said THEIR FAULT FOR LIVING WITH THE GUY!
If you take a wanted man into your home there is a chance you'll end up in the crossfire.

They had a choice. Tell him to leave (I bet he would just kill them then)
Or just give him the house and go slum somewhere else.

Though it's not a good thing that they died. They made the choice. It was the wrong choice. And sadly, they died because of it. Natural Conquence.

Does it matter? You don't need to prove to me that al-Zarqawi, if he was in fact guilty of what he was accused of, was no angel. I'm not particularly sympathetic to him or his organization. Of course, I'm not particularly sympathetic to the gang of murderous criminals that invaded the country and allowed him to do what he did, either.

You think Zarqawi was innocent? My God. This is making me sick. Allowed him to do what he did? Oh my god. Grow up. We've been after him for awhile and finally nailed this son of a bitch and all you can say is that the bastard was innocent?

We will probably see a reduction in CIVILIAN casualties in Iraq, because the Iraqi nationalist insurgents mainly target Americans, Iraqi soldiers, and Iraqi police, while Al-Qaeda favors civilian targets. Until, of course, they get a new leader. Still, while he is a martyr, it also has to be disheartening for Al-Qaeda in Iraq that their leader got blown to bits.

Meanwhile, kudos to the Jordanian intelligence for nabbing this guy!

I agree with the post.

Why not the others? Exactly the same situation - they thought they knew where he was, they bombed the place and killed innocent civilians.


http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/08/world/middleeast/08cnd-iraq.html?ex=1149912000&en=32b81e5316a5e20a&ei=5087%0A

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=849742006


So it was wrong to kill him ...because a baby was there that no one knew about ?

provided that the baby was actually there ...and that the mom and dad did not bring him / her...the baby just happened to be with the terrorist leader of Al - Queda in Iraq ....

so now ...the baby killers that ...bombed the terrorist are going to hell....

In this case they DID get the terrorist...the guy blowing up half of Iraq with suicide bombers and car bombs when he wasnt busy chopping off heads ...


I get it .

Like I said THEIR FAULT FOR LIVING WITH THE GUY!
If you take a wanted man into your home there is a chance you'll end up in the crossfire.

They had a choice. Tell him to leave (I bet he would just kill them then)
Or just give him the house and go slum somewhere else.

Though it's not a good thing that they died. They made the choice. It was the wrong choice. And sadly, they died because of it. Natural Conquence.
Yeah, babies can choose where to live. Prick.

Like I said THEIR FAULT FOR LIVING WITH THE GUY!
What?

They were the wrong houses. There was no one there. The US Military admitted as much. They were intelligence fuck-ups, and because no one bothered to check by sending in ground forces, civilians died.

That's one of my points to start with: if you only aim to kill someone by bombs from a distance, the risk of hurting innocents is higher. And that's apart from the political boost an al-Zarqawi would've given the Iraqi government.

You think Zarqawi was innocent? My God. This is making me sick. Allowed him to do what he did? Oh my god. Grow up. We've been after him for awhile and finally nailed this son of a bitch and all you can say is that the bastard was innocent?
Hey, Corny. There's something called "reading". Learn how to do it, instead of pulling random shit out of your ass.

The Times is reporting that it was members of the Sunni insurgency who cut a deal with US forces and sold him out.

This is far more likely.

so now ...the baby killers that ...bombed the terrorist are going to hell....
If you believe in hell, yeah, they probably will. If you kill innocent people (willingly in this case, as they obviously weighed the costs and benefits and decided to bomb) that's not good.

Whether or not it was worth it is another debate - it probably was. Zarqawi was pretty close to a monster, and he probably deserved death. I just disagree with the way the US went about the whole thing.

I've got to say that it's interesting how this issue of collateral damage is the centre of such vehement debate on this forum and it's hardly getting any air whatsoever in any of the media outlets that are running with the issue.

Maybe it's because they have something of a coherent grasp of the relative significance of two civilians being killed and Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi finally being ended.

The one that was killed when the bombs were dropped. Are you dense?

Apparently he is. He's even making me look bad. I thought I was a comedian but apparently I have some competition.

Christ ...I get it...finally ...it took a while ...but you hammered your point home .... ..all I have to do to stay alive after I behead a bunch of infidels ...blow up a few dozen mosques....a few hundred police recruits ...some children of the infidels and the occupiers...a few hundred civilians who get in the way.. some recruits... a few dogs ....and a couple pidgeons...

IS TO INVITE A WOMEN AND A BABY.


NO ONE CAN TOUCH ME THEN ..........I AM FREE.......


Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhaaaahahahahaahahahahahahaha.....

Hey, Corny. There's something called "reading". Learn how to do it, instead of pulling random shit out of your ass.

Excuse me what? I don't think I caught the insult.

Hey, Corny. There's something called "reading". Learn how to do it, instead of pulling random shit out of your ass.

In fairness I too find it pretty nauseating/incomprehensively stupid that Soheran believes that not enough evidence has been provided before he can say for sure that Zarqawi was guilty of what he's accused of.

If you believe in hell, yeah, they probably will. If you kill innocent people (willingly in this case, as they obviously weighed the costs and benefits and decided to bomb) that's not good.

Whether or not it was worth it is another debate - it probably was. Zarqawi was pretty close to a monster, and he probably deserved death. I just disagree with the way the US went about the whole thing.


Your assuming they KNEW a baby was at a terrorist meeting .

Christ ...I get it...finally ...it took a while ...but you hammered your point home .... ..all I have to do to stay alive after I behead a bunch of infidels ...blow up a few dozen mosques....a few hundred police recruits ...some children of the infidels and the occupiers...a few hundred civilians who get in the way.. some recruits... a few dogs ....and a couple pidgeons...

IS TO INVITE A WOMEN AND A BABY.


NO ONE CAN TOUCH ME THEN ..........I AM FREE.......


Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhaaaahahahahaahahahahahahaha.....

Is that how they print maniacal laughter in all the Super Ted comics you read?

http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/5769/zarqari6ob.png

I've got to say that it's interesting how this issue of collateral damage is the centre of such vehement debate on this forum and it's hardly getting any air whatsoever in any of the story's that are running with the issue.

Maybe it's because they have something of a coherent grasp of the relative significance of two civilians being killed and Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi finally being ended.
Welcome to NationStates General, please enjoy your stay.

I think the point wandered off of asking why US forces decided to drop two bombs on him (and cause damage) instead of attempting to take him alive for trial.

Excuse me what? I don't think I caught the insult.
Sorry, DK got me in a bad mood. Basically, you were assuming that Soheran thought that the guy with the funny name was innocent. The way I read it, Soheran doubted that he was responsible for every last thing that was attributed to him. Apologies for the insult.

Christ ...I get it...finally ...it took a while ...but you hammered your point home ....
You really are dense. You hammered that home quite well.

First I suggested that it would have been better to capture him alive. There are dozens of units on the planet which would have been qualified to do so. Then I said he would face a trial, be convicted and sentenced to death (even though I oppose the death penalty).

You chose to interpret that as me supporting Zarqawi, and also hinted that he had threatened to blow himself up rather than being captured.

I acknowledged that, and instead suggested that a sniper rifle might have been a way to reduce collateral damage. Again, pretty much all special forces on the planet could have done this.

You chose to ignore that point.

So I continued to outline my reasons for this, aside from the political ones these are that you end up using a bomb which will do area damage to kill a single person, thus risking or accepting that innocent civilians will die.

And you choose to interpret that as me believing Zarqawi should be free.

You need a reality check. Your "liberal" boogeyman doesn't exist.

Apparently he is. He's even making me look bad. I thought I was a comedian but apparently I have some competition.


Nahhhh I just didnt read the news ...being at work and all and just listening to the radio..

But now that I know the news...what do you do ? Did they KNOW a baby and mom were there ? Or did they KNOW that the number one Al Queda guy was there ?

Get real ...its a miracle they finally tracked the guy down...and it seems his OWN guys turned him in..you think they said " BTW there might be some kids hanging out " ?

The kid didnt know he was a terrorist ...but the PARENTS ?.....so who's fault is it that the kid was hanging out with a guy with a 25 million dollar bounty on his head .....


remind me to take my kid sky diving without a chute ....its all the planes fault .

Your assuming they KNEW a baby was at a terrorist meeting .
No, what I said is that they knew that civilians would likely die as well, when they drop two 250kg bombs. They considered that an acceptable side effect, and went ahead.

That could perhaps be justified if there was absolutely no other choice, but they obviously could've done things differently, if it is indeed true that they had special forces on the ground closeby.

The arguments put up by the people who say he should have been taken alive are valid points.

However, you must understand what the military is thinking when they get a verified tip on a high-level Al-Qaeda official. They are thinking of how to eliminate the target with the lowest chance of failure.

Sending a team of Special Forces, into a city, possibly filled with hostiles, to capture al-Zarqawi would have a high chance of failure, especially if they were going to take him alive. You have to have a successful insertion, execution and extraction in a hostile environment.

There are nine principles of war that any good commander follows. One of those is simplicity. A Special Forces mission to capture al-Zarqawi violates that principle because there are too many variables. If one thing goes wrong, the whole mission is shot to hell and al-Zarqawi gets away. The military does not want to miss him when they are certain of where he is. They chose to take the route where they were 99% certain it would work.

The military made the right decision. It is sad that civilians died, and that should be avoided when possible. However, al-Zarqawi has killed many more and will not be able to any more.

You really are dense. You hammered that home quite well.

Not as dense as you may think...

First I suggested that it would have been better to capture him alive. There are dozens of units on the planet which would have been qualified to do so. Then I said he would face a trial, be convicted and sentenced to death (even though I oppose the death penalty).


bullshit...they have to get in range without getting killed...and if it was that easy ...why did this asshole stay alive so long ?

You chose to interpret that as me supporting Zarqawi, and also hinted that he had threatened to blow himself up rather than being captured.

because he has...jordanian sources have him always wearing a bomb belt so as not to be taken alive...not uncommon among his followers . ALSO his own words .



I acknowledged that, and instead suggested that a sniper rifle might have been a way to reduce collateral damage. Again, pretty much all special forces on the planet could have done this.


sure like all the other hundreds of times they almost had him .
not for anything you watch too much tv or something...a thousand yards iss about the furthest ....how do you get close to a house ...in a hostile neighborhood without being discovered or the target getting away ?

You chose to ignore that point.

It deserved to be ignored .

So I continued to outline my reasons for this, aside from the political ones these are that you end up using a bomb which will do area damage to kill a single person, thus risking or accepting that innocent civilians will die.

the best result would have been capturing him and putting him in the circus ...the next best is killing him...the least best is killing him with collaterall damage . Its kind of obviouse .

And you choose to interpret that as me believing Zarqawi should be free.

do you think they shouldnt have killed him ?

You need a reality check. Your "liberal" boogeyman doesn't exist.
You must be kidding me .

No, what I said is that they knew that civilians would likely die as well, when they drop two 250kg bombs. They considered that an acceptable side effect, and went ahead.

That could perhaps be justified if there was absolutely no other choice, but they obviously could've done things differently, if it is indeed true that they had special forces on the ground closeby.


Your assuming the special forces were not there just to surround the area in case he tried to get away...and you failed to note that 17 other target were hit at the same time ...or around the time ..also " in the area " what within a mile ...ten miles ....20 miles ? two feet ? What is in the " area " I am in the area of the US ..right now .


at any rate the late news is on ...along with the jokes...

so far they have Him dead with ..dick cheny got him..


And now that the number one looney tune in the world was killed ..


Ann Coulter gets to move up .

just out of interest, do the US military even try and capture people anymore?

we saw it with the hussein brothers and now here. just launch a rocket and thats that? seems either lacking in ambition or confidence in the ground troops

unless they didnt want him talking for some reason


Hey SR, if you actually watched the Zarqawi video where he gets bombed in his sleep you will see the plumes of smoke coming from the ground. Those are ESCAPE HOLES!

Not to mention the lookouts he had watching for an approaching US raid. The one they couldn't spot...a lone f16....:D

They got him, and that's all that matters.

Oh, and if you think the brass lacks confidence in the troops....look at men such as Capt Brian Chontosh-google him. Bigtime Hero-read about his exploits. And that marine that lost 60% of his blood after getting shot by an AK 10 times and still fighting. Hard core man. Our troops are the finest (Marines especially).

And as I said AQ is the extreemely small minority in Iraq. Why elevate their status as if they are the top threat? The majority of insurgents, who are native to Iraq (unlike AQ and the suicide bombers), are the ones targetting the coalition forces and are who I would classify as the real top threat.

Because the took down two of our greatest building, and they are the reason we launched the WOT.

bullshit...they have to get in range without getting killed...and if it was that easy ...why did this asshole stay alive so long ?
Because they didn't have a clue where he was.

sure like all the other hundreds of times they almost had him .
Obviously they never did.

not for anything you watch too much tv or something...a thousand yards iss about the furthest ....how do you get close to a house ...in a hostile neighborhood without being discovered or the target getting away ?
What hostile neighbourhood? As far as I know, this was a village somewhere in the desert. As you heard from their testimony, the villagers thought there were refugees living in that house.
Move a drone into the area, get a few SpecOps to monitor, and a few sniper teams in position. Wait until he leaves the house, and shoot him dead. For Delta Force for example, that should be a routine operation.

do you think they shouldnt have killed him ?
I believe I was the first person in this thread to say "Good Riddance", if you'd like to have a look at page one.
But it would still have been a better option to either capture him, or kill him without taking four other people with him (I take it on face value that one was his spiritual advisor, and one of the women was his wife).

You must be kidding me .
What, one can't disagree with the actions of the US Military and not support terrorists?

and you failed to note that 17 other target were hit at the same time ...or around the time
I assume these were also targets of importance, but they knew that Zarqawi was in this one position.

Well in all fairness the media isn't the most trustworthy source in the world.
If I see a body,I'll believe it.
Or the letters on Mount Sinai.
Either way suits me.

Youll need to fly to the funeral.
Even then you'll have to have seen him before to know it's not a body double.
It is probably a big conspiracy and coverup anyway and Zarky is sipping mint juleps with JFK and Elvis in a secret Swiss chalet.

Because the took down two of our greatest building, and they are the reason we launched the WOT.
And they were not IN Iraq till we went in.

FLASH!

Fast Breaking News

Dateline Baghdad

In a shocker that caught many completely unawares its being widely reported that Al Qaeda big wig Musab al-Zarqawi is still dead.

Stay tuned for further updates on this story

Look at your fingernails. You might say, "They need cutting, but since they'll grow back anyway, I won't bother". But you cut your fingernails.

It only takes a fanatic to be a terrorist. But to be a top terrorist, you have to be intelligent, clever, and fanatic. Those don't grow on trees.
I bet someone has answered to this already but I have only few minutes...

Al-Zargawi was not clever and certainly not intelligent. He could barely write. He was a troubled teenager who turned into troubled fanatic. He was just at the right place at the right time and got famous. I'm quite sure there are several much more intelligent terrorist leaders just waiting to get his place.

Welcome to NationStates General, please enjoy your stay.

I think the point wandered off of asking why US forces decided to drop two bombs on him (and cause damage) instead of attempting to take him alive for trial.

Probably because they wanted him dead instead of released on his own recogizance. Anyone that was hanging out with him were undoubtedly giving sound bites for future kidnapping tapes and posing for pictures for Al-Jazeera, if they weren't actively plotting to kill their fellow Iraqis and any incidental Americans or innocent journalists that might get in the way. Frankly, I think you ought to be celebrating this event. The only negative I can see in this is that Osama wasn't there to share the love.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/06/08/international/i003054D33.DTL

While nice... but how many times have we heard this before?

a murderous thug...the world is better off for it.

i hate violence and death,but that mf'er deserved to be boiled alive.:sniper:

If they did send Special Forces in, More people might have died in the resulting Firefight! (Like the whole freaking Village at the max.)

X amount of People and possibly US soldiers while the Terrorist gets away>
3 People and the Terrorist is gone for good.

Decisions Decisions.... Oh I'll choose the one that puts multiple Lives in danger because I don't want to possibly hurt whoever is with him. But he may escape, open fire on all the neighboring houses, or he could blow himself up and kill those inside ANYWAY. But hey it's the MORAL thing to do.

Idiots, the lot of you.


Yeah, babies can choose where to live. Prick.
The Parents are responseable for the child. The child currently had no choice in the matter, the people you should be mad at are the (Late) parents. But as usual EVERYTHING is the US's fault.
Jackass.


P.S. I hate Bush and everything he stands for but do I think this guy deserved to die. Hell yeah.

Probably because they wanted him dead instead of released on his own recogizance. Anyone that was hanging out with him were undoubtedly giving sound bites for future kidnapping tapes and posing for pictures for Al-Jazeera, if they weren't actively plotting to kill their fellow Iraqis and any incidental Americans or innocent journalists that might get in the way. Frankly, I think you ought to be celebrating this event. The only negative I can see in this is that Osama wasn't there to share the love.
Didn't say that I wasn't, I was mearly pointing out why the thread had wandered onto this particular tangent.

You think Zarqawi was innocent?

I think he was innocent until proven guilty by a court of law.

Sad that I like America more than you, isn't it?

Remember the "card deck"? Only 10 of those 55 most wanted are still missing. Has the situation cooled down in Iraq?

Er, the deck of cards were the most wanted of the Iraqi Regime.
The regime isn't fighting the Coalition anymore. Al-Qaeda is.

Is Iraq cool? Vis a vis an insurrection, no. By the fact that the old Iraqi Regime no longer exists and is on trail for war crimes? Yep.

I think he was innocent until proven guilty by a court of law.

Sad that I like America more than you, isn't it?

He gave up his option for a swift trial by his peers by:
a) not being an American citizen
and
b) being on the lam for years.

Sorry, I have no sympathy for this bastard.

Fat chance of that happening. There is no indication of even a hunt going on for him. Judging by the number of taliban captured in NWFP area, it is clear that it is a case of lack of will (both on the part of US and Pakistan) and in such a case, I do not see a possibility of his capture/death anytime soon.

Simply, we do not know. C'mon, he's an overly tall Arabic guy that needs constant medical attention of a fairly sophisticated nature. For all WE know, he could have been picked up YEARS ago and is being held in Henderson Nevada in an underground suite by the CIA!

Oh and I love it when Saddam Hussein is mentioned in the same breath as Bin Laden and co.

A war aim is a war aim.

Lets see, his ideology is having more takers now, he is finding followers without direct recruition (7/7, the recent London raids and Canada raids indicate that the wannabes were inspired by his ideology and methodology).

With Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq still in contest and Somalia a victory for him, even the military score is in his favor.

No one ever said changing the world would be easy. As I recall, Indian Independence was impossible at one time, too. :)
(Hell, so were seen the defeat of Nazi Germany or American Independence for that matter...)

Yawn.

This is the same Zarqawi that a while back you were all laughing at and dismissing as an incompetent assclown who couldn't even handle a machine gun properly. And now that he's dead you're all celebrating like the Death Star just fucking exploded. Celebrating the death of an incompetent Al Qaeda wannabe like it was V-Day is like actually caring that Al Bundy scored 4 touchdowns in a single game.

Remember the other "milestones" that was supposed to turn the "War on Terror" around?

"Mission Accomplished"?

Saddam getting his ass hauled out of the spider hole?

But as the old song (and probably the insurgents too) would say, "Oblah Dee Oblah Dah, Life Goes On."

I hear that World War 2 didn't end in 1943, either. ;)

Real life isn't World of Warcraft. Things take time.

they also 'got' 6 civilians including a woman and a child.

How many "valid targets" were at the WTC? :headbang:
This is war, not a Steven Segal movie!

He looks dead.
Now for the other troublemakers the same medicine...

Le Woot!

Why are you calling for the murder of Dave Chappelle?

That depends. Is he making new episodes or not?!? :D

And? There are at least hundreds like him more than willing to take his place.

And? There are at least hundreds like him more than willing to take his place.

More targets! Yay!

How many "valid targets" were at the WTC? :headbang:
This is war, not a Steven Segal movie!

Sorry, I'm trying for the life of me to find the link between Al-Z and the WTC attacks.....

I think he was innocent until proven guilty by a court of law.

Sad that I like America more than you, isn't it?
The dude makes video tapes promoting his mass murders as a brand, in his holy *war* against America. To the extent that his exploits offend the sensibilities of other noted mass murders, no less. And you're *seriously* arguing it should be treated as a criminal offense by a citizen of the United States, who is not under the control of the American armed forces, and where he and the powers that be are contesting each other's version of events? The only reasonable explaination is my sarcasm detector has been secretly replaced by Foldier's crystals.

Just in case.... The Supreme Court's view on the matter isn't encouraging considering their ruling on the American warcrimes trials in Manilla. Of course the Japanese citizens that were so quickly rushed to the gallows actually had some standing under the Geneva Conventions. Unlike guys who hide in civilian populations, making them into legitimate military targets, and have neither the trappings of a military unit nor the saction of a recognized government. His rights, they don't exist beyond esoteric theory. In the abscense of the protection of US law, and before the US Military, one's own might is the be all and end all of one's "rights." That's the bargain HE struck.

For all the celebration, at the end of the day, he's a dead, new balance wearing, thug of a failed video store clerk. Next.

And they were not IN Iraq till we went in.




Sure they were

Those who try to whitewash Saddams record dont dispute this evidence; they just ignore it. So lets review the evidence, all of it on the public record for months or years:

* Abdul Rahman Yasin was the only member of the al Qaeda cell that detonated the 1993 World Trade Center bomb to remain at large in the Clinton years. He fled to Iraq. U.S. forces recently discovered a cache of documents in Tikrit, Saddams hometown, that show that Iraq gave Mr. Yasin both a house and monthly salary.

* Bin Laden met at least eight times with officers of Iraq's Special Security Organization, a secret police agency run by Saddam's son Qusay, and met with officials from Saddams mukhabarat, its external intelligence service, according to intelligence made public by Secretary of State Colin Powell, who was speaking before the United Nations Security Council on February 6, 2003.

* Sudanese intelligence officials told me that their agents had observed meetings between Iraqi intelligence agents and bin Laden starting in 1994, when bin Laden lived in Khartoum.

* Bin Laden met the director of the Iraqi mukhabarat in 1996 in Khartoum, according to Mr. Powell.

* An al Qaeda operative now held by the U.S. confessed that in the mid-1990s, bin Laden had forged an agreement with Saddams men to cease all terrorist activities against the Iraqi dictator, Mr. Powell told the United Nations.

* In 1999 the Guardian, a British newspaper, reported that Farouk Hijazi, a senior officer in Iraqs mukhabarat, had journeyed deep into the icy mountains near Kandahar, Afghanistan, in December 1998 to meet with al Qaeda men. Mr. Hijazi is "thought to have offered bin Laden asylum in Iraq," the Guardian reported.

* In October 2000, another Iraqi intelligence operative, Salah Suleiman, was arrested near the Afghan border by Pakistani authorities, according to Janes Foreign Report, a respected international newsletter. Janes reported that Suleiman was shuttling between Iraqi intelligence and Ayman al Zawahiri, now al Qaedas No. 2 man.

(Why are all of those meetings significant? The London Observer reports that FBI investigators cite a captured al Qaeda field manual in Afghanistan, which "emphasizes the value of conducting discussions about pending terrorist attacks face to face, rather than by electronic means.")

* As recently as 2001, Iraqs embassy in Pakistan was used as a "liaison" between the Iraqi dictator and al Qaeda, Mr. Powell told the United Nations.

* Spanish investigators have uncovered documents seized from Yusuf Galan -- who is charged by a Spanish court with being "directly involved with the preparation and planning" of the Sept. 11 attacks -- that show the terrorist was invited to a party at the Iraqi embassy in Madrid. The invitation used his "al Qaeda nom de guerre," Londons Independent reports.

* An Iraqi defector to Turkey, known by his cover name as "Abu Mohammed," told Gwynne Roberts of the Sunday Times of London that he saw bin Ladens fighters in camps in Iraq in 1997. At the time, Mohammed was a colonel in Saddams Fedayeen. He described an encounter at Salman Pak, the training facility southeast of Baghdad. At that vast compound run by Iraqi intelligence, Muslim militants trained to hijack planes with knives -- on a full-size Boeing 707. Col. Mohammed recalls his first visit to Salman Pak this way: "We were met by Colonel Jamil Kamil, the camp manager, and Major Ali Hawas. I noticed that a lot of people were queuing for food. (The major) said to me: Youll have nothing to do with these people. They are Osama bin Ladens group and the PKK and Mojahedin-e Khalq."

* In 1998, Abbas al-Janabi, a longtime aide to Saddams son Uday, defected to the West. At the time, he repeatedly told reporters that there was a direct connection between Iraq and al Qaeda.

*The Sunday Times found a Saddam loyalist in a Kurdish prison who claims to have been Dr. Zawahiris bodyguard during his 1992 visit with Saddam in Baghdad. Dr. Zawahiri was a close associate of bin Laden at the time and was present at the founding of al Qaeda in 1989.

* Following the defeat of the Taliban, almost two dozen bin Laden associates "converged on Baghdad and established a base of operations there," Mr. Powell told the United Nations in February 2003. From their Baghdad base, the secretary said, they supervised the movement of men, materiel and money for al Qaedas global network.

* In 2001, an al Qaeda member "bragged that the situation in Iraq was good," according to intelligence made public by Mr. Powell.

* That same year, Saudi Arabian border guards arrested two al Qaeda members entering the kingdom from Iraq.

* Abu Musaab al-Zarqawi oversaw an al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan, Mr. Powell told the United Nations. His specialty was poisons. Wounded in fighting with U.S. forces, he sought medical treatment in Baghdad in May 2002. When Zarqawi recovered, he restarted a training camp in northern Iraq. Zarqawis Iraq cell was later tied to the October 2002 murder of Lawrence Foley, an official of the U.S. Agency for International Development, in Amman, Jordan. The captured assassin confessed that he received orders and funds from Zarqawis cell in Iraq, Mr. Powell said. His accomplice escaped to Iraq.

*Zarqawi met with military chief of al Qaeda, Mohammed Ibrahim Makwai (aka Saif al-Adel) in Iran in February 2003, according to intelligence sources cited by the Washington Post.

* Mohammad Atef, the head of al Qaedas military wing until the U.S. killed him in Afghanistan in November 2001, told a senior al Qaeda member now in U.S. custody that the terror network needed labs outside of Afghanistan to manufacture chemical weapons, Mr. Powell said. "Where did they go, where did they look?" said the secretary. "They went to Iraq."

* Abu Abdullah al-Iraqi was sent to Iraq by bin Laden to purchase poison gases several times between 1997 and 2000. He called his relationship with Saddams regime "successful," Mr. Powell told the United Nations.

* Mohamed Mansour Shahab, a smuggler hired by Iraq to transport weapons to bin Laden in Afghanistan, was arrested by anti-Hussein Kurdish forces in May, 2000. He later told his story to American intelligence and a reporter for the New Yorker magazine.

* Documents found among the debris of the Iraqi Intelligence Center show that Baghdad funded the Allied Democratic Forces, a Ugandan terror group led by an Islamist cleric linked to bin Laden. According to a Londons Daily Telegraph, the organization offered to recruit "youth to train for the jihad" at a "headquarters for international holy warrior network" to be established in Baghdad.

* Mullah Melan Krekar, ran a terror group (the Ansar al-Islam) linked to both bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Mr. Krekar admitted to a Kurdish newspaper that he met bin Laden in Afghanistan and other senior al Qaeda officials. His acknowledged meetings with bin Laden go back to 1988. When he organized Ansar al Islam in 2001 to conduct suicide attacks on Americans, "three bin Laden operatives showed up with a gift of $300,000 to undertake jihad," Newsday reported. Mr. Krekar is now in custody in the Netherlands. His group operated in portion of northern Iraq loyal to Saddam Hussein -- and attacked independent Kurdish groups hostile to Saddam. A spokesman for the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan told a United Press International correspondent that Mr. Krekars group was funded by "Saddam Husseins regime in Baghdad."

* After October 2001, hundreds of al Qaeda fighters are believed to have holed up in the Ansar al-Islams strongholds inside northern Iraq.




how didi you manage to miss this info ?

http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=092503F

I cant help but notice that Zarqawi still has a recognizable face and a head still attached to his body even though 2 500-lb bombs were dropped on him.

Sure they were

how didi you manage to miss this info ?

http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=092503F

Don't confuse the left-leaning people with someone who actually pays attention to facts.

Don't confuse the left-leaning people with someone who actually pays attention to facts.

Dont confuse the right-leaning people with people who manage to convey the actual facts.

Dont confuse the right-leaning people with people who manage to convey the actual facts.


Don't confuse those who live in buffers with those who ought to be flushed.

*tazes Kazus*

Dont confuse the right-leaning people with people who manage to convey the actual facts.
Anything non-factual about the post he made listing all the contacts and activity in and with Iraq?

Nope.

Anything non-factual about the post he made listing all the contacts and activity in and with Iraq?

Nope.

Hahahahahaha....oh man....thats funny.

How the FUCK would you know personally whats factual and whats not? There are 3 sides to every story, remember...

Hahahahahaha....oh man....thats funny.

How the FUCK would you know personally whats factual and whats not? There are 3 sides to every story, remember...
How the FUCK would you know personally whats factual and whats not?

How the FUCK would you know personally whats factual and whats not?

I dont claim to.

Can you debunk the claim that Al-Qaeda and Iraq had absolutely no relationship because Saddam was not the Islamic extremist Bin Laden is? (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0211-11.htm)


Bottom line, you have 2 articles claiming opposites. Which one is correct?

Hes dead, great.

Its only four or 6 years too late, but still, we have a trophy death to show everyone what a great job were doing in Iraq, right?

Wrong.

Somebody already has his job, and is overseeing things just as he did.
The insurgency still continues, and Iraq still teeters on the brink of all out civil war, just as it did the day before this bozo was bombed.

One asshole was killed....whoop-dee!

Its still a shitstorm over there, and the mistakes keepm piling up.

This isnt a victory, its a term paper, thats done half-assed, and turned in far too late.

I dont claim to.

Can you debunk the claim that Al-Qaeda and Iraq had absolutely no relationship because Saddam was not the Islamic extremist Bin Laden is? (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0211-11.htm)

Bottom line, you have 2 articles claiming opposites. Which one is correct?

The article claiming a connection has more sources, varying sources, that show a connection.

It is not necessary to be ideologically mated in order to work together. Saddam is an opportunist, and could care less about ideology. All that is required is that they have a common enemy.

I've seen the airliner that was used for hijacking training at Salman Pak. The same airliner used by various al-Q trainees in the 1990s. Not necessarily training for 9-11, but just training. They have the paperwork showing that al-Q trained there.

That's all the connection I need. I've seen the airliner, and I've seen the paperwork.

The article claiming a connection has more sources, varying sources, that show a connection.

It is not necessary to be ideologically mated in order to work together. Saddam is an opportunist, and could care less about ideology. All that is required is that they have a common enemy.

I've seen the airliner that was used for hijacking training at Salman Pak. The same airliner used by various al-Q trainees in the 1990s. Not necessarily training for 9-11, but just training. They have the paperwork showing that al-Q trained there.

That's all the connection I need. I've seen the airliner, and I've seen the paperwork.


Yer full of it.

Your own Conservative government has officially declared that no link between Al-Q and Saddam existed prior to invasion.
I think youre grasping at the thinnest of straws.

It is not necessary to be ideologically mated in order to work together. Saddam is an opportunist, and could care less about ideology. All that is required is that they have a common enemy.

"Ideologically and logically, they cannot work together," Gen. Hamid Gul, the former chief of Pakistan's spy agency InterServices Intelligence, told The Associated Press. "Bin Laden and his men considered Saddam the killer of hundreds of Islamic militants," a reference to Saddam's relentless crackdowns on domestic political rivals, including Kurds and Shiites.

Oh...

Yer full of it.

Your own Conservative government has officially declared that no link between Al-Q and Saddam existed prior to invasion.
I think youre grasping at the thinnest of straws.

Bush is just one 'o them goddarned Liberals!

"Ideologically and logically, they cannot work together," Gen. Hamid Gul, the former chief of Pakistan's spy agency InterServices Intelligence, told The Associated Press. "Bin Laden and his men considered Saddam the killer of hundreds of Islamic militants," a reference to Saddam's relentless crackdowns on domestic political rivals, including Kurds and Shiites.

Oh...

The irony is that Hamid Gul worked with Osama.

The irony is that Hamid Gul worked with Osama.
The point here is that Backwoods and Kazus think that Osama and the Iraqis NEVER worked together, no matter how much evidence piles up saying that they did.

And they don't want people to keep looking for more evidence - they think it's a done deal.

The point here is that Backwoods and Kazus think that Osama and the Iraqis NEVER worked together, no matter how much evidence piles up saying that they did.

And they don't want people to keep looking for more evidence - they think it's a done deal.

Yet your government stated there was no link. How is that possible?

Yet your government stated there was no link. How is that possible?
Politics.

Why do you think that the government said that Oswald was not part of a conspiracy? How is that possible?

No human being, not even rifle experts from the Army and FBI were able to reproduce the rapidity and accuracy of the shots that Oswald supposedly performed with his rifle - yet their testimony was dropped from the Warren Commission Report and never acknowledged.

How is that possible?

I find it FUNNY that the very people who say, "we shouldn't trust the government" are the first people to say, "we believe the government when they say there's no connection between al-Q and Iraq".

The same people who say they NEVER believed that there were WMD in Iraq.

The point here is that Backwoods and Kazus think that Osama and the Iraqis NEVER worked together, no matter how much evidence piles up saying that they did.

And they don't want people to keep looking for more evidence - they think it's a done deal.

Sorry, I am no fan of Saddam, but I don't think he was involved with Osama. Saddam supported Palestinian terrorists, but his ambitions were limited to his immediate region and the preservation of sunni primacy (particularly his clan) in Iraq.

Some elements of his establishment may have colluded with Osama, I do not exclude that possibility, but considering the larger scheme of things, it is very very irritating for me when people go "Saddam is a monster and was a danger to the US and he was involved with Osama etc etc"....it flies in the face of blatant involvement of Pakistani higher ups like their intelligence chiefs starting from Hamid Gul to Durrani to Mahmud Ahmed.

When purely viewed in the context of fighting islamism (and I am not even going into the humanitarian issues and the various blunderings of the administration), Iraq invasion is a HUGE mistake. Yeah, Saddam gassed his people, oppressed shias and kurds, we are better of without Saddam yadda yadda, BUT, if that was the case, then the US should have said so.

Making the Saddam episode as a fight against islamism, weakens and seriously undermines the fight against islamism.

After Afghanistan war and the fleeing of AQ and taliban top brass to Pakistan, the war shoud have been continued to its logical conclusion. US should have gone inside Pakistan, come hell or high water. Instead, what did we see? There is atleast one allegation from a US officer (forgot which branch) that the operations in Tora Bora were delayed and that allowed Osama to escape. Even before that the US allowed the airlift of Pak-talibanis from Kunduz and it was predicted at that time itself that the taliban will resurface. And ultimately, US has outsourced the war on terror in that part to the Pak army. And instead of catching Osama and liquidating AQ and taliban and the Lashkar e toibas and Jaish e mohammed's, we were told that Saddam=Osama and Iraq did 9/11 and all nonsense...

The war on islamist terror should be fought in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, the fountainheads of all islamist terror. 9/10 islamist terror attacks can be traced to these two countries. Take the recent Canada terror raid. Half the suspects are of Pakistani descent, the mastermind Jahmal is a Pakistani, his UK contact is Pakistani, they planned to train in terrorist camps in Pakistan, the plot seems to be from Lashkar-e-toiba - a Pakistani terrorist org. Take the Virginia paintball jihadis, the california Lodi Hayat case, the london 7/7 bombers and so on...there is inevitably a Pakistani connection.

But they are the key al-lies to the Bush admin. :rolleyes:

This cartoon sums it best.
http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/3757/insetcartoonqueue1917077672519.jpg


I am of the view that all this Iraq nonsense have got more to do with PNAC than with fighting Osama and islamism. The Iraq war does not help in the war against islamism. It is undermining the moral high ground that the US has (or had), it is making the public war weary and faitigued and suspicious of the administration's motives, it is taking the focus away from the real war against islamism that is yet to be fought.

I find it FUNNY that the very people who say, "we shouldn't trust the government" are the first people to say, "we believe the government when they say there's no connection between al-Q and Iraq".

They said that? I thought the whole reason for the war was that he had links to al-qaeda and 9/11.

The same people who say they NEVER believed that there were WMD in Iraq.

The government said there were.

The irony is that Hamid Gul worked with Osama.

Right, so he would know.

The government said there were.

I was responding to someone who said we should believe the government in one case (and it's highly unlikely the same poster believes that the government was telling the truth before).

And they don't want people to keep looking for more evidence - they think it's a done deal.

The irony is you do the same thing.

The irony is you do the same thing.
No, the irony is that they accuse me of it on a daily basis, and do the same thing.

I cant help but notice that Zarqawi still has a recognizable face and a head still attached to his body even though 2 500-lb bombs were dropped on him.

You saw a body?

Welcome to NationStates General, please enjoy your stay.

I think the point wandered off of asking why US forces decided to drop two bombs on him (and cause damage) instead of attempting to take him alive for trial.

Well...Jordan wanted him Dead and not alive could have something to do with it.

Sorry, DK got me in a bad mood. Basically, you were assuming that Soheran thought that the guy with the funny name was innocent. The way I read it, Soheran doubted that he was responsible for every last thing that was attributed to him. Apologies for the insult.

Accepted :)

I think he was innocent until proven guilty by a court of law.

Sad that I like America more than you, isn't it?

I wouldn't go there Keruvalia. Not unless you want to turn this into a flamewar.

1) Iraq is not the US.
2) The evidence would've proved him guilty anyway since he took credit for everything going on.
3) Jordan wanted him Dead and not alive if found.

I wouldn't go there Keruvalia. Not unless you want to turn this into a flamewar.

1) Iraq is not the US.
2) The evidence would've proved him guilty anyway since he took credit for everything going on.
3) Jordan wanted him Dead and not alive if found.

You realise that 'admitting' guilt, and actually BEING guilty, are not the same thing, yes?

Do you remember the Madrid bombing? I realise it happened in that unreal haziness they call 'not America'... I seem to recall news reports of something like a half-dozen groups ALL claiming responsibility for it.

Regarding the Jordan thing... since when do we take their orders?

You realise that 'admitting' guilt, and actually BEING guilty, are not the same thing, yes?

Do you remember the Madrid bombing? I realise it happened in that unreal haziness they call 'not America'... I seem to recall news reports of something like a half-dozen groups ALL claiming responsibility for it.

Regarding the Jordan thing... since when do we take their orders?Please tell me this is facaetious.

Please?

You realise that 'admitting' guilt, and actually BEING guilty, are not the same thing, yes?

Yea true but meh. In this case, we all know he's guilty. Guilty of many things.

Do you remember the Madrid bombing? I realise it happened in that unreal haziness they call 'not America'... I seem to recall news reports of something like a half-dozen groups ALL claiming responsibility for it.

Yes Gni I do remember the Madrid Bombings. Only an idiot would forget that. I also remember 7/7 as well. Ya know...the attacks in London?

Regarding the Jordan thing... since when do we take their orders?

Well...they are an ally and so we probably consulted them :D

Yea true but meh. In this case, we all know he's guilty. Guilty of many things.


So was Saddam... but he got a trial, right?


Yes Gni I do remember the Madrid Bombings. Only an idiot would forget that. I also remember 7/7 as well. Ya know...the attacks in London?


I recall the attacks in London. I had to make a phonecall that morning to make sure my oldest brother got to work, since that is his 'route'.

London is easier to remember... a lot of people forget about Madrid.

But - the important thing is that you remember it... and the number of different agencies that got blamed, or took responsibility.


Well...they are an ally and so we probably consulted them :D

Which is fine. But, just because Jordan says "We don't want him back"... shouldn't have any effect on US military policy, should it?

Please tell me this is facaetious.

Please?

Why?

They said that? I thought the whole reason for the war was that he had links to al-qaeda and 9/11.




No- it was the Weapons of Mass Destruction sadaam had.

WMDs and links between sadaam and bin laden will come to light.

No- it was the Weapons of Mass Destruction sadaam had.

WMDs and links between sadaam and bin laden will come to light.

Hardcore Bushevism at work. Very cute considering how even Dear Leader Chairman Bush himself abandoned the search for WMDs long ago.

Official: U.S. calls off search for Iraqi WMDs (http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/01/12/wmd.search/)

So was Saddam... but he got a trial, right?
After we tried to blow him up, but finally found him hiding in a hole...


Which is fine. But, just because Jordan says "We don't want him back"... shouldn't have any effect on US military policy, should it?
Well if they don't want him back, and we don't want him alive...

Hardcore Bushevism at work. Very cute considering how even Dear Leader Chairman Bush himself abandoned the search for WMDs long ago.

Official: U.S. calls off search for Iraqi WMDs (http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/01/12/wmd.search/)


No need for name calling.

Its been clear for some time that you will believe anything that suits you,that makes your feel better about who you are.

I'm not impressed.

No need for name calling.

Its been clear for some time that you will believe anything that suits you,that makes your feel better about who you are.

I'm not impressed.

And whose job is it to impress you, Darth Vader?

You chanted the same old Bushevik "Iraq had WMDs" mantra long after even Bush gave up looking for them and I posted a link that proved it.

If it quacks like a Bushevik...

WMDs and links between sadaam and bin laden will come to light.

You think they would have found these things in less than 5 years....

No- it was the Weapons of Mass Destruction sadaam had.

WMDs and links between sadaam and bin laden will come to light.

To quote something you said to me yesterday "You honestly believe that?"

To quote something you said to me yesterday "You honestly believe that?"
*Awaiting scary answer*

No- it was the Weapons of Mass Destruction sadaam had.

weds and links between sadaam and bin laden will come to light.

How long do we have to hold our breath?

People here will tell you I supported the invasion as I said "Ok if they guy is building nukes, then yes it is worth it."

Except there aren't any. With all our satellite capabilities and the guys that were in the field, it would have been noticed if they tried to sneak them out.

It all boils down to the fact there weren't any.

Saddam was not a "clear and present" danger to the US.

This is especially evident by the fact the propaganda machine quickly changed to "Saddam was an evil man. He killed his own people for God's sake. Don't you support removing evil dictators?........"

Don't hold your breath and don't make any bets that Iraq had an active nuke program.

It was nothing more then the shrub trying to one up his old man.

At least his old man was smart enough to leave the place when he saw there was no plan for the peace.....

Sorry, I'm trying for the life of me to find the link between Al-Z and the WTC attacks.....

Hmm... Lets think about this for a moment:

Al Qaeda flew planes into buildings killing thousands, have blown up thousands more in Embassy, ship, and mass transit bombings, terrorized nations, beheaded people and spew a dogma of hate. Nevermind destabilizing some countries. Members of Al Qaeda are bad.
Al-Z is a member of Al Qaeda. Not only is he ALLIED with bin Laden, but (on 27 December 2004) Al Jazeera broadcast an audiotape of bin Laden calling Zarqawi "the prince of al Qaeda in Iraq".

The point is that the poster was protesting that some innocents were killed in the building. I was pointing out that this bastard has the blood of many more on his hands, and that his organization has no trouble killing innocents, since they don't consider anyone not of their kind to not be "the Infidel".
The woman and child killed are nothing compared to the death and mayhem he is responsible for and would continue to create in the future.

It's not like the US sent up a dozen B-52s and flattened a county or something.

Yer full of it.

Your own Conservative government has officially declared that no link between Al-Q and Saddam existed prior to invasion.
I think youre grasping at the thinnest of straws.


Wrong...if you paid attention ...they said..." NO link was proven to 9 /11 "

NEVER did they say no link between SADDAM and AL Queda .

In fact read the Times today .

Wrong...if you paid attention ...they said..." NO link was proven to 9 /11 "

NEVER did they say no link between SADDAM and AL Queda .

In fact read the Times today .
How about you telling us what you think you've read?

Also it has been reported so far today ...that the women and child were Al-Zarqawi 's wife and Child...and that there WAS no woman or child present..
That they followed his spiritual advisor to the location
He was the lead that lead them to Zarqawi.
That zarqawi was alive when found.
At a press conferance it was asked if he was killed when found alive .
NOT one surrounding home...because the home bombed was out of the way of other homes ..was damaged.

You have something on your computer browser called GOOGLE...use it .

All the info you want on ZARQAWI is available .

Quote:
Those who try to whitewash Saddams record dont dispute this evidence; they just ignore it. So lets review the evidence, all of it on the public record for months or years:

* Abdul Rahman Yasin was the only member of the al Qaeda cell that detonated the 1993 World Trade Center bomb to remain at large in the Clinton years. He fled to Iraq. U.S. forces recently discovered a cache of documents in Tikrit, Saddams hometown, that show that Iraq gave Mr. Yasin both a house and monthly salary.

* Bin Laden met at least eight times with officers of Iraq's Special Security Organization, a secret police agency run by Saddam's son Qusay, and met with officials from Saddams mukhabarat, its external intelligence service, according to intelligence made public by Secretary of State Colin Powell, who was speaking before the United Nations Security Council on February 6, 2003.

* Sudanese intelligence officials told me that their agents had observed meetings between Iraqi intelligence agents and bin Laden starting in 1994, when bin Laden lived in Khartoum.

* Bin Laden met the director of the Iraqi mukhabarat in 1996 in Khartoum, according to Mr. Powell.

* An al Qaeda operative now held by the U.S. confessed that in the mid-1990s, bin Laden had forged an agreement with Saddams men to cease all terrorist activities against the Iraqi dictator, Mr. Powell told the United Nations.

* In 1999 the Guardian, a British newspaper, reported that Farouk Hijazi, a senior officer in Iraqs mukhabarat, had journeyed deep into the icy mountains near Kandahar, Afghanistan, in December 1998 to meet with al Qaeda men. Mr. Hijazi is "thought to have offered bin Laden asylum in Iraq," the Guardian reported.

* In October 2000, another Iraqi intelligence operative, Salah Suleiman, was arrested near the Afghan border by Pakistani authorities, according to Janes Foreign Report, a respected international newsletter. Janes reported that Suleiman was shuttling between Iraqi intelligence and Ayman al Zawahiri, now al Qaedas No. 2 man.

(Why are all of those meetings significant? The London Observer reports that FBI investigators cite a captured al Qaeda field manual in Afghanistan, which "emphasizes the value of conducting discussions about pending terrorist attacks face to face, rather than by electronic means.")

* As recently as 2001, Iraqs embassy in Pakistan was used as a "liaison" between the Iraqi dictator and al Qaeda, Mr. Powell told the United Nations.

* Spanish investigators have uncovered documents seized from Yusuf Galan -- who is charged by a Spanish court with being "directly involved with the preparation and planning" of the Sept. 11 attacks -- that show the terrorist was invited to a party at the Iraqi embassy in Madrid. The invitation used his "al Qaeda nom de guerre," Londons Independent reports.

* An Iraqi defector to Turkey, known by his cover name as "Abu Mohammed," told Gwynne Roberts of the Sunday Times of London that he saw bin Ladens fighters in camps in Iraq in 1997. At the time, Mohammed was a colonel in Saddams Fedayeen. He described an encounter at Salman Pak, the training facility southeast of Baghdad. At that vast compound run by Iraqi intelligence, Muslim militants trained to hijack planes with knives -- on a full-size Boeing 707. Col. Mohammed recalls his first visit to Salman Pak this way: "We were met by Colonel Jamil Kamil, the camp manager, and Major Ali Hawas. I noticed that a lot of people were queuing for food. (The major) said to me: Youll have nothing to do with these people. They are Osama bin Ladens group and the PKK and Mojahedin-e Khalq."

* In 1998, Abbas al-Janabi, a longtime aide to Saddams son Uday, defected to the West. At the time, he repeatedly told reporters that there was a direct connection between Iraq and al Qaeda.

*The Sunday Times found a Saddam loyalist in a Kurdish prison who claims to have been Dr. Zawahiris bodyguard during his 1992 visit with Saddam in Baghdad. Dr. Zawahiri was a close associate of bin Laden at the time and was present at the founding of al Qaeda in 1989.

* Following the defeat of the Taliban, almost two dozen bin Laden associates "converged on Baghdad and established a base of operations there," Mr. Powell told the United Nations in February 2003. From their Baghdad base, the secretary said, they supervised the movement of men, materiel and money for al Qaedas global network.

* In 2001, an al Qaeda member "bragged that the situation in Iraq was good," according to intelligence made public by Mr. Powell.

* That same year, Saudi Arabian border guards arrested two al Qaeda members entering the kingdom from Iraq.

* Abu Musaab al-Zarqawi oversaw an al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan, Mr. Powell told the United Nations. His specialty was poisons. Wounded in fighting with U.S. forces, he sought medical treatment in Baghdad in May 2002. When Zarqawi recovered, he restarted a training camp in northern Iraq. Zarqawis Iraq cell was later tied to the October 2002 murder of Lawrence Foley, an official of the U.S. Agency for International Development, in Amman, Jordan. The captured assassin confessed that he received orders and funds from Zarqawis cell in Iraq, Mr. Powell said. His accomplice escaped to Iraq.

*Zarqawi met with military chief of al Qaeda, Mohammed Ibrahim Makwai (aka Saif al-Adel) in Iran in February 2003, according to intelligence sources cited by the Washington Post.

* Mohammad Atef, the head of al Qaedas military wing until the U.S. killed him in Afghanistan in November 2001, told a senior al Qaeda member now in U.S. custody that the terror network needed labs outside of Afghanistan to manufacture chemical weapons, Mr. Powell said. "Where did they go, where did they look?" said the secretary. "They went to Iraq."

* Abu Abdullah al-Iraqi was sent to Iraq by bin Laden to purchase poison gases several times between 1997 and 2000. He called his relationship with Saddams regime "successful," Mr. Powell told the United Nations.

* Mohamed Mansour Shahab, a smuggler hired by Iraq to transport weapons to bin Laden in Afghanistan, was arrested by anti-Hussein Kurdish forces in May, 2000. He later told his story to American intelligence and a reporter for the New Yorker magazine.

* Documents found among the debris of the Iraqi Intelligence Center show that Baghdad funded the Allied Democratic Forces, a Ugandan terror group led by an Islamist cleric linked to bin Laden. According to a Londons Daily Telegraph, the organization offered to recruit "youth to train for the jihad" at a "headquarters for international holy warrior network" to be established in Baghdad.

* Mullah Melan Krekar, ran a terror group (the Ansar al-Islam) linked to both bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Mr. Krekar admitted to a Kurdish newspaper that he met bin Laden in Afghanistan and other senior al Qaeda officials. His acknowledged meetings with bin Laden go back to 1988. When he organized Ansar al Islam in 2001 to conduct suicide attacks on Americans, "three bin Laden operatives showed up with a gift of $300,000 to undertake jihad," Newsday reported. Mr. Krekar is now in custody in the Netherlands. His group operated in portion of northern Iraq loyal to Saddam Hussein -- and attacked independent Kurdish groups hostile to Saddam. A spokesman for the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan told a United Press International correspondent that Mr. Krekars group was funded by "Saddam Husseins regime in Baghdad."

* After October 2001, hundreds of al Qaeda fighters are believed to have holed up in the Ansar al-Islams strongholds inside northern Iraq.





how didi you manage to miss this info ?

http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=092503F

Also it has been reported so far today ...that the women and child were Al-Zarqawi 's wife and Child...and that there WAS no woman or child present..
That they followed his spiritual advisor to the location
He was the lead that lead them to Zarqawi.
That zarqawi was alive when found.
At a press conferance it was asked if he was killed when found alive .
NOT one surrounding home...because the home bombed was out of the way of other homes ..was damaged.

You have something on your computer browser called GOOGLE...use it .

All the info you want on ZARQAWI is available .
Quoted "article" is from 25 Sep 2003. Lots of changes and new information since then dude.

Wrong...if you paid attention ...they said..." NO link was proven to 9 /11 "

NEVER did they say no link between SADDAM and AL Queda .

In fact read the Times today .

Newsweek (11/21) reports in its "Periscope" column, "The alleged Qaeda-Saddam tie was further discredited last week: a CIA report, sent to Congress and obtained by NEWSWEEK, said that even before Colin Powell and George W. Bush asserted that Saddam had provided WMD training to Qaeda terrorists, the agency had reported that the captured Qaeda leader used as the source for the allegation lacked firsthand knowledge of the matter. A newly declassified Pentagon intel report, circulated more than a year before the U.S. invasion, said it was 'likely' the source made up the story to please his interrogators."
THE U.S. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld admitted yesterday that there was no evidence of a firm link between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. -Daily Mail, October 6, 2004

A report from the bipartisan commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks on New York City and Washington should put to rest arguments from the Bush administration that the Iraqi regime was involved.

In what is a devastating blow to President Bush and others in his administration, the commission found "no credible evidence" that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein helped the al Qaeda terror network target the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and either the White House or the Capitol on that fateful day.

It will be all but impossible for Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and others in the administration to continue to insist that Saddam and al Qaeda were intertwined in the fabric of terror. The evidence simply isn't there to make a case that Saddam and Osama bin Laden were partners in the Sept. 11 attacks.

Whatever intelligence the administration had to suggest such a collaboration apparently was dead wrong. The commission report said bin Laden made overtures to Saddam's regime and asked for help building and training his Islamic army, but nothing ever came of them. -Austin American-Statesman, June 17, 2004

A NEW CIA assessment has found no conclusive evidence that former Iraq president Saddam Hussein gave safe haven before the war in Iraq to Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian extremist with links to al-Qaida, a US official said yesterday. -The Advertiser, October 7, 2004

There are al-Qaeda in Iraq... Saddam is harbouring al-Qaeda operatives who fled the US military dragnet in Afghanistan - US Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld, August 2002

If you've asking are there al-Qaeda in Iraq, the answer's yes... We do have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al-Qaeda members, including some that have been in Baghdad. Rumsfeld, September 2002.

We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade. Credible information indicates that Iraq and al-Qaeda have discussed safe haven and reciprocal non-aggression. Since Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan , we have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al-Qaeda members, including some that have been in Baghdad. We have credible reporting that al-Qaeda leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire WMD capabilities. The reporting also stated that Iraq has provided training to al-Qaeda members in the areas of poisons and gases and making conventional bombs. - letter dated October 7th, 2002, from CIA director George Tenet to US Senate Intelligence chairman Bob Graham. Claim repeated on February 5th, 2003, by US Secretary of State Colin Powell to the UN Security Council.

We have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al-Qaeda members. - Rumsfeld, October 2002

Iraq had been the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11. - US Vice-President Dick Cheney, September 2003. The claim prompted President Bush to acknowledge that Saddam's regime had not been linked to the 9/11 attacks.

Saddam Hussein had long-established ties with al-Qaeda. - Cheney, June 14th, 2004.

Iraqi rebel leader Zarqawi's the best evidence of a connection to al-Qaeda affiliates and al-Qaeda. - Bush, June 15th

Saddam provided safe harbour and sanctuary... for al-Qaeda. - Cheney, September 2004

To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence that links the two Saddam and Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network . - Rumsfeld, October 4th

A question I answered... at an appearance before the Council on Foreign Relations regarding ties between al-Qaeda and Iraq regrettably was misunderstood - Rumsfeld, later on October 4th -The Irish Times, October 6, 2004
[Adam Boulton, Sky News (London):] One question for you both. Do you believe that there is a link between Saddam Hussein, a direct link, and the men who attacked on September the 11th?

THE PRESIDENT: I can't make that claim.

THE PRIME MINISTER: That answers your question. -White House Transcript, January 31, 2003
Read... read... read...

And they were not IN Iraq till we went in.

Ever hear of Salman Pak?

Let's hear it for veteran USAF f-16 pilots with guided 500lb bombs!


Think of the children.

:D

Ever hear of Salman Pak?
You mean:

A DIA analyst told the Committee, "The Iraqi National Congress (INC) has been pushing information for a long time about Salman Pak and training of al-Qa'ida." Knight Ridder reporters Jonathan S. Landay and Warren P. Strobel noted in November 2005 that "After the war, U.S. officials determined that a facility in Salman Pak was used to train Iraqi anti-terrorist commandos."[Seattle Times, 1 November 2005, p. A5].
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salman_Pak_facility

Sorry, show me an actual link not INC fabricated wishes.

Early this morning on Fox News Channel they had the quote--

"He (al-Zarkawi) was alive when we found him, but he died shortly thereafter."

Now, depending upon how your mind works, there's a bit of potential in that sentence. Probably got hit a few times by the buttstock of an M16, or even better, a bayonet.

:upyours:

Early this morning on Fox News Channel they had the quote--

"He (al-Zarkawi) was alive when we found him, but he died shortly thereafter."

Now, depending upon how your mind works, there's a bit of potential in that sentence. Probably got hit a few times by the buttstock of an M16, or even better, a bayonet.

:upyours:
Oh, and now you're hoping that our military decides to violate its own rules of conduct. :rolleyes:

Nice... just... nice.

Of course if you bothered to actually read the rest of the news you'd find out that US forces actually offered medical aid. Which shows they have more profesionalism than the 101st Fighting Keyborders.

Which shows they have more profesionalism than the 101st Fighting Keyborders.

Aren't they a detachment of the 1st NationStates Yellow Elephant Brigade? :D

Early this morning on Fox News Channel they had the quote--

"He (al-Zarkawi) was alive when we found him, but he died shortly thereafter."

Now, depending upon how your mind works, there's a bit of potential in that sentence. Probably got hit a few times by the buttstock of an M16, or even better, a bayonet.

:upyours:

Iraqi police had arrived on the scene of Wednesday's bomb attack first and put al-Zarqawi on a stretcher
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/08/iraq.al.zarqawi/index.html?section=cnn_topstories

Given that the IRAQI police was there, then, yeah, maybe! If I was Iraqi, I know I'D love to bayonet the guy that was a major player in making my country a hellhole.

BTW: You don't think there won't be an autopsy? :rolleyes:

All I have to say is, that given the track record of this guy, I have to return your "upyours" with a BIG FUCK YOU. This asshole assassinated, beheaded, bombed, and led a terrorist cell that has killed thousands, maybe more. He doesn't get the benefit of the doubt.

Iraqi police had arrived on the scene of Wednesday's bomb attack first and put al-Zarqawi on a stretcher
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/08/iraq.al.zarqawi/index.html?section=cnn_topstories

Given that the IRAQI police was there, then, yeah, maybe! If I was Iraqi, I know I'D love to bayonet the guy that was a major player in making my country a hellhole.

BTW: You don't think there won't be an autopsy? :rolleyes:

All I have to say is, that given the track record of this guy, I have to return your "upyours" with a BIG FUCK YOU. This asshole assassinated, beheaded, bombed, and led a terrorist cell that has killed thousands, maybe more. He doesn't get the benefit of the doubt.


Zarqawi is anti-American, anti-West, anti-Capitalist, anti-Zionist.
Hero to some....

[All I have to say is, that given the track record of this guy, I have to return your "upyours" with a BIG FUCK YOU. This asshole assassinated, beheaded, bombed, and led a terrorist cell that has killed thousands, maybe more. He doesn't get the benefit of the doubt.


I think it wasnt up to whatever soldier who shot him, but rather for a court to decide.
Looks like that option was eliminated.

Not good.

Early this morning on Fox News Channel they had the quote--

"He (al-Zarkawi) was alive when we found him, but he died shortly thereafter."

Now, depending upon how your mind works, there's a bit of potential in that sentence. Probably got hit a few times by the buttstock of an M16, or even better, a bayonet.

:upyours:

If that is the case (and I'm doubting that) then the soldiers should be punished.

I think it wasnt up to whatever soldier who shot him, but rather for a court to decide.
Looks like that option was eliminated.

Not good.

Show me the evidence that he was shot while on the stretcher. Oh, I forgot - your court option only applies to terrorists. If someone in the military is accused of something (especially if you're the accuser), the military person is assumed guilty.

I think it wasnt up to whatever soldier who shot him, but rather for a court to decide.
Looks like that option was eliminated.

Not good.


Proof?

...I thought not.

Yeah, kind of silly to think someone could die from wounds after being hit by 1,000 lbs of explosives. :headbang:

Proof?

...I thought not.

Yeah, kind of silly to think someone could die from wounds after being hit by 1,000 lbs of explosives. :headbang:

No, no, no... remember that if someone who is against the war makes any allegation, that allegation is TRUE until proven false. :rolleyes:

No, no, no... remember that if someone who is against the war makes any allegation, that allegation is TRUE until proven false. :rolleyes:

I guess that means an anti-war protestor said Iraq had WMDs then. :rolleyes:

I guess even a Swedish expert on the subject thinks it had an effect on terrorists.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/w-eur/2006/jun/09/060900579.html

Killing 40 percent of the crew and leaving the rest in disarray sounds like it's working.

I guess even a Swedish expert on the subject thinks it had an effect on terrorists.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/w-eur/2006/jun/09/060900579.html

Killing 40 percent of the crew and leaving the rest in disarray sounds like it's working.

It'll have an effect on Al'Qaeda in Iraq. The insurgency was going on long before AQ stuck its nose in local business and frankly they don't give a shit what happened to Zarqawi other than it makes a nice excuse to bomb the shit out of more U.S. troops.

Oh, and now you're hoping that our military decides to violate its own rules of conduct. :rolleyes:

Nice... just... nice.

Of course if you bothered to actually read the rest of the news you'd find out that US forces actually offered medical aid. Which shows they have more profesionalism than the 101st Fighting Keyborders.

And yet he still died....

If that is the case (and I'm doubting that) then the soldiers should be punished.

I wouldn't doubt it, although who would try and prosecute them?

"Huh? What soldiers? Zarqawi? Yeah, those AF guys messed him up!"

"What about those rifle butt marks?"

"He tried to escape"

"Good job soldier"

It'll have an effect on Al'Qaeda in Iraq. The insurgency was going on long before AQ stuck its nose in local business and frankly they don't give a shit what happened to Zarqawi other than it makes a nice excuse to bomb the shit out of more U.S. troops.

If you read the article I posted re: the Iraqi police, you'd have known that Al-Qaeda was in Iraq before the war.

Autopsy performed on al-Zarqawi
U.S. military: Cell phone helped track terrorist leader

Saturday, June 10, 2006; Posted: 10:27 a.m. EDT (14:27 GMT)

Iraqis walk among the rubble left in the wake of the airstrike that killed al-Zarqawi and five others.
Image:



Inside the rubble of al-Zarqawi's safe house (1:28)

U.S.: Al-Zarqawi alive, then died (1:44)

With Iraq's top terrorist gone, where's bin Laden? (2:06)
RELATED
Gallery: Airstrike aftermath

• Timeline: Taking out a terrorist
• What al-Zarqawi's death means
• World reacts to al-Zarqawi death
• Al-Zarqawi drove sectarian strife
SPECIAL REPORT

• Audio: Al-Zarqawi killed
• The road to al-Zarqawi
• Timeline: Al-Zarqawi attacks
• Your e-mails: After al-Zarqawi
• Tracking Terror: Who's next?
• Special ReportYOUR E-MAIL ALERTS

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
Iraq
Acts of terror
or Create Your Own
Manage Alerts | What Is This? BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- An autopsy was being carried out Saturday on the body of terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, killed Wednesday in a U.S. airstrike, the U.S. military said.

Two military personnel were flown in Friday night and Saturday to conduct the autopsy on al-Zarqawi, the leader of the terrorist group al Qaeda in Iraq, U.S. Army Maj. Gen. William Caldwell, spokesman for Multi-National Forces-Iraq, told reporters Saturday.

The personnel are familiar with background and cultural concerns for conducting the autopsy, he said. It was expected to be completed Saturday night. The body, he said, was in a "safe location."

Caldwell told reporters for the first time Friday that al-Zarqawi, initially reported to have died instantly, survived the attack Wednesday in which an Air Force F-16 dropped two 500-pound bombs on a safehouse near Baquba where he was holding a meeting with associates.

There was a gap of 1:38 between the bombs, Caldwell said Saturday. (Timeline of the operation)

Al-Zarqawi was placed on a stretcher by arriving Iraqi police and was still alive when coalition forces arrived, some by helicopter, he said. Two coalition troops interacted with al-Zarqawi; one began administering first aid, while the second attempted to talk to him, Caldwell said Saturday. But al-Zarqawi died "very shortly thereafter, within minutes." (Watch how al-Zarqawi's final moments unfolded -- 2:27)

He said Friday al-Zarqawi mumbled something unintelligible and tried to turn away, possibly off the stretcher, before being resecured to it and dying. (Watch what new questions are being asked about al-Zarqawi's death -- 1:44)

Five others died in the airstrike, including Sheikh Abd-al-Rahman, al-Zarqawi's spiritual adviser, who died of head wounds and a massive skull fracture, Caldwell said Saturday. The total casualties included three males and three females; one of the females was a child between the ages of 5 and 7, he said.

The military had been tracking al-Rahman and watching his patterns in an effort to find al-Zarqawi, Caldwell said. Al-Rahman had just arrived at the safehouse when the bombs were launched, while al-Zarqawi had already arrived. (Watch a walk around the remnants of "safe house" 1:28)

Asked again about why military personnel cleaned the blood off al-Zarqawi's dead face before taking a photo of it, Caldwell said al-Zarqawi's injuries were "not at all minor" and reiterated there were no gunshot wounds to his body. The time stamp on the photo, he said Saturday, was incorrect. It said 6:17 p.m., but actually was taken about 7:20 p.m. (Watch for answers on medical care for al-Zarqawi -- 3:57)

Gen. George Casey, commander of multi-national forces in Iraq, was notified of the airstrike shortly before it occurred, Caldwell said.

Cell phone tracking
In an exclusive interview, an Iraqi army colonel told CNN Friday that intelligence from cell phone technology helped U.S. forces find and kill al-Zarqawi.

Col. Dhiya Tamimi said he worked with U.S. forces to monitor al-Zarqawi and his associates' cell phones, helping to lead to Wednesday night's airstrike.

Authorities also relied on intelligence from Iraqi civilians and information from al Zarqawi's terrorist network.

President Bush, appearing at a news conference Friday at Camp David, Maryland, said he phoned U.S. Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal to congratulate him on finding al-Zarqawi.

McChrystal heads one of the most secret covert special operations forces in the U.S. military, called the Joint Special Operations Command.

FBI tests DNA
FBI spokesman Richard Kolko said the agency had matched the dead man's fingerprints with al-Zarqawi's records and also would do a DNA analysis. Al-Zarqawi's death was confirmed on Islamic Web sites.

The FBI said results from DNA testing would be available as soon as Monday.

A green canvas bag carried from Iraq to FBI headquarters in Quantico, Virginia, on Thursday contained three boxes of samples, officials said.

The FBI would not say if DNA from the samples would be compared with al-Zarqawi's DNA already on file -- or DNA from his family.

Allegiance to bin Laden
Al-Zarqawi, 39, gained notoriety in February 2003, when then-Secretary of State Colin Powell appeared before the U.N. Security Council to make his case supporting the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Powell pointed to al-Zarqawi, then believed to have been in Baghdad, as evidence that al Qaeda had a presence in Iraq. (Watch how al-Zarqawi's kin feel about his death -- :20)

Al-Zarqawi was the leader of one of the nation's many insurgent factions. In October 2004, al-Zarqawi pledged his allegiance to al Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden, and renamed his group al Qaeda in Iraq. (Relief for bin Laden?)

Al Qaeda in Iraq was blamed for brazen terrorist attacks, including a 2003 suicide bombing of U.N. headquarters in Baghdad that killed the U.N. envoy to Iraq and 21 others, and the November bombing of three hotels in Amman, Jordan, in which 60 people died.

Al-Zarqawi is believed to have been involved in the abductions and beheadings of several Western hostages. In addition, the United States believes al-Zarqawi had appealed to al Qaeda for help in starting a civil war in Iraq and encouraged sectarian violence. (Watch how al-Zarqawi murdered his way to the most-wanted list -- 2:50)

CNN's Cal Perry, Jamie McIntyre, Barbara Starr, Henry Schuster and journalist Randa Habib contributed to this report.



for every article questioning the fact of Al -Queda being in Iraq..there are ten more attempting to prove it. Al-zawquari claimed to have been in Iraq before the invasion.

The above came from CNN . com


Notice that NO witness on the scene found any GUNSHOT wounds on the scumbag . I guess the autopsy will confirm he was turned to jelly by the bomb concusion .

Funny the BBC seems to think that Profile: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is Iraq's most notorious insurgent - a shadowy figure associated with spectacular bombings, assassinations and the beheading of foreign hostages.


The next stop on his itinerary was his old stamping ground - Afghanistan.

He is believed to have set up a training camp in the western city of Herat, near the border with Iran.

Students at his camp supposedly became experts in the manufacture and use of poison gases.

It is during this period that Zarqawi is thought to have renewed his acquaintance with al-Qaeda.

He is believed to have fled to Iraq in 2001 after a US missile strike on his Afghan base, though the report that he lost a leg in the attack has not been verified.

US officials argue that it was at al-Qaeda's behest that he moved to Iraq and established links with Ansar al-Islam - a group of Kurdish Islamists from the north of the country.

He is thought to have remained with them for a while - feeling at home in mountainous northern Iraq.


Saying that Al- queda was not in Iraq until the US invaded is at the very least a mistake .
Tons of evidence exist to place Al-queda operatives in Iraq before the war.


NO evidence EVER existed to link Al- Queda and Saddam with 9 -11 .
That has been exposed by many including the 9-11 commision report .


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3483089.stm