NationStates Jolt Archive

Another al-Qaeda terrorist boss blown to smithereens:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,327206,00.html

Original report:

http://siteintelgroup.org/bin/articles.cgi?ID=publications342208&Category=publications&Subcategory=0

One by one, the enemy continue to die a dog's death. Roast in pieces, Libi boy.

I'll be drinking a toast tonight--to the US forces that took the bastard out :D

yay?

"Good News from Afghanistan"

Ross Kemp is there!And is doing a cracking series on SkyOne to say the least!:)

Outstanding news.

Nice. Hopefully, the two who replace him will be less competent. :p

That's good and all, but what about the fact that for every terrorist killed, more join?

Terrific news, it hasn't even been confirmed. :rolleyes:

And in the end someone else will replace him.

So what does that make our targets to collateral damage ratio now? I'd say it would be Andaras-defending-Stalin insane to say that it is 1:100. I'll be safe and say 1 terrorist has been killed/apprehended for every 500 Afghani civilians injured/killed.

*gestures emptily*

Finally! So now Afghanistan is safe, and the conflict is finally over! I shall sing and dance an-

Efforts to stabilize Afghanistan are faltering and the country could become a failed state if international troops are removed, according to a study released Wednesday.

The Afghanistan Study Group report is one of three published Wednesday, all of which sound alarm bells for Afghanistan's future if the government and society's institution's can't be shored up and if the insurgency isn't properly dealt with.

"Afghanistan stands today at a crossroads," according to a letter in the Afghanistan Study Group report from co-chairs retired U.S. Marine Corps Gen. James Jones and former U.N. Ambassador Thomas Pickering.

It says the "progress achieved after six years of international engagement is under serious threat from resurgent violence, weakening international resolve, mounting regional challenges and a growing lack of confidence on the part of the Afghan people about the future direction of their country."

...oh right. We live in the real world. Damnit! So close too! :(

That's good and all, but what about the fact that for every terrorist killed, more join?

Keeps us in business! Nothing better than killing evil Arabs! Warms the cockles of my heart. Now if only we could resume dispatching the minions of Satan in North Korea...

Keeps us in business! Nothing better than killing evil Arabs! Warms the cockles of my heart. Now if only we could resume dispatching the minions of Satan in North Korea...

Nothin makes you feel warm and fuzzy quite like the deaths of thousands of nameless brown people, eh? ;)

Another al-Qaeda terrorist boss blown to smithereens:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,327206,00.html

Original report:

http://siteintelgroup.org/bin/articles.cgi?ID=publications342208&Category=publications&Subcategory=0

One by one, the enemy continue to die a dog's death. Roast in pieces, Libi boy.

I'll be drinking a toast tonight--to the US forces that took the bastard out :D

It's kind of sad that you find as much (if not more) delight in death as these terrorists.

So what does that make our targets to collateral damage ratio now? I'd say it would be Andaras-defending-Stalin insane to say that it is 1:100. I'll be safe and say 1 terrorist has been killed/apprehended for every 500 Afghani civilians injured/killed.

Most deaths are caused by the taliban fighters. They're the ones blowing up schools, market places, ect. Not the American Forces.

It's kind of sad that you find as much (if not more) delight in death as these terrorists.

I don't find it sad; I find it hypocritical, perverse, disgusting and nauseating.

Most deaths are caused by the taliban fighters. They're the ones blowing up schools, market places, ect. Not the American Forces.

Apparently you're forgetting the Orwellianly titled "Operation Infinite Justice" where the US coalition lovingly bombed Afghanistan into a parking lot, wrecking the economy, and causing tens of thousands to die of disease and starvation. The direct collateral damage alone was in the tens of thousands of casualties.

Apparently you're forgetting the Orwellianly titled "Operation Infinite Justice" where the US coalition lovingly bombed Afghanistan into a parking lot, wrecking the economy, and causing tens of thousands to die of disease and starvation. The direct collateral damage alone was in the tens of thousands of casualties.

Desert camps and government centers made up the economy? Those were the main targets. Sources for casulities numbers? Al jezera?(spelling) I would believe a few hundred. Most of the weapons used in urban areas were smaller, more accurate munitions. However no matter how advanced the weapon system, some will miss, or incorrect intel will be used for targeting. (see Gulf War).

Another al-Qaeda terrorist boss blown to smithereens:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,327206,00.html

Original report:

http://siteintelgroup.org/bin/articles.cgi?ID=publications342208&Category=publications&Subcategory=0

One by one, the enemy continue to die a dog's death. Roast in pieces, Libi boy.

I'll be drinking a toast tonight--to the US forces that took the bastard out :D

And last month the US either destroyed or deported 600 million tonnes of corn. At this rate, we'll have won the war on terror and the war on corn by the end of Bush's presidency.

And last month the US either destroyed or deported 600 million tonnes of corn. At this rate, we'll have won the war on terror and the war on corn by the end of Bush's presidency.

Harooh! Harooh!

(Yells Spartan war cry before killing masses of brown people along with corn)

Meh. Now, if we could see this having any discernible effect on the chaos...

Well, I suppose the chaos might increase. And technically, this should be 'Good News from Pakistan'.

That's good and all, but what about the fact that for every terrorist killed, more join?

Is that a fact?

I'll be safe and say 1 terrorist has been killed/apprehended for every 500 Afghani civilians injured/killed.

The more the merrier.

This won't make any impact in the scheme of things in Afg. Maybe some propaganda value for Bush admin....but I think even the dumbest Americans are catching on to the "#3 in Al-Qaeda killed" scam.

More interesting news is the raiding of supply convoys by Mehsud and co and the apparent gearing up of US troops to do extended operations near chitral valley other than the hit and run operations they are doing currently on the sly.

Another al-Qaeda terrorist boss blown to smithereens:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,327206,00.html

Original report:

http://siteintelgroup.org/bin/articles.cgi?ID=publications342208&Category=publications&Subcategory=0

One by one, the enemy continue to die a dog's death. Roast in pieces, Libi boy.

I'll be drinking a toast tonight--to the US forces that took the bastard out :D
Yeah, things are just going fricken fantastic in Afghanistan!! :rolleyes:

Three reports sound alarm bells on Afghan mission (http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/TopStories/ContentPosting.aspx?feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V2&showbyline=True&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20080131%2fafghan_mission_080131)

Ummm BTW, Bush kinda reneged on his promise of smokin' Bin Laden out of his cave huh?

And your next wannabe Pres. McCain has vowed to finish the job that Bush never got too serious about (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PGmnz5Ow-o).

McCain reiterates vow to capture Osama bin Laden (http://www.yahoo.com/s/796756)

Good old Republican propaganda.

Still on yellow alert there in America....7 years later? Hmmmmmm.

Is that a fact?
Absolutely. Or don't you read/hear/see the news?

So what does that make our targets to collateral damage ratio now? I'd say it would be Andaras-defending-Stalin insane to say that it is 1:100. I'll be safe and say 1 terrorist has been killed/apprehended for every 500 Afghani civilians injured/killed.

So that's mean about 750,000 Afghan civilians have been killed. Sure, I believe that. :rolleyes:

Keeps us in business! Nothing better than killing evil Arabs! Warms the cockles of my heart. Now if only we could resume dispatching the minions of Satan in North Korea...
Yep, brown.
http://img1.photographersdirect.com/img/15009/wm/pd466143.jpg

That's good and all, but what about the fact that for every terrorist killed, more join?
Is that a fact?

Have a look at some history. Cambodia and the Khmer Rouge would be a good place to start. The growth of the Kkhmer Rouge can be credited to the illegal operation Rolling Thunder that bombed Cambodia into the stone age.
Don't stop reading, until you discovered that after rescuing Cambodia from Pol Pot, Vietnam gave food aid, even though their populace was on food rationing, and the US gave no aid at all, due to Cambodia's political affiliations.

That's not true at all. For every successful military op, the terrorists drop in numbers. Most of the terrs come from Iran or Pakistan, the Afghani people have had enough of being ruled by the Taliban. Both insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan would have died down without foreign aid and foreign insurgents that hate the West.

Harooh! Harooh!

(Yells Spartan war cry before killing masses of brown people along with corn)http://cache.defamer.com/assets/resources/2008/01/spartans_britney.jpg

:D

Killing ANYBODY is not good news. Sorry.

There are conflicting reports on how it was done...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/world/asia/01qaeda.html?_r=2&th&emc=th&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
American military officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because the subject involves covert operations, said the attack early Tuesday against a safe house in Khushali Torikel, a village in North Waziristan, was not carried out by a Pentagon-operated Predator.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1709008,00.html
A U.S. Predator strike on a militant compound in Northwest Pakistan may have killed a top al-Qaeda operative.

In other news, Canadians are threatening to withdraw from Afg, if they don't get help from other NATO members. I do think that they have shouldered a lot more responsibility than other NATO members. They can't go on like this forever.

In other news, Canadians are threatening to withdraw from Afg, if they don't get help from other NATO members. I do think that they have shouldered a lot more responsibility than other NATO members. They can't go on like this forever.

Yeah, well, something had better be done, because I don't think Canada is going to be staying there very long unless something happens. The Harper government has decided to follow the Manley report's suggestions, and that means that before we confirm that our troops are going to stay in Afghanistan past 2009, we want to hear about reinforcements of at least 1000 more soldiers, helicopters, fighting and spying drones and other junk being supplied by the rest of NATO.

Of course, if our minority government gets forced to call in elections and the conservatives go out of power, chances are that we'll call off troops entirely no matter what happens. This Afghan quagmire is extremely unpopular here, we've been doing more than our fair share of the job, and we're getting tired of footing the bill both in terms of money spent and lives lost in a fight that we don't see coming to an end anytime soon. Moreover, all three opposition parties (The Bloc, NDP, and Liberals under Stephane Dion, who are likely to be the next government should the conservatives lose) are in agreement about getting our soldiers home.

So yeah.

I think that says it all. All things considered, we've put way too much effort in this, especially when you think that we had nothing at all to do in Afghanistan were it not for NATO. We've taken one for the team in the last 2 years, and if nobody else is willing to make an effort, then I consider it fair play for us to get out of there and let others deal with the mess in our place.

I do think that they have shouldered a lot more responsibility than other NATO members. They can't go on like this forever.

What the hell are you talking about? Aside from America, Britain has had the most troops in Afghanistan the longest doing the most fighting. Yes, Canada is taking a terrible burden, but they still have less overall responsibility than the British.

I know Canada is doing an oustanding job in Afghanistan, as are the Australians, which shows that once again only the Anglophonic countries have the balls to do the job.

What the hell are you talking about? Aside from America, Britain has had the most troops in Afghanistan the longest doing the most fighting. Yes, Canada is taking a terrible burden, but they still have less overall responsibility than the British.

I know Canada is doing an oustanding job in Afghanistan, as are the Australians, which shows that once again only the Anglophonic countries have the balls to do the job.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget
Consider the fact that the British Military budget is 7 times the Canadian military budget.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_combat_operations_in_Afghanistan_in_2006
Consider the fact that there are roughly 2500 Canadian soldiers, versus around 7000 British soldiers(not even 3 times as many).

Basically, if you consider the ratio, Canada has been doing a whole darn more than should be expected of us. We're no military superpower. 2500 Canadian soldiers, stationed in Kandahar, the bloodiest place in the country, is a very significant contribution.

Now don't get me wrong, this doesn't take anything back from the tremendous effort from the British troops. But the point is: Canada's threatening to withdraw comes from a sentiment that we've been doing far more than our fair share, in a war we did not start, in a country at the other side of the globe, which poses absolutely no threat to our national sovereignty.

''Course, if NATO sends reinforcement, it's a given the UK isn't expected to be the one who supplies them, considering their own significant contribution.

What the hell are you talking about? Aside from America, Britain has had the most troops in Afghanistan the longest doing the most fighting. Yes, Canada is taking a terrible burden, but they still have less overall responsibility than the British.



Skaladora's reply
we've been doing far more than our fair share, in a war we did not start, in a country at the other side of the globe, which poses absolutely no threat to our national sovereignty.

I can expand on this more. Your enemy is not everyone's enemy, and certainly not to the same degree. Canadians have put in more effort considering the threat they face from a taliban takeover of Afg.

Historically it has been UK and then the US which have been involved in that region. Not the Canadians. Even now, it is the Canadians who are facing the brunt of the attacks while UK goes around making deals with taliban.

I know Canada is doing an oustanding job in Afghanistan, as are the Australians, which shows that once again only the Anglophonic countries have the balls to do the job.

Problem is in Pakistan. No Anglophonic country has the balls to do the job there. Beating around the bush half-heatedly in Afghanistan won't do anything in the bigger scheme of things. The salafi takeover of Afg and Pak is getting more and more realistic.

There are conflicting reports on how it was done...what? so early??? usually the secondarytruths come -at least- a week later.

:confused:

I wonder when are they going to say, that the 2 suspected suicide bombers -in the pet market- where not really retarded. Or that the bombers were someone elses.

what? so early??? usually the secondarytruths come -at least- a week later.

:confused:

I wonder when are they going to say, that the 2 suspected suicide bombers -in the pet market- where not really retarded. Or that the bombers were someone elses.

Actually....usually conflicting reports come out of there first and then the official spin takes over. Because there is conflicting interests in reporting it. Paks don't want to admit that action was taken by US from inside of Pak soil. They feed something, US feeds something and the taliban will feed something else.