Johnny Punani Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 Nothing wrong with that. My respect remains in place. Thanks for the clarification, JP. No Problemo... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 Is he the actual #3 or the #3 in Pakikstan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 Well, we just couldn't wait for this one to be #2. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 Well, we just couldn't wait for this one to be #2.~Bang Well, they're becoming scarce. After all 80% of Al Qaeda #2s are now dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebluefood Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 P0wnd by the "evil infidel" United States Military. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSkins561 Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 1800 #2's wow, can't wait until we get #1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ned Flanders Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 1800 #2's wow, can't wait until we get #1 #1 has been fertilizer for a couple of years now...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostofSparta Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 #1 has been fertilizer for a couple of years now...... I've had the same thought ever since the world's biggest camera whore suddenly developed stage fright a few years ago.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 Isn't this like the fourth time we've killed this guy with a drone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus71 Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 So we killled the number 3 guy? Cool, I am sure about 5000 more will take his spot and then we kill him and another number 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 will take their spots! They are like insects, they keep coming back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 1800 #2's wow, can't wait until we get #1 For real. If one goes back to 2001, seems like we've killed a ton of #2s and #3s. It's like they have to throw the public a bone once in a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jrew1223 Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 Good.. Sooner we take them out the sooner we can get our people back home... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 Is he the actual #3 or the #3 in Pakikstan? This was the ACTUAL #3. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=127304113 The Egyptian-born al-Yazid, also known as Sheik Saeed al-Masri, was a founding member of al-Qaida and the group's prime conduit to Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahri. He was key to day-to-day control, with a hand in everything from finances to operational planning, the U.S. official said. The shadowy, 55-year-old al-Yazid has been involved with Islamic extremist movements for nearly 30 years since he joined radical student groups led by fellow Egyptian al-Zawahri, now the No. 2 figure in al-Qaida after bin Laden.In the early 1980s, al-Yazid served three years in an Egyptian prison for purported links to the group responsible for the 1981 assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. After his release, al-Yazid turned up in Afghanistan, where, according to al-Qaida's propaganda wing Al-Sabah, he became a founding member of the terrorist group. He later followed bin Laden to Sudan and back to Afghanistan, where he served as al-Qaida's chief financial officer, managing secret bank accounts in the Persian Gulf that were used to help finance the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington. After the U.S. and its allies invaded Afghanistan in 2001, al-Yazid went into hiding for years. He surfaced in May 2007 during a 45-minute interview posted on the Web by Al-Sabah, in which he was introduced as the "official in charge" of the terrorist movement's operations in Afghanistan. Those of you with looser mentalities can mock all you want. This was a BIG kill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 I always have mixed feelings about this kind of report. I'm VERY glad we got this guy, but from everything I read, the drones are causing huge blowback against us in Pakistan. What good does it do to take out a handful of terrorists if we create a thousand more by our actions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 I always have mixed feelings about this kind of report. I'm VERY glad we got this guy, but from everything I read, the drones are causing huge blowback against us in Pakistan. What good does it do to take out a handful of terrorists if we create a thousand more by our actions? Dude. ANYTHING we do to try to get those who have already declared war on us and attacked us on 9/11 is going to cause "blowback". You have two choices. Give up or fight. Pick one and stop wringing your hands over the choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 Dude. ANYTHING we do to try to get those who have already declared war on us and attacked us on 9/11 is going to cause "blowback". You have two choices. Give up or fight. Pick one and stop wringing your hands over the choice. Maybe we have more than two choices. Thinking that we have only two choices has caused us a lot of trouble in the past. I don't claim to have any easy solution, by the way. But I'm not automatically dismissive of the idea that killing thousands of civilians as collateral damage in our attacks might be a huge problem in the long run. SHF has more insight on that than I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 Maybe we have more than two choices. Thinking that we have only two choices has caused us a lot of trouble in the past. I don't claim to have any easy solution, by the way. But I'm not automatically dismissive of the idea that killing thousands of civilians as collateral damage in our attacks might be a huge problem in the long run. SHF has more insight on that than I do. First of all, it's not thousands. The largest estimate is 700 and even that number is questionable because the Taliban and Al Qaeda targets and people on the ground there are going to, as a mater of course claim everyone is innocent. And second, I don't dismiss the idea that collateral damage may cause problems in the future. I dismiss the idea that we should do nothing because of the fear that something bad may happen if we do something to kill al Qaeda and the Taliban who have allied with them. And I believe drones are the LEAST inflammatory thing we can do under the circumstances we are dealt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted June 1, 2010 Share Posted June 1, 2010 First of all, it's not thousands. The largest estimate is 700 and even that number is questionable because the Taliban and Al Qaeda targets and people on the ground there are going to, as a mater of course claim everyone is innocent.And second, I don't dismiss the idea that collateral damage may cause problems in the future. I dismiss the idea that we should do nothing because of the fear that something bad may happen if we do something to kill al Qaeda and the Taliban who have allied with them. Oh, I dismiss that idea too. Doing nothing isn't going to work. And I believe drones are the LEAST inflammatory thing we can do under the circumstances we are dealt. That's what I'm not sure of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.