Damn good thing we're containing terrorism to Iraq Pt 2

It's the 19th Anniversary for T1B - Fuckin' A

Moderator: Jesus H Christ

Post Reply
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Damn good thing we're containing terrorism to Iraq Pt 2

Post by Mister Bushice »

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050723/ap_ ... MlJVRPUCUl

And its a damn Good thing we're attracting all of the terrorists to Iraq and winning the war on Terror. I'd hate to see what would happen if we weren't. :roll:
Egyptian Toll Hits 88; Mubarak Vows Hunt

By SARAH EL DEEB, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 8 minutes ago

SHARM EL-SHEIK, Egypt - Egypt's president vowed Saturday to hunt down terrorists who unleashed a rapid series of car bombs and another blast in this Egyptian Red Sea resort, devastating a luxury hotel and a coffee shop and killing at least 88 people in the nation's deadliest terror attack.

The early morning attacks, which used more than a half-ton of explosives, came just two days after the latest strikes in London and sent an already jittery world reeling again. At least 119 people also were wounded, the Interior Ministry said.

With two extremist groups claiming responsibility, Egypt tightened security at other busy tourist sites like the Pyramids and Luxor, and the government and British tourist agencies sent large aircraft to the Sinai to fly home nervous tourists.

"This cowardly, criminal act is aimed at undermining Egypt's security and stability and harming its people and its guests," President
Hosni Mubarak said during a live national broadcast. "This will only increase our determination in chasing terrorism."

Mubarak flew into Sharm el-Sheik and inspected the scene at the Ghazala Gardens hotel. Heavily armed security forces guarded him throughout.

Rescue workers gave up the search for more dead or survivors at the hotel, where a car bomb blast flattened the reception area. A few body parts were still being found, but emergency personnel said they did not expect major increases in the death toll.

Egyptian police detained at least 20 people, including local Bedouin tribesmen, for questioning, but they were not currently suspected of involvement in the blasts, security officials said on condition of anonymity because the investigation was ongoing. The men were detained near the scenes of the bombings.

Pope Benedict XVI was among world political and religious leaders deploring the attacks, calling them "senseless acts." He appealed to terrorists to renounce violence.

The attacks appeared well-coordinated. Two massive car bombs, possibly detonated by suicide attackers, went off simultaneously at 1:15 a.m. about two miles apart.

One car was packed with 660 pounds of explosives and slammed into the reception of the Ghazala Gardens in Sharm's Naama Bay, the main strip of hotels, officials said. The second bomb weighed about 440 pounds and exploded in a nearby area called the Old Market, frequented mainly by Egyptians working in the town's resorts.

A third bomb, believed hidden in a sack, detonated about the same time near a beachside walkway where tourists often stroll at night.

A total of 88 people were confirmed dead, said Dr. Saeed Abdel Fattah, manager of the Sharm el-Sheik International Hospital, where the victims were taken. The dead included two Britons, two Germans and an Italian, he added, and Czech officials said one Czech tourist was also killed.

There were conflicting claims of responsibility. Several hours after the attacks, a group claiming ties to al-Qaida issued a claim on an Islamic Web site.

The group, the Abdullah Azzam Brigades, al-Qaida, in
Syria and Egypt, was one of two groups that also claimed responsibility for October bombings at the resorts of Taba and Ras Shitan that killed 34. The group also claimed responsibility for a Cairo bombing in April.

Hours later, a previously unknown group calling itself the Holy Warriors of Egypt faxed a statement to newspapers discounting the al-Qaida claim and saying it carried out Saturday's attack. It listed the names of five people it said were the bombers.

The authenticity of the statements could not immediately be verified.

A top Egyptian official said there were some indications the latest bombings were linked to last fall's Taba explosions.

"We have some clues, especially about the car that was exploded in the Old Market, and investigators are pursuing," Interior Minister Habib al-Adli said. He called it "an ugly act of terrorism."

The United States,
Israel and European and Middle Eastern countries condemned the attacks, and neighboring Jordan said it was immediately tightening security at its tourist sites.

President Bush spoke by phone with Mubarak to offer his support.

"Standing together with the rest of the civilized world, we will win the conflict against this global scourge," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said in a statement.

The Sharm hospital official, Abdel Fattah, said 43 foreigners were wounded, including 13 Italians, nine Britons, five Austrians, five Germans, four Spaniards, a Czech, an Israeli Arab, two Saudis, two Kuwaitis and a Qatari national. There were no reports of American casualties.

Eight Britons and three Spaniards were confirmed injured by officials from their countries.

An estimated 9,000 British tourists were believed to be in Sharm, said Association of British Travel Agents' spokeswoman Frances Tuke. Some British airlines have started sending extra planes to the resort to return home tourists who want to cut short their stays.

Egypt's national carrier, EgyptAir, also was sending larger aircraft to fly more people out, airline official Mohsen Khalil said.

The lobby of the 176-room Ghazala hotel collapsed into a pancaked pile of concrete.

David Stewart, from Liverpool, England, was staying with his wife and two teenage daughters at the Ghazala Gardens when the explosion hit. The windows of his room were smashed, and he and his family ran.

"Somebody shouted, 'Keep moving!,'" he told AP. "The lights were out. I couldn't tell what was happening."

His family, like many others, fled toward the back of the hotel to take refuge in a grassy lawn near the pool. There, hundreds spent the night, some lying on pool mattresses.

On the other side of Sharm in the Old Market, a second car bomb in a minibus parking lot sent a ball of flaming wreckage shooting over a nearby beach and into the sea and littered the sand with body parts. Overturned chairs, broken waterpipes and pools of blood were scattered around a ravaged coffee shop nearby, where 17 people — believed to be mostly Egyptians — were killed.

More than eight hours later, the overturned shell of a minibus was still smoldering, near a large crater in the asphalt.

"The country's going to come to a stop. That's it!" sobbed Samir al-Mitwalli, who arrived in Sharm only a month ago to work as a driver. "Whoever did this wants to destroy the economy."

Sharm el-Sheik has expanded at a furious pace in recent years, making it a major player in Egypt's vital tourism industry. It also has hosted multiple summits for the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, and Mubarak has a winter residence there.

The attacks last fall in Taba ended a long halt in Egyptian militant violence. The last major attack had been in 1997, when Islamic militants killed 58 foreign tourists and four Egyptians at the Pharaonic Temple of Hatshepsut outside Luxor in southern Egypt.

There were signs that the bombings were by suicide attackers. Witnesses at the coffee shop said the vehicle was moving when it blew up, and the governor of South Sinai, Mustafa Afifi, said the car in the Ghazala attack broke through security into the front driveway before exploding.

"This is a security farce," said Omar Ezzideen, owner of a children's clothing store in a nearby mall where windows were shattered. "How can something like this happen here? How could (explosives) enter here?"
User avatar
Mikey
Carbon Neutral since 1955
Posts: 31439
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 6:06 pm
Location: Paradise

Post by Mikey »

Why do you hate America?
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

Actually I love it. I don't want to see it blown up because Bush is too busy chasing sand rats halfway around the world while little is done to secure our borders, ports, and transportation facilities in major cities like new york. Obviously this war strategy has failed to keep terrorism in check.
If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." —GWB Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000
Martyred wrote: Hang in there, Whitey. Smart people are on their way with dictionaries.
War Wagon wrote:being as how I've got "stupid" draped all over, I'm not really sure.
Cripple Fight
Elwood
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 11:44 pm

Post by Cripple Fight »

Yes, terror attacks in Egypt are a new thing.


Sin,


Anwar Sadat
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

that's not the point. All of the Bush tail waggers are saying that the Iraq war is drawing The terrorists to fight over there instead of here, or Britain, etc. When the fact is that the people bombing elsewhere are not effected in the least by the iraq war, and in the case of the london bombings those happened BECAUSE of the war.
If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." —GWB Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000
Martyred wrote: Hang in there, Whitey. Smart people are on their way with dictionaries.
War Wagon wrote:being as how I've got "stupid" draped all over, I'm not really sure.
Cripple Fight
Elwood
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 11:44 pm

Post by Cripple Fight »

Dope,

How long has the Islamic Jihad been trying to overthrow Mubarak?
User avatar
Eddie Adams
Elwood
Posts: 201
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Fatass manboobs, 12 O'clock!

Post by Eddie Adams »

The point is; that even with all the rhetoric we hear from Bush and his elite mouthpieces around the country, about how we're winning the war on terror, we're safer here at home; we're bringing democracy and brotherhood to countries who've never had that chance, it's better to fight them there, than to do it here-- These are just lines of bullshit, that more and more Americans are realizing.

The facts are, that the CIA is a gustapo like organization. Using torture, sponsoring and even setting up torture tactics by other countries, so they can gain some info. These are things that make the terrorists want to kill us back even MORE!

Our troop morale is complete shit. (I know, because my brother is a 20+ yr, veteran and interacts with a lot of them) And we've seen an actual INCREASE in terror activity, bombings and insurgency in and around Iraq. And now even London, Egypt, Spain; you name it.

Also, our own southern border is completely neglected, as the number of NON Mexicans crossing into the U.S. has increased dramatically! Which is seen as a sign that eventually the ones who DID get through, will turn out to be Al-Queada, and the reason we haven't seen a London or Cairo type event, is because they want Bush, and it is just going to take time, and extensive planning to try their attacks. But one can surely know that there probably will be one, eventually. Christ! Some guy lobbed a damn grenade within 50 feet or so of Shrub when he was in Russia! It was a dud, but hey! They're trying, aren't they?!

You think we're safe here? Bullshit. These people are just biding their time. They're waiting for that certain event. For us to slack off, and then............

:(

Bush has created a chaotic world of uncertainty and paranoia, and actually unwittingly INCREASED the climate for the bombings and killings worldwide, because of our actions abroad this last 5+ years!
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

Cripple Fight wrote:Dope,

How long has the Islamic Jihad been trying to overthrow Mubarak?
Those bombs weren't aimed at mubarak.
User avatar
Eddie Adams
Elwood
Posts: 201
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 12:42 pm
Location: Fatass manboobs, 12 O'clock!

Post by Eddie Adams »

Aimed at (and some were killed by the way) American tourists!
Cripple Fight
Elwood
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 11:44 pm

Post by Cripple Fight »

Mister Bushice wrote:
Cripple Fight wrote:Dope,

How long has the Islamic Jihad been trying to overthrow Mubarak?
Those bombs weren't aimed at mubarak.
No?
Attacking tourists spots while he's in charge? Kinda like when the tourists were machine gunned at Giza a few years back, don'tcha think?
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

group responsible stated it was because israelis were allowed to visit there.

"A few years back"? And when was the last time mubarak himself was targeted? If they want him out so bad, why the sporadic attacks against israelis?

you're reaching here big time.
If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." —GWB Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000
Martyred wrote: Hang in there, Whitey. Smart people are on their way with dictionaries.
War Wagon wrote:being as how I've got "stupid" draped all over, I'm not really sure.
Variable
Untitled
Posts: 1536
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 5:11 am

Post by Variable »

Bushice wrote:And its a damn Good thing we're attracting all of the terrorists to Iraq and winning the war on Terror.
I don't recall anyone ever saying that we're attracting all of the terrorists to Iraq, or that there would never be another terrorist act anywhere in the world, ever again. This is the hypothetical statement that you seem to be responding to. Seems kinda silly, don't you think?

Not to go Dr. D on you, but it sounds to me like you're blaming America for the attacks in Egypt.
Bushice wrote:The group responsible stated it was because israelis were allowed to visit there.

"A few years back"? And when was the last time mubarak himself was targeted? If they want him out so bad, why the sporadic attacks against israelis?

you're reaching here big time.
How is he reaching? Islamic Jihad uses the same tactics that other AQ-esque branches do: Attack economic and civilian targets. They attack Egyptian tourist targets (like Giza) and hurt the Egyptian tourism industry and by extension, Mubarak.

[quote'Slack-jawed Yokel"]The point is; that even with all the rhetoric we hear from Bush and his elite mouthpieces around the country, about how we're winning the war on terror, we're safer here at home; we're bringing democracy and brotherhood to countries who've never had that chance, it's better to fight them there, than to do it here-- These are just lines of bullshit, that more and more Americans are realizing. [/quote]

Wait a second... Do you mean to tell me that politicians are using talking points and semantics to try to gain popular support for their foreign policies? NO WAY!! <==== Insert world's biggest fucking :roll: here
The facts are, that the CIA is a gustapo like organization. Using torture, sponsoring and even setting up torture tactics by other countries, so they can gain some info. These are things that make the terrorists want to kill us back even MORE!
Seeing how the Gestapo was responsible for setting up the concentration camps that killed six million jews, gypsies and homos (among others), how about we don't use them as a point of comparison with the CIA. The Gestapo carried out the killings, while the CIA at worst is torturing those who plot to commit the killings. Seems rather idiotic to equate the two, don't you think?
Our troop morale is complete shit.
Morale is always shit. Would you rather be in Iraq dodging sand storms and RPGs or driving your buddies to the lake to get shit-faced and pick up on hotties? Not a big shock that soldiers in Iraq would rather be at the lake. Oh, and the next American Enlisted Serviceman who doesn't have the attitude "This place sucks" during peace or wartime, regardless of duty station, will be the first.
And we've seen an actual INCREASE in terror activity, bombings and insurgency in and around Iraq. And now even London, Egypt, Spain; you name it.
If you're not even going to bother putting those individual attacks in their proper context, you're either poorly informed or a leftist whack job. Either way, it's not worth responding to.
Also, our own southern border is completely neglected, as the number of NON Mexicans crossing into the U.S. has increased dramatically! Which is seen as a sign that eventually the ones who DID get through, will turn out to be Al-Queada, and the reason we haven't seen a London or Cairo type event, is because they want Bush, and it is just going to take time, and extensive planning to try their attacks.
Sorry, but although Bush deserves to get slammed for leaving the back door open, he can share blame with the Democratic party, who wholeheartedly support his "come one, come all" approach to security at the southern border. It ain't like the lefties (and some of the righties)are all clammoring for him to shut the door.
You think we're safe here? Bullshit. These people are just biding their time. They're waiting for that certain event. For us to slack off, and then............
They aren't waiting for us to slack off, they're waiting for a green light from their leadership. We react to previous attacks, rather than proactively try to prevent new ones. So all they have to do is change tactics and attack somewhere new each time and they'll always be a step ahead. Additionally, because of the PC idiots in this country, who still won't let us profile young arab men, our guard is always down and we are always "slacking off" in our security measures.
Luther
Old Coot
Posts: 2275
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 8:16 am

Post by Luther »

The middle east? Fuck 'em, nuke them until they glow, then shoot them in the dark.

Sincerely
mv

Rip City
8)
DrDetroit
I Punk Liberals all day
Posts: 6680
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:25 pm
Location: In ya Ma!

Post by DrDetroit »

has the US suffered an attack or attacks?

well?

oh, I see, you have no point.

have a nice day.
User avatar
Tom In VA
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 9042
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 9:04 am
Location: In Va. near D.C.

Post by Tom In VA »

Eddie Adams wrote:Bush has created a chaotic world of uncertainty and paranoia, and actually unwittingly INCREASED the climate for the bombings and killings worldwide, because of our actions abroad this last 5+ years!
No Bush did not create a chaotic world of uncertainty and paranoia. That world existed since man realized he could pick up a rock and smash another man's head in to take what he wants and or needs.

It's increased because there's a war on. Both sides will see an increase in those willing to fight. After 9-11 many left cushy jobs on Wall Street and such places to fight. There was no shortage of terrorists prior to the invasion of Iraq.
With all the horseshit around here, you'd think there'd be a pony somewhere.
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

Get real. They're trying to scare the Israelis out of going there, out of fear of death by bombings. If they were after Mubarak they'd bomb a little more frequently than twice a year, and more than just one resort.
It was one resort TOWN, not the countrys financial center, and the ones who bombed this time were not connected to the groups that tried to disrupt tourism in the 90's.
And tourists are fleeing in droves. Mission accomplished?

6 pakistanis with suspected ties to AL queda are being sought, NOT egyptians. The theory is that it is a response to the violence in the Israeli-Palestinian sphere, just like the bombings in London were a response to Britains presence in Iraq.
If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." —GWB Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000
Martyred wrote: Hang in there, Whitey. Smart people are on their way with dictionaries.
War Wagon wrote:being as how I've got "stupid" draped all over, I'm not really sure.
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

mvscal wrote:
Mister Bushice wrote:that's not the point. All of the Bush tail waggers are saying that the Iraq war is drawing The terrorists to fight over there instead of here, or Britain, etc. When the fact is that the people bombing elsewhere are not effected in the least by the iraq war, and in the case of the london bombings those happened BECAUSE of the war.
So, if we just cave into their demands there won't be any mroe terrorist attacks?

Is that what you are trying to say? Or is this just knee-jerk drivel offered up without a shred of critical thought or reasoning?
NO NO NO NO NO.

When will you actually listen?

NO WHERE did I say cave into their demands.

Our Country is not safe from attacks. Our borders are so porous it is scary.

Bushs theory that a war in Iraq will stop or divert terrorism has been proven WRONG.

We should be spending more money on security here. Lock down the airports, lock down the seaports, start checking all arab men between 14 and 60. If we're at war with arab terrorists, we'd better start fighting them.

If you want to fight a war, fight it that way. Better to spend our money protecting ourselves here, than pouring money into Iraq because in the long run it will NOT help.
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

The real war WILL come to the US, and not enough is being done about that.

As usual, it will be hindsight that will show that something should have been done to root out the terror cells here and secure our borders.
Is that war over?
The Iraq war is useless in the fight against worldwide terror. The bombings around the world lately should have told you.
If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." —GWB Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000
Martyred wrote: Hang in there, Whitey. Smart people are on their way with dictionaries.
War Wagon wrote:being as how I've got "stupid" draped all over, I'm not really sure.
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

The latest theory after the most recent bombings is that the terror cells are followers of AL Queda, but are no longer requiring direct instructions. They're free lancing, based on the basic beliefs of AL queda.

Iraq will no longer be the "central point". There is no central point anymore. Until the world unites against the muslim community that allows its followers to pursue this type of "justice" in the name of their religion and god, we can expect to see bombings occur anywhere.

And at least one of the guys who bombed last week was a School teacher. They have pictures of some of the first bombers white water rafting the week before they blew themselves up.

Fighting insurgents in Iraq will help Iraq stabilize, but it will do nothing for the global war on terror. Very few if any international bombers are iraqis.
If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." —GWB Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000
Martyred wrote: Hang in there, Whitey. Smart people are on their way with dictionaries.
War Wagon wrote:being as how I've got "stupid" draped all over, I'm not really sure.
DrDetroit
I Punk Liberals all day
Posts: 6680
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:25 pm
Location: In ya Ma!

Post by DrDetroit »

Fighting insurgents in Iraq will help Iraq stabilize, but it will do nothing for the global war on terror.


Yeah, 'cuz we're not mowing down international terrorists in Iraq, right? :roll:
Very few if any international bombers are iraqis.
So what??

WTF is your point?

Who cares?

The larger point is that we know that Iraq supported and sponsored terrorists. That's indisputable fact.

We also know that international terrorists are flooding into Iraq. That's an indisputable fact.

This is why it is indisputable fact that Iraq is the central front in fighting the war on terror. Let them come to Iraq to be killed. It's a lot better than having them kill us in NYC, DC, LA, Chicago, Boston, etc.
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

mvscal wrote:
Mister Bushice wrote:Fighting insurgents in Iraq will help Iraq stabilize, but it will do nothing for the global war on terror. Very few if any international bombers are iraqis.
Is there some reason that you are ignoring the thousands of Islamist mercenaries that have been pouring into Iraq to fight the Jihad?

I can only assume that your fundamental intellectual dishonesty prevents you from acknowledging a blatantly obvious fact.
Big deal. Those are almost entirely regional new recruits that have absolutely no effect on the number of terrorists or sleeper cells in Europe and the US except perhaps to increase their numbers. This is the failed thinking I was talking about. You thinking that killing those freaks over in Iraq will have an effect on worldwide terror is flawed. It obviously has not, and it won't in the long run either.

Just typical Bush Speak.
User avatar
Tom In VA
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 9042
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 9:04 am
Location: In Va. near D.C.

Post by Tom In VA »

By definition, the "sleeper" cells existed prior to the invasion. Their purpose is to provide support to agents sent to accomplish specific missions and/or to execute an attack at a specific time.

Now if you're suggesting the current conflict has lit a fire in the hearts of fence riding muslims, I don't think that can be denied. However, what about the attacks that took place AND the "sleeper" cells that were put in place prior to the invasion ?

What inflamed them ? How are we supposed to address that ?

I'm not sure, but I think one of the methods forest fires are contained, is by starting another fire.

Their numbers are increasing primarily due to Islamic belief and sympathy from the West. Calling them "Freedom Fighters", buying into their propaganda and their psy op campaign.

To say that killing them, increases their number, is preposterous.
With all the horseshit around here, you'd think there'd be a pony somewhere.
DrDetroit
I Punk Liberals all day
Posts: 6680
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:25 pm
Location: In ya Ma!

Post by DrDetroit »

Bushice, why even speculate upon who these terrorists are? You clearly have no idea, yet, you wanna pose as though you're an expert on who they are, what motivates them, and etc., etc.
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

Tom In VA wrote:By definition, the "sleeper" cells existed prior to the invasion. Their purpose is to provide support to agents sent to accomplish specific missions and/or to execute an attack at a specific time.

Now if you're suggesting the current conflict has lit a fire in the hearts of fence riding muslims, I don't think that can be denied. However, what about the attacks that took place AND the "sleeper" cells that were put in place prior to the invasion ?

What inflamed them ? How are we supposed to address that ?
I addressed that above. Start checking all young Arab men in the US. they are the ones blowing shit up. There are no white grandmothers or Asian Teenagers doing this stuff. We increase our odds of preventing another attack by actually seeking out the potential perpetrators.

All they need is one or two more bombs to go off in England set off by adult males of Arab descent and those investigations will begin, or else street justice will begin. Shove the PC bullshit aside and go after the one single race of people who do 99% of the terrorist attacks.
I'm not sure, but I think one of the methods forest fires are contained, is by starting another fire.
These are not mindless flames. These are people who respond to situations by altering their techniques. Instead of running and hiding away from Iraq, they went there, and learned how to better fight an urban terrorist campaign.
Their numbers are increasing primarily due to Islamic belief and sympathy from the West. Calling them "Freedom Fighters", buying into their propaganda and their psy op campaign.

To say that killing them, increases their number, is preposterous.
Didn't say that specifically. I said that the War in Iraq has helped with recruitment for AL queda. The estimates by experts are that AL Queda is larger, not smaller than before the war, and that there are more local independent commanders instead of one or two masterminds.

Most of the insurgents in Iraq are new recruits and not all are Al queda but splinter groups who hate the west and the "occupation".
Cripple Fight
Elwood
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 11:44 pm

Post by Cripple Fight »

Mister Bushice wrote:The latest theory after the most recent bombings is that the terror cells are followers of AL Queda, but are no longer requiring direct instructions. They're free lancing, based on the basic beliefs of AL queda.


Would those beliefs be the same as Bin Ladens number 2 man, the Egyptian and Islamic Jihad leader Ayman al-Zawahiri ?


Just keep asking me if you want another anchor tossed to you, drowning man.
User avatar
Tom In VA
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 9042
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 9:04 am
Location: In Va. near D.C.

Post by Tom In VA »

Al Queda has always relied on autonomy and "belief" based alliances. The invasion of Iraq, did not cause this at all.
With all the horseshit around here, you'd think there'd be a pony somewhere.
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

No, it reinforced it.
If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." —GWB Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000
Martyred wrote: Hang in there, Whitey. Smart people are on their way with dictionaries.
War Wagon wrote:being as how I've got "stupid" draped all over, I'm not really sure.
User avatar
Tom In VA
Eternal Scobode
Posts: 9042
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 9:04 am
Location: In Va. near D.C.

Post by Tom In VA »

mvscal wrote:
Mister Bushice wrote:No, it reinforced it.
Reinforced which alliance? I didn't hear that.
Well apparently, groups like :

Egyptian Islamic Jihad
The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group
Islamic Army of Aden (Yemen)
Jama'at al-Tawhid wal Jihad (Iraq)
Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad (Kashmir)
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
Salafist Group for Call and Combat and the Armed Islamic Group (Algeria)
Abu Sayyaf Group (Malaysia, Philippines)
Jemaah Islamiya (Southeast Asia)

Were pretty shaken up by 9-11 and the visions of bleeding and weeping Americans that they were considering severing ties with Al Quada. But then Bush had to go and invade Iraq and stir them all up again.
With all the horseshit around here, you'd think there'd be a pony somewhere.
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

mvscal wrote:
Mister Bushice wrote:Big deal. Those are almost entirely regional new recruits that have absolutely no effect on the number of terrorists or sleeper cells in Europe and the US except perhaps to increase their numbers. This is the failed thinking I was talking about. You thinking that killing those freaks over in Iraq will have an effect on worldwide terror is flawed. It obviously has not, and it won't in the long run either.

Just typical Bush Speak.
Quite frankly, you are a total idiot. Your thought process, if it can be called that, is lazy, stupid, poorly informed and bereft of any hint of originality.
Actually, Your penchant for responding to everyone by calling them an idiot is lazy, stupid, and bereft of any hint of originiality.
Your conception of "global" terror seems to include only the US or Europe.
I've got news for you, but those aren't the governments at risk. The ones that are at risk are the local countries.
What it "seems" to be to you is only your interpretation. Can you honestly say that Europe (and toss in the republics that used to be the USSR for good geographical measure), which has a very high Muslim population is not seriously threatened when it comes to global terrorism? Can you honestly say that our borders are secure enough that we shouldn't concern ourselves with increasing said security?
Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, the Gulf Emirates, Afghanistan, Turkey, North Africa and the Levant are all in danger of being destabilized by radical Islamists except that the grunts who could be expected to fight in those battles are getting mowed down in Iraq.
Hardly all of them, and there's no way you could come close to proving that. And out of that Group, Egypt, Afghanistan, and Pakistan seem to be the only countries interested in seriously pursuing terrorists. Last I checked the Jury was still out on which side of the Fence the Saudis actually sit on, I've never heard of the Gulf Emirates doing anything tangible to suppress terrorism, and you left off the list one of the worst offenders - Iran. Do you seriously expect the US to march into all of those countries and dictate military policy?

Setting aside your wacked out concept of the US as the worlds military solution, lets be realistic. We will never affect change in most of those countries on that list, and what we are doing in Iraq will not make a serious dent in the problems they have. It will only be solved when the governments of those couintries step up to the table and actively get involved in hunting down and eliminating the splinter terror groups that constantly form within their own borders just to wreak havoc on their own people.
Even someone as dense as you are can appreciate the ramifications of one Islamist super-state stretching from Central Asia to the Atlantic Coast of North Africa.
Yet someone as extreme as you cannot accept the reality that we
(the US) cannot march into every country on the planet harboring terrorists, take over the government, bomb the shit out of the place, then rebuild it sans the terrorists.
If you think it can't happen, you had better fucking think again.
Oh I think that could happen, I just don't see the war in Iraq as a solution to the problem.
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

Tom In VA wrote:
mvscal wrote:
Mister Bushice wrote:No, it reinforced it.
Reinforced which alliance? I didn't hear that.
Well apparently, groups like :

Egyptian Islamic Jihad
The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group
Islamic Army of Aden (Yemen)
Jama'at al-Tawhid wal Jihad (Iraq)
Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad (Kashmir)
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
Salafist Group for Call and Combat and the Armed Islamic Group (Algeria)
Abu Sayyaf Group (Malaysia, Philippines)
Jemaah Islamiya (Southeast Asia)

Were pretty shaken up by 9-11 and the visions of bleeding and weeping Americans that they were considering severing ties with Al Quada. But then Bush had to go and invade Iraq and stir them all up again.
Not to mention the dozens of new groups that have formed out of the War around the world, several of which are responsible for the bombings in London, Spain, and apparently Egypt.

You do realize Tom that there are so many new terrorist groups out there with loose affiliations to AL Q ( at least in terms of ideology), that there is little to no intelligence available on them on their members?

This was one of the ways that AL Q has mutated.
Cripple Fight
Elwood
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 11:44 pm

Post by Cripple Fight »

mvscal wrote:
Mister Bushice wrote: you left off the list one of the worst offenders - Iran.
That would be because that country is already in the hands of Islamist radicals.

Obviously you aren't paying any attention.


:lol:


You failed to mention Algeria too. :lol:
Cripple Fight
Elwood
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 11:44 pm

Post by Cripple Fight »

You have to deal in specifics with certian slow learners.
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

mvscal wrote:
Mister Bushice wrote: you left off the list one of the worst offenders - Iran.
That would be because that country is already in the hands of Islamist radicals.

Obviously you aren't paying any attention.
Obviously YOU aren't recognizing that unless the majority of Middle east countries are on board with stopping terrorism over there that there is little we can do to prevent it from spreading over there. We aren't going to be successful in jamming our culture or our beliefs down muslim throats.
That isn't the plan, dumbfuck. Funny how you feel free to criticize a plan you so obviously don't understand.
Hmmm wasn't it several weeks ago that you suggested going from country to country was a solution? Lets review:
Mister Bushice wrote:And how do you propose going about doing that?
Invade every Middle East country followed by every country in Southeast Asia followed by every country in Europe with a high muslim population, line up all the males between the ages 12 and 60 and the females between 12 and 21 and ask those who are terrorists to step forward to be shot?
mvscal wrote: If that's what we have to do, so be it. You seem to be laboring under the mistaken impression that this war is optional and will simply go away if we ignore them.
So which is it? Conveniently forgetting your own words to make a point, or are you as off base as your prior comments make you appear to be?

and here's the thread link if you want a refresher:

http://www.theoneboard.com/board/viewto ... ht=#115903

Not the first time you posed the "Nuke em all" theory.

And you think I'm the one who doesn't understand? :roll:
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

Ha. Not even capable of admitting when he gets caught with his shoe inserted firmly in his own mouth. Figures.
If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." —GWB Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000
Martyred wrote: Hang in there, Whitey. Smart people are on their way with dictionaries.
War Wagon wrote:being as how I've got "stupid" draped all over, I'm not really sure.
Cripple Fight
Elwood
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 11:44 pm

Post by Cripple Fight »

The sheer ignorance you show of world history is astounding.
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

You don't seem to be doing so well with Geography, or recognizing the fact mvscal was caught in a little opinion trap.

Which troll are you anyway?
If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." —GWB Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000
Martyred wrote: Hang in there, Whitey. Smart people are on their way with dictionaries.
War Wagon wrote:being as how I've got "stupid" draped all over, I'm not really sure.
Cripple Fight
Elwood
Posts: 385
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 11:44 pm

Post by Cripple Fight »

Mister Bushice wrote:
Which troll are you anyway?

The one who clubbed you thrice on page one.
User avatar
Mister Bushice
Drinking all the beer Luther left behind
Posts: 9490
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:39 pm

Post by Mister Bushice »

Recognize.

You said in one post today, in response to my question about invading every country where terrorists are, that that was "Not the plan", and yet just a few weeks ago you made the statement in response to my question about invading each country systematically that we would do it " if that's what it takes"

Pick a strategy.
If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." —GWB Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000
Martyred wrote: Hang in there, Whitey. Smart people are on their way with dictionaries.
War Wagon wrote:being as how I've got "stupid" draped all over, I'm not really sure.
Post Reply