Should we hand over the world to Al-Qaida?

[sr71blackbird]

They seem to have rebuilt themselves (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070711/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_terror_threat) despite our best efforts to thwart them. Since the world public lacks the willpower to truly fight this enemy to extinction, should we capitulate and let them take over?
Is that their goal, anyway? Is their goal simply to wipe us out and rebuilt the world as an radical Islamic state? What is our future if we cannot defeat them? Are we just bankrupting ourselves trying to prolong the inevitable? Can we ever really win? What would happen to us if we did give it up to them?

http://news.softpedia.com/images/news2/New-Al-Qaida-Suspect-List-Issued-by-Saudis-2.jpg

[cougarjake13]

They seem to have rebuilt themselves (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070711/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_terror_threat) despite our best efforts to thwart them. Since the world public lacks the willpower to truly fight this enemy to extinction, should we capitulate and let them take over?
Is that their goal, anyway? Is their goal simply to wipe us out and rebuilt the world as an radical Islamic state? What is our future if we cannot defeat them? Are we just bankrupting ourselves trying to prolong the inevitable? Can we ever really win? What would happen to us if we did give it up to them?

http://news.softpedia.com/images/news2/New-Al-Qaida-Suspect-List-Issued-by-Saudis-2.jpg

if we gave up what would happen you ask ???

either be killed or forced to convert to their idelogy and religion

[Furtherman]

It's because our administration hasn't had the balls to tell Pakistan to stand aside while we cross their borders and do some real damage. Afghanastan is lost too... but that's because we sent everyone to Iraq. *sigh* Whatever chance we had to cripple them, we lost on that night we first bombed Baghdad. I didn't understand it then, and I still don't now.

[Furtherman]

if we gave up what would happen you ask ???

either be killed or forced to convert to their idelogy and religion

Well maybe if some interstellar galactic army teamed up with al-Qaida we would be in danger of coverting to save ourselves but I think that's giving them too much credit.

[sr71blackbird]

What I am wondering is would there be less casualties the world over if we just gave up and let them "win"?

Not that I want to. I hope this is understood...

[sailor]

What I am wondering is would there be less casualties the world over if we just gave up and let them "win"?

Not that I want to. I hope this is understood...

of course, in any war if either side just gives up there will be less casualties.

[underdog]

I wish Shapopo Joe was here to we could get his opinion. :sad:

[Judge Smails]

Should we hand over the world to Al-Qaida?

And then live our lives under the thumb of fundamentalist religious zealots? I for one would never . . . oh wait . . . never mind.

[EliSnow]

WTF? Is it just me or is the tenor of this thread a little too defeatist?

Yes, they've rebuilt. And the administration's efforts in Iraq clearly don't seem to have stopped Al Quaida from rebuilding, but it's not like we're facing the end of our country or our way of life.

The fact that they have rebuilt means they are a serious threat. And there's a good chance they'll hit us again. But the fact that they could attack us and hurt us, doesn't mean they've won or are close to it.

Times like this, I think what it must have been like for the British during the Blitz in 1940-41. They were getting hit consistently by German bombs and lost about 43,000 people. They were pretty much the only ones fighting the Germans then, and they had cause to despair. But they kept up their fight.

At this time, we're not close to being in their position. If faced with that position, I think we as a people can do what they did.

[Fallon]

http://news.softpedia.com/images/news2/New-Al-Qaida-Suspect-List-Issued-by-Saudis-2.jpg
Isn't that the Unhallowed logo?

[cupcakelove]

Yes we can win, we just need to actually fight terrorism instead of saying we're fighting and invading countries that have nothing to do with terrorism.

[PapaBear]

They don't want the world. Just the Muslim parts.

edit: and the Jewish part.

[sr71blackbird]

I dont think the world public will ever have the balls to actually drive them into extinction. No matter what they do and how atrocious, I just cannot see any way the world will allow the elimination of a religious philosophy, even if it is militant. Even though not doing so incredibly stupid on the worlds part.

[sailor]

They don't want the world. Just the Muslim parts.

edit: and the Jewish part.

ana ng?

[EliSnow]

I dont think the world public will ever have the balls to actually drive them into extinction. No matter what they do and how atrocious, I just cannot see any way the world will allow the elimination of a religious philosophy, even if it is militant. Even though not doing so incredibly stupid on the worlds part.

What are you talking about? Are you saying that we should drive Muslims into extincition? Are you talking about zealot jihad muslims?

You don't need to "drive" them into exinction to eliminate the problem. At one point, different sects of Christianity were at each other's throats trying to eliminate the other sects. We really don't see that now.

My point is that there are a number of ways to skin a cat. To solve this problem, there are more solutions that either capitulation or driving a religious philosophy into extinction. We need to be able to fight those who attack us or are planning to attack us, but at the same time there are other things we can do to help get past this us v. them mindset, where one side or the other needs to be exterminated.

[prothunderball]

Like most other problems were having in the world right now, another thing that is going to have to happen before we could truly take out Al-Qaida is we are going to have to get past our dependence on petroleum. The fact of the matter is that most of the money and a lot of the support for Al-Qaida comes from Saudi Arabia and our government simply isn't willing to put the amount of pressure necessary on Saudi Arabia to stop them for fear that they would drive oil costs up even higher. To dig up one of my favorite cliche's, it's the golden rule; he who has the gold makes the rules.

[cupcakelove]

kbird;1388389]I dont think the world public will ever have the balls to actually drive them into extinction. No matter what they do and how atrocious, I just cannot see any way the world will allow the elimination of a religious philosophy, even if it is militant. Even though not doing so incredibly stupid on the worlds part.

AL Qaeda is not a religious philosophy.

[EliSnow]

This thread suddenly reminded me of what Ronnie said today about the current debate/discussion from those under 35 about the Iraq conflict. It's either "nuke them" or "get our boys home."

[high fly]

They seem to have rebuilt themselves (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070711/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_terror_threat) despite our best efforts to thwart them.


Not really.
I reccomend you read Not A Good Day To Die by Sean Naylor, First In by Gary Schroen and Jawbreaker by Gary Berntsen.
They were there for the campaign in Afghanistan.

We did not put forth our best effort, not even close.
For the first time since 1942, an American battalion went into combat without the artillery requested by the ground commander.
The Bush administration nit-picked other deployments of attack helicopters and troops, preventing our best efforts.
Even when the infrared heat signitures of fleeing al Qaeda and Talibanners were followed by our military intelligence, requests to bomb them were denied by stateside chickenhawks. The argument was that in the middle of witer in waist-deep snow, those might well be shepherds at 10,000 feet tending their flocks.

Our military ground forces did not get a single significant al Qaeda leader in Afghanistan because the Bush administration decided to go in light and on the cheap. They were scared to send in troops in the numbers needed to get the job done and despite having formations in the Army and Marine Corps that may be deployed in hours, it took 5 months before we had enough troops on the ground to conduct operations.
The bad guys escaped because the Bush administration would not listen to the experts in the field, and thus left the back door wide open.

Making it even worse is General Tommy Franks was given the Presidential Medal of Freedom for not acomplishing the job (Franks, in his book American Soldier twice clearly stated the mission was not to defeat al Qaeda and the Taliban, but to "destroy" them).
Rewarding failure insures we will have more of the same in the future.



Oh, and the same day Bush announced "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq, Rumsfeld announced the same with regard to operations in Afghanistan.

[CofyCrakCocaine]

Here's the big problem you chowderheads. CCC common sense political relations 101 for the water-headed.

Bush deliberately refused to *define* the enemy and what would constitute victory against said defined enemy and thus ensure our boys go home. He did this for a special reason: anonymous enemy makes for anonymous war plans, anonymous targets, and anonymous directions in a conflict that has an anonymous purpose. In layman's terms: So he could do whatever the fuck he wanted, wherever he wanted, for however long he wanted.

Casablanca Conference, 1943. The unconditional surrender of the Axis forces was demanded- the war would not end with an armistice, a peace treaty, but total and complete surrender of both the armies and the ending of the Axis governments and all their officials to be brought into custody. This defined the ultimate objective and who the enemy was that needed to be brought down for good in this war: Hitler, Mussolini, and their respective Nazi and Fascist parties. This proved invaluable in both giving the war direction, morale for the Allies, and most importantly, highlighted a very possible goal that would bring an end to the current conflict.

Not so for this War on Turr. If they are brown, have black hair and beards, are Muslim and have guns, they are automatically called "Al Qaeda" or "Terrorists". And yet half if not most of the insurgents in Iraq are decidedly not Al Qaeda, but a conglomeration of local militias, homegrown fighters whose families and/or friends were destroyed by the bombings, and border crossing troublemakers (who may or may not be funded and trained by Syria and Iran) a la the Kansas Territories in the 1850's. We have no idea what their identity is, though we probably could find out, if we and the Administration cared to. All we know is that they attack us, and they are the enemy, but what faction are they? Are they ALL true terrorists, who have been members of Al Qaeda? Probably not- though anyone who targets a host of civilians in my book is a terrorist. But the simple fact that people think Iraqis are the true enemy of America shows how truly duped we are as a nation. It's not Iraqis- it's terrorists, alot of them not from Iraq. Alot of them not IN Iraq. Oh well, people, it's your trillions of tax payer dollars you want to flush down the toilet. Go ahead. China wins.

The real force of Al Qaeda, as Funkster well pointed it out, lie currently in Northern Pakistan- alongside the still formidable numbers of the Taliban. Pakistan, also the country whose civilian body is loudly proud that their top nuclear scientist sold nuclear secrets to North Korea and Iran, which is why those two countries are now the "Axis of Evil" in the first place. Radical Shiite clerics in Baghdad probably had less to do with the World Trade Center bombings in 2001 than the scum that are in Pakistan and Afghanistan did. Our forces in Afghanistan find the major economic pipelines for the Taliban and Al Qaeda (as well as militant fundamentalist factions), those being the heroin (poppy) factories... and turn a blind eye to them. The official statement as of some sergeant quoted in 2003 was "It's not our problem". That and the United States knows that the warlords also get money through those factories, and they want warlord support. Special forces guys who disobeyed orders and actually sought out and hunted Taliban forces were arrested, put on trial, and sent to prison (odd, considering that the United States puts bounties on Taliban and Al Qaeda but it shant allow its own people to conduct this bounty hunting- only foreigners are allowed to do this- double retard standards anyone?).

So I guess the real problem is: We have no idea who the enemy in this fucked "War on Turr" really is. And the reason why is because the guys in charge don't WANT this war to end. It's their best and worst card at the same time... "Sure...I fucked up Iraq...but you need us...cuz we know how to fight...if you elect weaklings, they'll take the fight to us!" And it allows the continued proliferation of funds to questionable organizations that already have alot of money in the US...while your average U.S. veteran gets shafted in medical treatment, care, and rehabilitation... and the American public, conservatives and liberals alike, have for the most part looked upon this travesty with a blind eye.

Define the enemy. Define who needs to be taken out to end this. The entire organization of fanatical muslims in the world is just not a viable and realistic target. Nor is the annihilation of every member of Al Qaeda, however desirable that might be. But disrupt their networks, disrupt their funding, disrupt their supplies...this could be done. It's not however. And instead of asking ourselves why...we should just go ahead, declare that's what we need to do, and do it. None of this McMiddle-East bullshit where we try to Americanize the so-called "savages" of the Middle East (the English failed miserably at this venture- why the fuck would we fare any better? Read your history books you assholes- Bush was a C student who majored in History...that should tell ya something!!!!).

As for Al Qaeda winning, no, they never would. Even if we lay down our arms. Other Muslims would get tired of their shit and start killing them... Muslims kill each other all the time when it comes to factions... Same with medieval Christians. I will merely reference the current shit going down with Hamas and Fatwah... or Shiite versus Sunni.

So there. Define the enemy. Destroy the enemy as best you can. Stop attaching bullshit objectives to it. It seems so simple, doesn't it? It's a shame we wage war trying to piss off as few people as possible...that we wind up pissing off way more people than if we had just went in and blew shit up and left. I mean, can you imagine the international outrage if the United States actually detained those relatives of Bin Laden right after 9-11? God. It makes me shake with fear.

[prothunderball]

Here's the big problem you chowderheads. CCC common sense political relations 101 for the water-headed.

Bush deliberately refused to *define* the enemy and what would constitute victory against said defined enemy and thus ensure our boys go home. He did this for a special reason: anonymous enemy makes for anonymous war plans, anonymous targets, and anonymous directions in a conflict that has an anonymous purpose. In layman's terms: So he could do whatever the fuck he wanted, wherever he wanted, for however long he wanted.

Casablanca Conference, 1943. The unconditional surrender of the Axis forces was demanded- the war would not end with an armistice, a peace treaty, but total and complete surrender of both the armies and the ending of the Axis governments and all their officials to be brought into custody. This defined the ultimate objective and who the enemy was that needed to be brought down for good in this war: Hitler, Mussolini, and their respective Nazi and Fascist parties. This proved invaluable in both giving the war direction, morale for the Allies, and most importantly, highlighted a very possible goal that would bring an end to the current conflict.

Not so for this War on Turr. If they are brown, have black hair and beards, are Muslim and have guns, they are automatically called "Al Qaeda" or "Terrorists". And yet half if not most of the insurgents in Iraq are decidedly not Al Qaeda, but a conglomeration of local militias, homegrown fighters whose families and/or friends were destroyed by the bombings, and border crossing troublemakers (who may or may not be funded and trained by Syria and Iran) a la the Kansas Territories in the 1850's. We have no idea what their identity is, though we probably could find out, if we and the Administration cared to. All we know is that they attack us, and they are the enemy, but what faction are they? Are they ALL true terrorists, who have been members of Al Qaeda? Probably not- though anyone who targets a host of civilians in my book is a terrorist. But the simple fact that people think Iraqis are the true enemy of America shows how truly duped we are as a nation. It's not Iraqis- it's terrorists, alot of them not from Iraq. Alot of them not IN Iraq. Oh well, people, it's your trillions of tax payer dollars you want to flush down the toilet. Go ahead. China wins.

The real force of Al Qaeda, as Funkster well pointed it out, lie currently in Northern Pakistan- alongside the still formidable numbers of the Taliban. Pakistan, also the country whose civilian body is loudly proud that their top nuclear scientist sold nuclear secrets to North Korea and Iran, which is why those two countries are now the "Axis of Evil" in the first place. Radical Shiite clerics in Baghdad probably had less to do with the World Trade Center bombings in 2001 than the scum that are in Pakistan and Afghanistan did. Our forces in Afghanistan find the major economic pipelines for the Taliban and Al Qaeda (as well as militant fundamentalist factions), those being the heroin (poppy) factories... and turn a blind eye to them. The official statement as of some sergeant quoted in 2003 was "It's not our problem". That and the United States knows that the warlords also get money through those factories, and they want warlord support. Special forces guys who disobeyed orders and actually sought out and hunted Taliban forces were arrested, put on trial, and sent to prison (odd, considering that the United States puts bounties on Taliban and Al Qaeda but it shant allow its own people to conduct this bounty hunting- only foreigners are allowed to do this- double retard standards anyone?).

So I guess the real problem is: We have no idea who the enemy in this fucked "War on Turr" really is. And the reason why is because the guys in charge don't WANT this war to end. It's their best and worst card at the same time... "Sure...I fucked up Iraq...but you need us...cuz we know how to fight...if you elect weaklings, they'll take the fight to us!" And it allows the continued proliferation of funds to questionable organizations that already have alot of money in the US...while your average U.S. veteran gets shafted in medical treatment, care, and rehabilitation... and the American public, conservatives and liberals alike, have for the most part looked upon this travesty with a blind eye.

Define the enemy. Define who needs to be taken out to end this. The entire organization of fanatical muslims in the world is just not a viable and realistic target. Nor is the annihilation of every member of Al Qaeda, however desirable that might be. But disrupt their networks, disrupt their funding, disrupt their supplies...this could be done. It's not however. And instead of asking ourselves why...we should just go ahead, declare that's what we need to do, and do it. None of this McMiddle-East bullshit where we try to Americanize the so-called "savages" of the Middle East (the English failed miserably at this venture- why the fuck would we fare any better? Read your history books you assholes- Bush was a C student who majored in History...that should tell ya something!!!!).

As for Al Qaeda winning, no, they never would. Even if we lay down our arms. Other Muslims would get tired of their shit and start killing them... Muslims kill each other all the time when it comes to factions... Same with medieval Christians.

So there. Define the enemy. Destroy the enemy as best you can. Stop attaching bullshit objectives to it. It seems so simple, doesn't it? It's a shame we wage war trying to piss off as few people as possible...that we wind up pissing off way more people than if we had just went in and blew shit up and left. I mean, can you imagine the international outrage if the United States actually detained those relatives of Bin Laden right after 9-11? God. It makes me shake with fear.

um I swear I'm not stupid, and I generally don't mind reading long posts, but I have to draw the line somewhere. I did enjoy the first and last paragraphs though, and agree with them.

[CofyCrakCocaine]

um I swear I'm not stupid, and I generally don't mind reading long posts, but I have to draw the line somewhere. I did enjoy the first and last paragraphs though, and agree with them.

Exactly why we're fucked. ;)

But thanks anyway.

Print it out and read it while you're dropping ur next turd dammit!! I'm sure I make good shitting material at the least. :(

[cupcakelove]

Exactly why we're fucked. ;)

But thanks anyway.

Print it out and read it while you're dropping ur next turd dammit!! I'm sure I make good shitting material at the least. :(

Gotta have something to wipe with!!!











Just Kidding.

[high fly]

um I swear I'm not stupid, and I generally don't mind reading long posts, but I have to draw the line somewhere. I did enjoy the first and last paragraphs though, and agree with them.


How 'bout mine?
Talk about mine!

[prothunderball]

How 'bout mine?
Talk about mine!

yours seems about right, it's really not a lot of fun for me to talk about stuff I agree with, I'd rather point out why people are stupid.

[high fly]

http://news.aol.com/story/_a/al-qaida-has-rebuilt-us-intel-warns/n20070711201509990006

Counterterrorism analysts produced the document, titled "Al-Qaida better positioned to strike the West." The document focuses on the terror group's safe haven in Pakistan and makes a range of observations about the threat posed to the United States and its allies, officials said.

Al-Qaida is "considerably operationally stronger than a year ago" and has "regrouped to an extent not seen since 2001," the official said, paraphrasing the report's conclusions. "They are showing greater and greater ability to plan attacks in Europe and the United States."

The group also has created "the most robust training program since 2001, with an interest in using European operatives," the official quoted the report as saying.



Mission accomplished?

[IamFogHat]

I'm scared.

[cougarjake13]

Well maybe if some interstellar galactic army teamed up with al-Qaida we would be in danger of coverting to save ourselves but I think that's giving them too much credit.

it is probable ??? no


but he asked what would happen if we did nothing and in my opinion those are the two options

[high fly]

John Kringen, who heads the CIA's analysis directorate, echoed the concerns about al-Qaida's resurgence during testimony and conversations with reporters at a House Armed Services Committee hearing on Wednesday.

"They seem to be fairly well settled into the safe haven and the ungoverned spaces of Pakistan,"


good thing the bulk of our combat power is tied down three counties over to the west!

WAY TO "SMOKE-EM OUT," GEORGE!

[Yerdaddy]

I read this story this morning and it depressed me. The first post depressed me more. Then EliSnow and CCC's posts made me feel better.

In the broadest sense we won't defeat al-Qaeda with the super-retard-forearm stregth that our government has applied so far. Obviously. And, because we are a democracy we won't stop using retard-power until Americans recognize that citizens who are ignorant and crazy will produce governments that are ignorant and crazy and the only solution is to pay attention and stop listening to people who are liars or just plain wrong about this shit. We didn't become a great nation and defeat our past enemies by being strong and stupid. We defeated them by being strong and smart. So until Americans care enough to learn about terrorism and demand smart solutions and elect smart honest people (or at least the smartest most honest people available) then we'll continue to live with the threat of terrorism.

Al-Qaeda will never take over America and anyone who even suggests they might one day should be ridiculed into obscurity. They're fear-mongering liars with an agenda that isn't about beating al-Qaeda. The longer we continue to listen to these cocksuckers, the more blood and treasure we'll lose to them and terrorists.

Iraq never should have been, but it is critical to the defeat of al-Qaeda. Both parties have been using the war for their own political agendas; Bush is on a mission from God and his backers have given him a free hand to pursue it regardless of it's cost; the Democrats are responding to the simplistic logic that the public is expressing: win or get out. It's a false dichotomy that guarantees we'll make every problem - from Iraq, al-Qaeda, our security, our economy, and the lives of our soldiers who will be sent back if we pull out - worse. We, as a people, have a choice: accept the complexity and deal with it complexly, or lose everything we hope to gain by pulling out. I've only seen one presidential candidate that has even addressed the war with honesty and courage and his campaign is sinking fast. Again. For what it's worth I have nothing but contempt for the positions of all the other candidates on Iraq, and I consider that a sign that they will all continue to lose ground against terrorism for the length of their terms as well. What we need is an FDR and what we've got is a bunch of Bushs and Chamberlains. Either we demand better plans from them, (like we didn't do before Iraq), or we will suffer through more of the same losses of the last six years.

The world is not to blame for losing our battles. At the same time the Congressional cafeteria was coming up with "Freedom Fries" France was leading the NATO operations in Kabul. We have cut anti-terrorism funds from African and other countries simply because they supported the International Criminal Court. We have done nothing to broker peace between Israel and Palestine. We tried to force elections on Palestine, Lebanon and Iraq as though elections = democracy, and then we punished the publics when they didn't elect who we wanted. We belittled the opinions of some 80% of the world's opinions in going into Iraq. We refused offers of assistance against al-Qaeda from Syria and Iran because we preferred having them as enemies than allies. As the largest contributor to climate change we are about the last country to even acknowledge it's existance, even as it already impacts the lives of millions of people already. Six years ago the symbol of America was the Statue of Liberty, (I still see signs of this in the form of American flag baseball hats on Thai people's heads and carseats on Cambodian cars), but now its Guantanamo and Iraq.

Nevertheless NATO troops are still dying in Afghanistan, Indonesia is aggressively going after it's al-Qaeda cells, recently capturing the head of Jamiyyat Islamia - the group responsible for the Bali bombings, Saudi Arabia is reforming at its own delicate pace while having killed or captured all of its known al-Qaeda heads known to have operated there, and, according to the Treasury Department has made strides in cutting off terrorist financing coming from the country. And yet Saudi Arabia is still the favorite whipping boy of both right and left idologues who exploit the fact that our public knows nothing about that country, allowing Congressional "leaders" to pass legislation insulting one of our critical allies for the benefit of another.

In short, as long as we still come in last place in National Geographic's global geography quiz we will continue to elect stupid people and tell them to do stupid things that make our enemies stronger and ourselves weaker.

In simple terms: this is our fault, and the solution is up to us. That's why we have a democracy in the first place.

[A.J.]

Nevertheless NATO troops are still dying in Afghanistan, Indonesia is aggressively going after it's al-Qaeda cells, recently capturing the head of Jamiyyat Islamia - the group responsible for the Bali bombings, Saudi Arabia is reforming at its own delicate pace while having killed or captured all of its known al-Qaeda heads known to have operated there, and, according to the Treasury Department has made strides in cutting off terrorist financing coming from the country. And yet Saudi Arabia is still the favorite whipping boy of both right and left idologues who exploit the fact that our public knows nothing about that country, allowing Congressional "leaders" to pass legislation insulting one of our critical allies for the benefit of another.

And don't forget about the Philippines going after the ASG, JI and MILF (huh huh huh) forces there.

I'm by no means a Saudi apologist -- they do a lot of things that piss me off. But they're also one of the few friends we have there (and they have been since the 1930s -- that predates the establishment of Israel) so for this country to constantly send senior Administration officials over there to tell them all the wrong things they are doing, and to have the pro-Israel lobby in Congress bash them, is not going to make them want to work with/for us.

[A.J.]

They don't want the world. Just the Muslim parts.

edit: and the Jewish part.

Westchester County, NY?

[Yerdaddy]

And don't forget about the Philippines going after the ASG, JI and MILF (huh huh huh) forces there.

I'm by no means a Saudi apologist -- they do a lot of things that piss me off. But they're also one of the few friends we have there (and they have been since the 1930s -- that predates the establishment of Israel) so for this country to constantly send senior Administration officials over there to tell them all the wrong things they are doing, and to have the pro-Israel lobby in Congress bash them, is not going to make them want to work with/for us.

I love hearing the argument: "The royal family are all living large, drinking and banging chicks while they pretend to be good Muslims!"

Those are the Saudis you CAN trust!!!

Most of the Saudis I met in Yemen lived in Texas at one time or another. Not sure why, but true story.

[A.J.]

Most of the Saudis I met in Yemen lived in Texas at one time or another. Not sure why, but true story.

Oil. The schools in Texas teach courses relevant to the oil industry. Plus the climate and geography is similar.

Adil Al-Jubayr, the current Saudi Ambasador to the U.S., went to the University of North Texas.

There are also a lot of Saudis in Arizona.

[Yerdaddy]

Oil. The schools in Texas teach courses relevant to the oil industry. Plus the climate and geography is similar.
Adil Al-Jubayr, the current Saudi Ambasador to the U.S., went to the University of North Texas.

There are also a lot of Saudis in Arizona.

And yet where did they put the Iraqi refugees we let in after the first Iraq War and all the other Arabs we resettle? Michigan. Fucking Saudis get all the good weather!

[high fly]

I read this story this morning and it depressed me. The first post depressed me more. Then EliSnow and CCC's posts made me feel better.

In the broadest sense we won't defeat al-Qaeda with the super-retard-forearm stregth that our government has applied so far. Obviously. And, because we are a democracy we won't stop using retard-power until Americans recognize that citizens who are ignorant and crazy will produce governments that are ignorant and crazy and the only solution is to pay attention and stop listening to people who are liars or just plain wrong about this shit. We didn't become a great nation and defeat our past enemies by being strong and stupid. We defeated them by being strong and smart. So until Americans care enough to learn about terrorism and demand smart solutions and elect smart honest people (or at least the smartest most honest people available) then we'll continue to live with the threat of terrorism.

Yes.
George Custer tried to use conventional tactics against an unconventional foe and look what it got him.
Same lesson in Vietnam.
Conventional forces will not get the job done, nor will our special forces if we keep expanding them to the point they become conventional forces.
Bigger is not better in this arena.
One of the requirements of having successful anti-terrorism forces is to keep them small and agile.
The best person to kill a guerilla is another guerilla and the best weapon to kill a guerilla is a knife, and the worst is a missile or bomb. To learn this in depth, please read A Bright Shining Lie by Neil Sheehan.
We are expanding our SEALs and Delta Force units to the detriment of our security. Notice how they are now being used in conventional roles for which they were not designed to carry out.


Al-Qaeda will never take over America and anyone who even suggests they might one day should be ridiculed into obscurity. They're fear-mongering liars with an agenda that isn't about beating al-Qaeda. The longer we continue to listen to these cocksuckers, the more blood and treasure we'll lose to them and terrorists.

Again, I agree. They have demonstrated nothing but a profound incompetence.
Al Qaeda has a three-part long-term strategy, with this part the third, and they will never get there. Terrorist groups, by the sort of people they attract as well as the pressures of living clandestinely make them particularly fractious and vulnerable to poison pen letters and other tactics to turn them on themselves.
They tend to divide and divide and fight amongst themselves.
Anyone heard from Black September lately?
Anyone familiar with the history of the PFLP?
First the original leader foreswore terrorism, so Waddi Haddad formed the PFLP Special Operations Group. From that split off the PFLP-General Command.
From the Special Operations Group Ilich Ramirez Sanchez split off another splinter group and there was at least one other, and all the while they fought each other.
These terrorist groups as well as insurgency organizations like the Taliban, or the PLO, prove to be crappy administrators if they get a bit of political power, and they are usually unable to hold what they take.
So to think they can control and administer an area with the divisions we see in the Persian Gulf, much less a whole continent of the entire world is ridiculous.


I think something needs to be understood about al Qaeda.
It is not one organzation or even one grouping of organizations.
Typically, the Bush administration is presenting it falsely to justify the war in Iraq.
It must be seen as three types of organizations.
First, is al Qaeda the parent organization with but a few thousand members. This outfit does two things - it trains and deploys terrorists and it trains and deploys insurgents. Remember when we went into Afghanistan and there was talk of the AQ camps, and how tens of thousands of people had been trained in them? Some estimated were as high as a hundred thousand.
Well, we haven't seen a hundred thousand suicide bombers, have we?
That is because most of them were trained as insurgents, and a few percent were trained as terrorists.
Those insurgents spread out and established liaison with other groups and worked with them to bring about insurgent warfare, the Philippines, for example. These type groups are a separate category and they have some autonomy from the al Qaeda command structure.
Thirdly, there are the copycat groups that call themselves al Qaeda.
Al Qaeda in Iraq is one example. They are inspired by al Qaeda and have contact with them, but they do not take orders from bin Laden any more than the Russian mafia takes orders from the Sicilian mob.

[scottinnj]

Still, numerous government officials say they know of no specific, credible threat of a new attack on U.S. soil.

Except if you're Chertoff, and have that "gut feeling."

[Don Stugots]

http://www.paulmcelligott.com/images/first_contact.jpg

[scottinnj]

Most of the Saudis I met in Yemen lived in Texas at one time or another. Not sure why, but true story.


When I was over there they all drove Chevy Caprices and Suburbans. The shieks drove Mercedes Benz, but I think it was for the diesel engines. But a boatload of Chevys.

[prothunderball]

When I was over there they all drove Chevy Caprices and Suburbans. The shieks drove Mercedes Benz, but I think it was for the diesel engines. But a boatload of Chevys.

I lived in Kuwait for 5 years and you're right on the money with the Chevy's when I was there it was the Chevy Caprice, by far the most popular car there(i don't know what it is now that they've stopped making them) whenever I'd ask why the Chevy Caprice, I could never get a consistent answer, it would range from "good air conditioners" to "the have good brakes." And then the second most popular car was the Benz, and those they just had because they can afford them.

[high fly]

When I was over there they all drove Chevy Caprices and Suburbans. The shieks drove Mercedes Benz, but I think it was for the diesel engines. But a boatload of Chevys.


I hear they got oil jest under the surface so up can come-a bubblin crude by merely dropping a cinderblock in the yard.
With that in mind, any of you ever heard of an oil exploration company, particularly one with close ties to the rulers over there, come to the Persian Gulf and fail to find oil?








The Deciderator did.

[scottinnj]

I hear they got oil jest under the surface so up can come-a bubblin crude by merely dropping a cinderblock in the yard.
With that in mind, any of you ever heard of an oil exploration company, particularly one with close ties to the rulers over there, come to the Persian Gulf and fail to find oil?








The Deciderator did.
He missed the WMDs too. Waka Waka!

[high fly]

...and now that we have the records and captured the leading figures in the Iraqian WMD program, what has become apparent is that the last of their WMD program was eliminated by International Superstar Bill Clinton with the Desert Fox campaign, circa 1998.

Seems to me the honest thing to do would be to give Big Bad Bill credit for eliminating Saddam's WMD program, without one single American losing their life!


That's pretty big, and the floundering ineptitude of the current bunch of misfits in there makes International Superstar Bill Clinton's accomplishments even more praiseworthy!

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Relax America, its only a bumper sticker

http://www.wiedza.servis.pl/images/thumb/7/7c/John_Edwards.jpg/200px-John_Edwards.jpg

[Yerdaddy]

When I was over there they all drove Chevy Caprices and Suburbans. The shieks drove Mercedes Benz, but I think it was for the diesel engines. But a boatload of Chevys.

http://idontreadyourblog.blogs.friendster.com/photos/egypt/100_0537.JPG

Knowing Arabs, they put the Mercedes mudflaps on there as a security system: "Maybe these camels belong to a sheikh." And knowing Arabs, it works.

[CofyCrakCocaine]

Relax America, its only a bumper sticker



Well, thank you for injecting relevancy and genuine humor into yet another political discussion.

[sr71blackbird]

Yerdaddy, you lived in that part of the world, will there ever be an end to this shit? Is there anything we can do, short of surrender that will get them to just stop this shit? Why dont the "regular" folk over there get pissed and fed up and retaliate against the terrorists?

[Yerdaddy]

Yerdaddy, you lived in that part of the world, will there ever be an end to this shit? Is there anything we can do, short of surrender that will get them to just stop this shit? Why dont the "regular" folk over there get pissed and fed up and retaliate against the terrorists?

Like I said, it's up to us. The vast majority of Muslims are disgraced by what terrorists do and would turn them, but have never met a terrorist, and if they have they probably don't know they're a terrorist. It's not like they wear uniforms. I'm sure somebody knows who these people are and they're scared. Why do gangs and mafias still exist? Why don't Americans retaliate against them and make them go away. Truth is terrorists get ratted out by ordinary Muslims all the time. That's why they need failed states and sympathetic areas to hide in.

But your question assumes terrorists are a finite commodity - the same bad assumption that was the basis of the ridiculous "drain the swamp" rationale of invading Iraq. By invading Iraq and lettting it turn into a cesspool of human suffering for the Iraqis we sent the message to Muslims that we hate them, or at best don't care if they suffer or die, and more of them are now more likely to join a terrorist group. (Not to mention all the Iraqis with relatives killed in Iraq who want payback like any human would.) On top of that they read conservative writings that slander them and their religion, and liberal clap-trap that blames America for all the ills in the world. What would you think if you were a Yemeni, given all of this to consider? "I better use my weekends hunting down terrorists so that they'll stop killing those poor Americans?" You have to consider they aren't you. They hate terrorism but, like you, they see their own concearns. And many of them have asked me: "Why haven't the Americans got pissed off and stopped this war/ closed Guantanamo/ restrained Israel/ stopped supporting my dictator...?" So I'll pose their questions to you: Why haven't you stopped your government from doing these things to them?