so we just dropped some bombs in somalia

[drizl]

looks like the united states government is taking advantage of their conflict to kill some more innocent people, and use the word "al qaeda" to justify it. american politics makes me sick to my stomach. how can we let this happen? why is there no outrage? is it because someone said "al qaeda"? wht about the innocent people who were killed? what about the fact that we feel we have the right to just fly into countries and drop bombs. talk about tyrrany. fuckin a.

[D_Raay]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6246063.stm

Is this distracting enough for ya?

[drizl]

i heard about that phone on npr today...right after an interview with a GM rep talking about how GM is leading the way in concept, and in biofuels and electric vehicles. marvelous.

[Schmeltz]

Hey, you guys are mired in at least one unwinnable war, maybe two. Now here your military-industrial complex has a golden opportunity to cash in on a war fought largely by other people, fire off a few missiles and deploy a few fighters, and claim a victory in a third front in the War on Terror! Remember how nobody had even heard of Somalia a month ago? Remember how Black Hawk Down was like fifteen years ago and nobody thought about it anymore? Well here's a chance to demonstrate some real progress - at the cost of absolutely zero American lives.

This really shouldn't come as a surprise.

[drizl]

thats whats so sad, it is no suprise, and american people will just let it happen.

[kaiser soze]

WAG THE DOG!!!!

[SobaViolence]

fucking americans.

[saz]

before getting ahead of yourself, wait and see if the us military did indeed take out al-qaeda operatives.

[D_Raay]

i heard about that phone on npr today...right after an interview with a GM rep talking about how GM is leading the way in concept, and in biofuels and electric vehicles. marvelous.

GM leading the way in alternatives to fossil fuels? Were his pants smoldering as he spoke?

[drizl]

i think his ass was on fire.


al qaeda or not, we do not have the right to fly into countries and start dropping bombs. you cant fight terrorist with terrorism...you only make more terrorists that way.

[drizl]

oh there is no hope in the american way!!!

[saz]

al qaeda or not, we do not have the right to fly into countries and start dropping bombs. you cant fight terrorist with terrorism...you only make more terrorists that way.

that's probably one of the most ridiculous statements on here i've ever read. granted, bush's illegal and immoral invasion of iraq has done nothing but been a gigantic recruiting incentive for al-qaeda and other fundamentalist extremists. regardless, al-qaeda are cold-blooded murderers, who have no regard for human life, even if it means killing their own, and women and children. if the united states and other countries who are participating in the war on terror, have the permission of said country to take out al-qaeda operatives within its borders, then i don't see anything wrong with it. yes, we do need to understand the enemy, their hatred of america, and what motivates them, ie us troops in saudi arabia/iraq/middle east, unequivocal support for israel while contributing to the repression of the palestinians, and not creating a palestinian nation, plus proping up and supporting repressive regimes throughout the middle east (egypt, saudi arabia, etc). but the bottom line is that al-qaeda is a fanatical, murderous, and criminal organization.

[D_Raay]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6251077.stm

[Pres Zount]

Nobody here cared about the heavy handed Etheopian way, but I suppose nobody here is Ethiopian.

As had already been said: before getting ahead of yourself, wait and see if the us military did indeed take out al-qaeda operatives.

I'd wager there are alterior motives behind this, but who really cares if it's just actual terrorists that die, right?

[drizl]

this was total bullshit. i think schmeltz hit the nail on the head. another weapon of mass destraction. this is ridiculous. dont fall for the bullshit again sazi. al qaeda is more than a terrorist organization, they are an excuse to control us.

[drizl]

0 terrorists killed
27 civilians.

should we start another terrorist/innocent civilian/us soldier death count?

[saz]

yeah they didn't get (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070111/ap_on_re_af/somalia_us) them unfortunately. al-qaeda members should be captured in order to face criminal prosecution, or killed.

this was total bullshit. i think schmeltz hit the nail on the head. another weapon of mass destraction. this is ridiculous. dont fall for the bullshit again sazi. al qaeda is more than a terrorist organization, they are an excuse to control us.

yeah, islamic extremists are just a tool of the cia to control us. right. i guess it's only a matter of time then until we start hearing about the role of the illuminati, the new world order, and how the aliens all fit into this.

[Tone Capone]

yeah, islamic extremists are just a tool of the cia to control us. right. i guess it's only a matter of time then until we start hearing about the role of the illuminati, the new world order, and how the aliens all fit into this.


LOL!!! :p (y)

[drizl]

yeah yeah:p (y) go get em dubya!!!! LOL LOL!!!!! yaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy!!!!!

first off, if you read the first sentence of your link sazi, you'll see that we didnt kill any of the terrorist. but its reported that we killed some people who were "close" to the terrorists. well, judging by the patriot act, and what some even here on the board might think of me, i might be considered to be "close" to al qaeda. that doesnt mean anything. they are just saying that to cover their ass because it sounds a lot better than saying we missed the terrorists and killed a bunch of innocent people.

this war on terror is bullshit and is only causing more terrorists, and more hatred for the united states, and US, its citizens. what will it take for you to realize that? another major attack? maybe you'll never figure it out. you might as well be dead.




this war on terror is an excuse for greater political and military aims as outlined in PNAC. thats all. the idea is that we have a major attack, get involved in the war on terror, which only increases the terrorism and gives greater reason for the war on terror until some day soon, the goals of total overhaul of the military, the opening of several permanent US bases abroad (in the middle east), a secure israel, and the procurement of oil are met. most likely, there will be a police state in america by then, that is, unless people like yourself continue to bark along and herald us airstrikes in somalia and the rest of the bogus war on terror.

let me ask you this: where does iraq fit into the war on terror? where does the raiding of irans embassy in iraq fit in the war on terror? where does oil fit in on the war on terror? why somalia? who profits off the war on terror? who planned the war on terror?

im not saying there are no islamic fascists. im not saying there arent any terrorists. im only saying that we are making it worse, and that the war on terror is not about defeating terrorism, its only made to make you feel that way.

[drizl]

yeah they didn't get (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070111/ap_on_re_af/somalia_us) them unfortunately. al-qaeda members should be captured in order to face criminal prosecution, or killed.



yeah, islamic extremists are just a tool of the cia to control us. right. i guess it's only a matter of time then until we start hearing about the role of the illuminati, the new world order, and how the aliens all fit into this.


thats typical, very intelligent of you.

[saz]

first off, if you read the first sentence of your link sazi, you'll see that we didnt kill any of the terrorist.

yeah thanks for the tip. that's why i acknowledged that fact, and made it quite clear in my third reply in this thread, that no al-qaeda operative was killed, ie 'yeah they didn't get them unfortunately'.


but its reported that we killed some people who were "close" to the terrorists. well, judging by the patriot act, and what some even here on the board might think of me, i might be considered to be "close" to al qaeda. that doesnt mean anything. they are just saying that to cover their ass because it sounds a lot better than saying we missed the terrorists and killed a bunch of innocent people.

considering that you might be close to al-qaeda, due to your views and opinions, is completely absurd.


this war on terror is bullshit and is only causing more terrorists, and more hatred for the united states, and US, its citizens. what will it take for you to realize that? another major attack? maybe you'll never figure it out. you might as well be dead.

now that's just silly. it's quite obvious that al-qaeda is waging their war against the united states, due to their presence in the middle east, their unwavering support of israel, which contributes to the ongoing repression of the palestinians, and the fact that the united states continues to support opressive regimes throughout the middle east. and i've already stated this, in this very thread, in my second reply, so i have no clue whatsoever why you'd actually imply that i don't comprehend the dynamics of this conflict. what's igniting the flames of islamic fundamentalism much further is bush's war in iraq.


let me ask you this: where does iraq fit into the war on terror? where does the raiding of irans embassy in iraq fit in the war on terror? where does oil fit in on the war on terror? why somalia? who profits off the war on terror? who planned the war on terror?

oh, you're asking me a question now eh. i thought i might as well be dead lol. i don't believe that iraq, the raiding of an iranian embassy in northern iraq, and oil has anything to do with the war on terror.


thats typical, very intelligent of you.

you have to love the irony here:


you might as well be dead.

[D_Raay]

You guys basically agree why are you arguing?

[drizl]

al qaeda didnt do 9-11, they didnt do london, they didnt do madrid. they were the terrorist organization chosen to take the blame, used as a means of igniting, prolonging and claiming victory in the war on terror.

in much of what i said you seemed to completely missed the context. yes its absurd to label innocent people as al qaeda operatives. thats why its absurd to kill a bunch of innocent people and then say that they were "linked to al qaeda". their only connection was probably the fact that they were killed by bombs that the administration later said killed al qaeda operatives.

how would you feel if your entire family was killed in an air raid that was meant to kill one or two or three terrorists. its bullshit. its not doing anything but causing more trouble and pain.


sazi i ask you those questions because you support the war on terror. iraq is not a training ground for al qaeda and extremists. its a country destroyed by the united states twice now, involved in conflict many times over the past 100 or so years, war torn and ravaged, now caught in civil war. there is no war on terror. there is only the carrying out of the administrations agenda to see thru PNAC.

tag your it, take it apart, take it all out of context and react.

[drizl]

You guys basically agree why are you arguing?

i think we are arguing because sazi, like most others and the media(so i dont blame him) believe the war on terror is justified, and that going into countries and killing innocent people in the name of the war on terror is ok.

i disagree and think the war on terror is totally unjustified and is only a grouping of words used to instigate fear and support for the us military being used to carry out a greater agenda outlined by PNAC. in other words, its bogus.

[Schmeltz]

I think you've misconstrued sazi's point, drizl, though of course I don't presume to speak for him. Or her. You never know on the internet. But anyway, I think you may have gone too far in casting al-Qaeda as an entirely fictional construct, or as a straw man siezed upon by the neocons as the perfect justification for the perpetuation of their ideology. I don't dispute that 9/11 was used by the Bushies as a massive opportunity to implement an agenda that was well-defined years before Bush took office; any excuse probably would have done. But I think it's equally true that al-Qaeda is a perfectly legitimate and independent organization that would have performed its vicious and murderous terrorist deeds no matter who was in the White House when they came to fruition.

It's true on one level that al-Qaeda did not carry out the bombings in London or Madrid or Mumbai or wherever. But at the same time they did, on one level. It becomes clearer when you look at what al-Qaeda really is - it's not a centrally directed organization anymore. When bin Laden and al-Zawahri were driven underground by the American response to 9/11, al-Qaeda fractured. It became a term, an idea, a concept adopted by any independent terrorist cell or organization looking to make a name for itself. You have only to look at bin Laden's statements about Abu Musab al-Zarqawi to realize that. Osama bin Laden probably has no direct control over anything that happens outside the Tora Bora range on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, if he's even still alive. No, al-Qaeda is still out there - but it has assumed a form that even its founding members wouldn't recognize. That's all.

And honestly, it's still important for the Western world to mount some kind of opposition to what al-Qaeda represents. At this point we all have a stake in the future of Islam, and it is in all our best interests for the progressive elements in Islam to take the upper hand in the face of the militants and fanatics who have hijacked it and perverted it in the name of their insane vision of the future. The fact that Bush and his cronies have made a hamfisted hash of the situation shouldn't blind anyone to the fact that there is a very real struggle going on for the heart of Islam, and if the wrong side wins there will be many more Iraqs, and many more 9/11s, and infinitely more death and suffering before any kind of productive solution is reached.

The inept, incompetent, ignorant leadership of the Western world is only half of the problem. The other half involves ethnic and religious dimensions that are difficult for any of us to comprehend and will ultimately be resolved internally. Hopefully for the better.

[Tone Capone]

al qaeda didnt do 9-11, they didnt do london, they didnt do madrid. they were the terrorist organization chosen to take the blame, used as a means of igniting, prolonging and claiming victory in the war on terror.

in much of what i said you seemed to completely missed the context. yes its absurd to label innocent people as al qaeda operatives. thats why its absurd to kill a bunch of innocent people and then say that they were "linked to al qaeda". their only connection was probably the fact that they were killed by bombs that the administration later said killed al qaeda operatives.

how would you feel if your entire family was killed in an air raid that was meant to kill one or two or three terrorists. its bullshit. its not doing anything but causing more trouble and pain.


sazi i ask you those questions because you support the war on terror. iraq is not a training ground for al qaeda and extremists. its a country destroyed by the united states twice now, involved in conflict many times over the past 100 or so years, war torn and ravaged, now caught in civil war. there is no war on terror. there is only the carrying out of the administrations agenda to see thru PNAC.

tag your it, take it apart, take it all out of context and react.

LOL!!!!

[SobaViolence]

i am curious why americans feel the need to bring democracy and freedom to arabs/muslims when a great number of amercans fear and/or hate them...

[Tone Capone]

i am curious why americans feel the need to bring democracy and freedom to arabs/muslims when a great number of amercans fear and/or hate them...

Where as in the UK they do the same thing but actually hate them MORE.

The only difference is that for some reason they think they always have the right to point at the States and never at themselves.

[drizl]

schmeltz, i totally agree that al qaeda exists, and that terrorism and extremists are not good things. but it was never the problem that it is today, and it will take a long long time before things ever get resolved, if they ever do. this administration in the us has just created a dimension of hatred that will last a very long time. the war on terror has done nothing positive, only negative to this country, to the middle east, towards breeding terrorists, to the world.

but, the war on terror was not designed to defeat terrorism, only to create further terrorism and more reason and distraction to carry out PNAC.

if there was any misunderstanding of sazi, i am sorry...but i think that anyone who supports this war on terror is supporting an endless war, where millions will eventually die- for no good cause.
we are all pawns in ths war.

[saz]

(y)

I think you've misconstrued sazi's point, drizl, though of course I don't presume to speak for him. Or her. You never know on the internet. But anyway, I think you may have gone too far in casting al-Qaeda as an entirely fictional construct, or as a straw man siezed upon by the neocons as the perfect justification for the perpetuation of their ideology. I don't dispute that 9/11 was used by the Bushies as a massive opportunity to implement an agenda that was well-defined years before Bush took office; any excuse probably would have done. But I think it's equally true that al-Qaeda is a perfectly legitimate and independent organization that would have performed its vicious and murderous terrorist deeds no matter who was in the White House when they came to fruition.

It's true on one level that al-Qaeda did not carry out the bombings in London or Madrid or Mumbai or wherever. But at the same time they did, on one level. It becomes clearer when you look at what al-Qaeda really is - it's not a centrally directed organization anymore. When bin Laden and al-Zawahri were driven underground by the American response to 9/11, al-Qaeda fractured. It became a term, an idea, a concept adopted by any independent terrorist cell or organization looking to make a name for itself. You have only to look at bin Laden's statements about Abu Musab al-Zarqawi to realize that. Osama bin Laden probably has no direct control over anything that happens outside the Tora Bora range on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, if he's even still alive. No, al-Qaeda is still out there - but it has assumed a form that even its founding members wouldn't recognize. That's all.

And honestly, it's still important for the Western world to mount some kind of opposition to what al-Qaeda represents. At this point we all have a stake in the future of Islam, and it is in all our best interests for the progressive elements in Islam to take the upper hand in the face of the militants and fanatics who have hijacked it and perverted it in the name of their insane vision of the future. The fact that Bush and his cronies have made a hamfisted hash of the situation shouldn't blind anyone to the fact that there is a very real struggle going on for the heart of Islam, and if the wrong side wins there will be many more Iraqs, and many more 9/11s, and infinitely more death and suffering before any kind of productive solution is reached.

The inept, incompetent, ignorant leadership of the Western world is only half of the problem. The other half involves ethnic and religious dimensions that are difficult for any of us to comprehend and will ultimately be resolved internally. Hopefully for the better.




if there was any misunderstanding of sazi, i am sorry...but i think that anyone who supports this war on terror is supporting an endless war, where millions will eventually die- for no good cause.
we are all pawns in ths war.

thank you. and eradicating international terrorism isn't necessarily done through bombs and military operations. effectively combating terrorism is accomplished through coordinated law enforcement and intelligence efforts.