Tocky on 6/5/2011 at 03:14
I only drink until my spelling improves and then I quit. It's a selfless gesture for the publik. See? Not there yet.
heywood on 6/5/2011 at 06:01
I think a fundamental question to be answered is whether al-Qaeda are criminals or combatants. I'm not comfortable saying all terrorists are combatants, certainly not the "lone wolf" sniper or bomber. But if it's an international organization that has declared war on you, I'm inclined to say they're not simply criminals but combatants.
I'm also not sure it's fair to call it assassination. Killing a uniformed soldier on a battlefield during wartime is clearly not assassination. Killing a political figure out of wartime, away from the battlefield clearly is assassination. But in this case, without the formality of conventional war, it's not entirely clear. Al-Qaeda don't wear uniforms and don't constrain their operations to well defined battlefields, so those distinctions don't apply. Bin Laden did issue a fatwa declaring global war, so that does apply. Suppose we had killed bin Laden back when we were bombing Tora Bora. We would not have called that assassination. But this killing happened in his home. Is that enough to make it assassination?
Quote Posted by Tocky
I don't mean to step Dems toes but it was quoted on NPR. Nearly every time they splode it is in the midst of muslims even when that isn't thier main target however in Afghanistan the police force is a constant target and they use terror frequently in Pakistan to control the political process among other stuff elsewhere like suddenly shooting into crowds of people aid is meant for so they can round it up and distribute it to thier soldiers and things like that. Truely stand up guys.
If NPR said that 85% of the Taliban's victims were local Muslims, or 85% of the victims of Islamic terrorists are local Muslims, then I wouldn't have questioned it. What caught my eye was the statement that 85% of
Osama's victims are local Muslims. I'm not sure I believe that, which is why I'm curious about the source.
As I was saying to demagogue, I think it's important to distinguish between the local and global terrorists and not lump them together. One group is unsophisticated and indiscriminate and tends to have local concerns & aims while the other has global, strategic aims and can reach half way around the world to strike high value targets.
Azaran on 6/5/2011 at 06:13
Quote Posted by heywood
Where did you see that 85% statistic? Most of the al-Qaeda attacks I've heard about are against non-Muslim targets.
(
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12379146) Not in Indonesia
Over there the most persecuted group are Ahmadiya muslims, who are considered heretics by fundamentalists. They've also been persecuted in Pakistan:(
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10181380) last year terrorists attacked a couple of Ahmadiya mosques and killed 80 people.
Muzman on 6/5/2011 at 06:23
Al Qaeda's one of those organisations where anyone can get a group together, call themselves a branch/cell and if they pass the screening they get approval as charter members, get given a couple of guns or bombs and told to go their merry way.
Sure the big jobs require a lot more than that, but I think there's a lot of stuff that happens that broadly falls under their banner. Most of their activities in Iraq happened like this, I believe, and generally involved turf wars between different insurgent leaders and those seen as US sympathisers. There I don't think the statistic would be far off.
Yakoob on 6/5/2011 at 11:51
Quote Posted by heywood
I think a fundamental question to be answered is whether al-Qaeda are criminals or combatants. I'm not comfortable saying all terrorists are combatants, certainly not the "lone wolf" sniper or bomber. But if it's an international organization that has declared war on you, I'm inclined to say they're not simply criminals but combatants.
I just took a class on terrorism as part of my politics masters. After studying a lot of cases I grew to think there is no difference between "terrorist," "combatant" or "guerrilla fighter." The term is picked based on how evil you want to portray their side and whether or not Koki saw his shadow this spring.
Koki on 6/5/2011 at 12:04
You stay the fuck away from my shadow.
CCCToad on 6/5/2011 at 15:01
Quote Posted by Tocky
I don't mean to step Dems toes but it was quoted on NPR. Nearly every time they splode it is in the midst of muslims even when that isn't thier main target however in Afghanistan the police force is a constant target and they use terror frequently in Pakistan to control the political process among other stuff elsewhere like suddenly shooting into crowds of people aid is meant for so they can round it up and distribute it to thier soldiers and things like that. Truely stand up guys.
How did I miss nd in my last post? I was sleepy. And she looks even better in a jacks me up.
I can personally vouch for this, but with the caveat that very few of these conducts are executed by al-qaeda itself. MSNBC put out a pretty good documentary where you can see how they usually work. A lone al-qaeda operative or bombmaker will meet up with a Taliban cell and provide with the bomb, instructions on how to use it, or other advisement. The Taliban cell itself will be the one who carries out the attacks.
edit: addendum
I read an interesting article here: (
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/1418100.html)
While I don't agree with most t of what this guy says(I"ll give him that the Castro assassination attempts were pretty bad), I'm curious to know if any other foreigners feel this way about U.S. actions.
Muzman on 6/5/2011 at 16:24
Broadly speaking yeah. Bob's good fun in a rabble rousing sort of way. There's plenty of good arguments for just disposing of him as they did, but I do think it'd have been somewhat more excellent to do something more proper.
As big a diplomatic minefield as it surely is, I really like the idea of giving him back to his family. It's both gracious and respectful (he was someone's son, someone's (many people's) brother after all) and it's kinda rubbing Saudi Arabia's nose in what is essentially their mess and reminding the whole world of that at the same time.
nickie on 6/5/2011 at 16:33
Quote Posted by CCCToad
edit: addendum
I read an interesting article here: (
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/1418100.html)
While I don't agree with most t of what this guy says(I"ll give him that the Castro assassination attempts were pretty bad),
I'm curious to know if any other foreigners feel this way about U.S. actions.I haven't read everything in this thread but I did just read that article.
As I mentioned a few posts back, I come from an army family and am old enough to have been in some 'interesting' situations as a child and of course there was the IRA and other more personal hairy happenings. So I don't really scare that easily. But the US is the one country that scares the pants off me and is the one country where I very firmly differentiate between the government and the people despite the fact my sister is a raving republican. I forgive her. :)
And I remember thinking, way back in 1986 when I heard the US bombers overhead on their way to bomb Libya, that this would be the start of the 3rd world war and I should have a bit of fun. OK, it didn't happen but since then, I've always been very wary of what you're going to do next.
I can understand why your government wouldn't want a martyr's memorial made out of a grave but I think that a lot of people will feel there's something suspicious about the lack of post mortem, the lack of any picture viewed by people considered trustworthy by people and by a very hasty burial at sea. But my information is sketchy and I may be wrong about these. Too much other shit going on for me to have followed this closely.
Ulukai on 6/5/2011 at 17:54
You just produce a corpse, and I'll release Sloane. I want to see this dead [grand]mother first-hand :mad:
Sorry I don't have a tin-foil hat
