Al Qaeda leader al-Zawahiri killed in drone attack

[Queen Bitch 1692]

8 minutes ago, Queen Bitch said:

but but but Texans told me he’s been dead awhile and gas prices/inflation are a bigger deal and the Democrats have inflicted worse pain on the country than him

TexAGS* 

[Sbbruin 21567]

8 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

Aren't you proving my point that losing the commander of this force won't make much difference? Further, do you, dude, actually believe that a Muslim organization is so different from a Western organization that no "illiterate goatfuckers" have ambitions to lead?

The Romans were wise in always cautioning not to despise your enemy. They're men like you and will fight like you. The embossing of our shields won't scare them.

As far as this enemy is concerned, I despise them and would like to see them all eliminated.

[RomaVicta 29472]

12 minutes ago, Sbbruin said:

As far as this enemy is concerned, I despise them and would like to see them all eliminated.

I feel that way about enemies, too. It never happens and shouldn't need to happen. 

Also, do you also include sympathizers? Potential sympathizers from the totality of what you would like to see?

Your post conveys the emotion of the issue. The rationale is lacking in reality.

[Sawbonz 26736]

25 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

I feel that way about enemies, too. It never happens and shouldn't need to happen. 

Also, do you also include sympathizers? Potential sympathizers from the totality of what you would like to see?

Your post conveys the emotion of the issue. The rationale is lacking in reality.

This makes no sense. Of course killing the leader of your enemy is a big deal. Leaders don’t grow on trees. Whoever is second to this guy now has a bullseye on him. And when he is gone the next guy will. This isn’t a Hydra. Killing the leaders of a movement is much more effective than wiping out 100 soldiers. Driving them underground also helps. Bin Laden didn’t die leading a valiant charge at Tora Bora. He died wearing Pakistani peasant garb under an assumed name. 

Edited August 2, 2022 by Sawbonz

[ConferenceRoom 5956]

In other words, he went out like a bitch. 

[yoladu 4040]

meanwhile on Texags...

"Meh, this type of stuff doesn't move the needle for me anymore. Wake me up when we have blown George Soros, Klaus Schwab, or his evil henchman to smithereens."

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3305263/1

i am sure this wasn't the sentiment over there when Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was killed under Trump's watch in 2019

Edited August 2, 2022 by yoladu

[yoladu 4040]

****

Edited August 2, 2022 by yoladu
double post - like a rookie

[RomaVicta 29472]

50 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

This makes no sense. Of course killing the leader of your enemy is a big deal. Leaders don’t grow on trees. Whoever is second to this guy now has a bullseye on him. And when he is gone the next guy will. This isn’t a Hydra. Killing the leaders of a movement is much more effective than wiping out 100 soldiers. Driving them underground also helps. Bin Laden didn’t die leading a valiant charge at Tora Bora. He died wearing Pakistani peasant garb under an assumed name. 

I'm sure you can name numerous examples of such a strategy forcing an enemy to submit. 

Mainly name insurgencies because that's what this conflict most resembles. 

[Sawbonz 26736]

5 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

I'm sure you can name numerous examples of such a strategy forcing an enemy to submit. 

Mainly name insurgencies because that's what this conflict most resembles. 

Lol I don’t think anyone here expects Al Qaeda or the taliban to surrender. Is that your metric for whether we should have a policy of killing their leaders?

[RomaVicta 29472]

10 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Lol I don’t think anyone here expects Al Qaeda or the taliban to surrender. Is that your metric for whether we should have a policy of killing their leaders?

You claimed it was effective, not me. You'll need to make a more substantial argument than LOLing and mischaracterizing the argument to get another response from me. lol

[Sawbonz 26736]

1 minute ago, RomaVicta said:

You claimed it was effective, not me. You'll need to make a more substantial argument than LOLing and mischaracterizing the argument to get another response from me. lol

No one here has mentioned surrender of the organization as a goal or expected outcome of killing these leaders. You seem to be setting such an endpoint up as a straw man to knock down. If you’re not, I’m really not sure what you’re driving at. If your contention is that killing their leaders is not an effective strategy in weakening a terrorist organization, that is prima facie ridiculous and doesn’t really warrant a serious response

[C-Man 26535]

8 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

You claimed it was effective, not me. You'll need to make a more substantial argument than LOLing and mischaracterizing the argument to get another response from me. lol

If you keep killing leadership, the talent pool starts drying up at some point.

[RomaVicta 29472]

1 minute ago, C-Man said:

If you keep killing leadership, the talent pool starts drying up at some point.

Again, where is the evidence that it actually does dry up? I'll go for killing this guy because he's linked to the 9/11 attack.

This whole discussion springs from my ironic post about this killing ending terrorism. These killings don't and won't. I doubt their impact is much at all on the overall conflict.

The most effective ways we've ripped up Al Quaeda is by other means (law enforcement cooperation internationally) which we rarely recognize let alone celebrate. Why don't we celebrate that? Because we like blowing things and people up because it's way cool.

That's all I'm saying. 

[RomaVicta 29472]

9 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

I’m really not sure what you’re driving at.

It shows.

[C-Man 26535]

Just now, RomaVicta said:

Again, where is the evidence that it actually does dry up? I'll go for killing this guy because he's linked to the 9/11 attack.

This whole discussion springs from my ironic post about this killing ending terrorism. These killings don't and won't. I doubt their impact is much at all on the overall conflict.

The most effective ways we've ripped up Al Quaeda is by other means (law enforcement cooperation internationally) which we rarely recognize let alone celebrate. Why don't we celebrate that? Because we like blowing things and people up because it's way cool.

That's all I'm saying. 

Because irradiating Al-Zawahiri with two cruise missiles is far sexier than arresting him for tax evasion.

Sure, it probably does little in the grand scheme of things but satisfy our blood lust at this point. I was simply stating that Bin Ladens and Al-Zawahiris might not grow on trees. Are there plenty of extremists over there that would set off a nuke in NYC if they could but I bet there aren't many with the ability to plan or carry through such an operation. Bin Laden would still be head of Al-Qaeda if he was still alive today. Al-Zawahiri was apparently still in charge a decade after replacing OBL and 25+ years as OBL's #2.

[Sawbonz 26736]

4 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

It shows.

So you agree killing leaders weakens terrorist organizations 

[C-Man 26535]

5 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Again, where is the evidence that it actually does dry up? I'll go for killing this guy because he's linked to the 9/11 attack.

This whole discussion springs from my ironic post about this killing ending terrorism. These killings don't and won't. I doubt their impact is much at all on the overall conflict.

The most effective ways we've ripped up Al Quaeda is by other means (law enforcement cooperation internationally) which we rarely recognize let alone celebrate. Why don't we celebrate that? Because we like blowing things and people up because it's way cool.

That's all I'm saying. 

To clarify, I don't mean "dry up" like it goes away. I mean dry up in the sense that the underlings very likely aren't as charismatic or capable as those who have led Al-Qaeda since it started 25+ years ago.

[WhatTheBuck 28574]

33 minutes ago, C-Man said:

If you keep killing leadership, the talent pool starts drying up at some point.

Let us know when that point rolls around. 

[Sbbruin 21567]

1 hour ago, RomaVicta said:

I'm sure you can name numerous examples of such a strategy forcing an enemy to submit. 

Mainly name insurgencies because that's what this conflict most resembles. 

No one said they will submit.  That's just a stupid comment.  But it shows Al Qaeda that they are under surveillance and if they think they can pop their heads out of the gopher hole, be prepared to get blown the fuck up.  Fun way to spend your existence.  

You almost sound like you are suggesting pursuing Al Qaeda leadership is a fool's errand, and we shouldn't bother spending resources on that.  Is that what you're saying?

[C-Man 26535]

30 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Let us know when that point rolls around. 

I clarified what I meant by "drying up" one post up.

[RomaVicta 29472]

1 hour ago, Sbbruin said:

No one said they will submit.  That's just a stupid comment.  But it shows Al Qaeda that they are under surveillance and if they think they can pop their heads out of the gopher hole, be prepared to get blown the fuck up.  Fun way to spend your existence.  

You almost sound like you are suggesting pursuing Al Qaeda leadership is a fool's errand, and we shouldn't bother spending resources on that.  Is that what you're saying?

No.

[DigglerontheHoof 20450]

Effective/ not effective?  Fuck it, the evil cunt who was one of the main people responsible for killing thousands of our fellow citizens is fucking dead.

Good riddance and pass the tequila and keep killing those fucks.

['stache 21490]

Yup, should have happened 20 years ago. A targeted mission to find the leaders who actively participated in planning 9/11. Instead we got a generic "war on terror" that by name alone could never be victorious and W declaring "Mission Accomplished" like an idiot when we accomplished basically nothing.

[Fudge Nuggets 18825]

3 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

Again, where is the evidence that it actually does dry up? I'll go for killing this guy because he's linked to the 9/11 attack.

This whole discussion springs from my ironic post about this killing ending terrorism. These killings don't and won't. I doubt their impact is much at all on the overall conflict.

The most effective ways we've ripped up Al Quaeda is by other means (law enforcement cooperation internationally) which we rarely recognize let alone celebrate. Why don't we celebrate that? Because we like blowing things and people up because it's way cool.

That's all I'm saying. 

Guess we should have let him go.  That sounds like a brilliant idea.  🙄

[RomaVicta 29472]

22 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Guess we should have let him go.  That sounds like a brilliant idea.  🙄

I never suggest that, so your post is basically a lie if you're claiming I did. 

If you don't want to look past the emotions, it's your right.

Touchdown America!

 

 

['stache 21490]

Anyone have the skillz to Biden-ize this?

[C-Man 26535]

https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/02/opinions/al-zawahiri-al-qaeda-death-osama-bin-laden-bergen/index.html

Interesting counterpoint opinion saying Al-Zawahiri was an ineffective successor to Bin Laden. Oh well, still glad we greased his ass this weekend.

[HornOnTheBayou 8816]

4 hours ago, Sawbonz said:

No one here has mentioned surrender of the organization as a goal or expected outcome of killing these leaders. You seem to be setting such an endpoint up as a straw man to knock down. If you’re not, I’m really not sure what you’re driving at. If your contention is that killing their leaders is not an effective strategy in weakening a terrorist organization, that is prima facie ridiculous and doesn’t really warrant a serious response

This. @RomaVicta, I have no idea what your argument is. Of course this assassination is not going to end terrorism, but no one thinks it will. We got one of the 9/11 masterminds and al Qaeda is weaker than it was last week. That's a win, but it's not the end. No one has said it is. 

['stache 21490]

1 minute ago, C-Man said:

https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/02/opinions/al-zawahiri-al-qaeda-death-osama-bin-laden-bergen/index.html

Interesting counterpoint opinion saying Al-Zawahiri was an ineffective successor to Bin Laden. Oh well, still glad we greased his ass this weekend.

A Nazi guard was recently arrested in his late 90's in a wheelchair. Sometimes punitive repercussions are just as important as any other theory of justice/war. Deterrence too. You want to fuck with us? We'll hunt you down one way or another.

[WhatTheBuck 28574]

3 hours ago, C-Man said:

I clarified what I meant by "drying up" one post up.

Then point out when that happens. I won’t hold my breath.

Ground zero for the twisted, hardcore fundamentalist interpretation of Islam that drives the jihadists is in Riyadh. As long as that goes unresolved, the problem isn’t going away. When it comes to the Taliban, their base of support is in Islamabad. As long as that’s the case, the Taliban aren’t going anywhere. We could invade Afghanistan again, drive them from the cities, they’d wage an insurgency until we got tired and left, then they’d seize power again and it wouldn’t matter how many we killed in the mean time. We can kill all we want. They’ll just make more. 

[4th&Five 41055]

 

[RomaVicta 29472]

21 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

I expect this will be the end of terrorism.

The above is what started all of this conversation. It was a pointed bit of irony. If you don't get it, I no longer care.

24 minutes ago, HornOnTheBayou said:

This. @RomaVicta, I have no idea what your argument is. Of course this assassination is not going to end terrorism, but no one thinks it will. We got one of the 9/11 masterminds and al Qaeda is weaker than it was last week. That's a win, but it's not the end. No one has said it is. 

You can comfort your bewilderment at my argument with Sawbones. Here homework: read all of the posts.

Cliff's Notes: I more than once say killing this guy is fine and good.

[HornOnTheBayou 8816]

9 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

The above is what started all of this conversation. It was a pointed bit of irony. If you don't get it, I no longer care.

You can comfort your bewilderment at my argument with Sawbones. Here homework: read all of the posts.

Cliff's Notes: I more than once say killing this guy is fine and good.

OK. You're right. I'm not going to try and argue with The Smartest Guy in the Room.

[Hank Scorpio 17691]

I’m not a huge fan of our drone warfare program but they essentially dropped an anvil covered in knives on this guy Wile E. Coyote style. That’s fucking metal. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33695]

33 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

I’m not a huge fan of our drone warfare program but they essentially dropped an anvil covered in knives on this guy Wile E. Coyote style. That’s fucking metal. 

do you have more technical info on this? I'd be curious to learn about what you're describing

[Hank Scorpio 17691]

 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33695]

4 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

 

grassy ass

[RomaVicta 29472]

1 hour ago, HornOnTheBayou said:

OK. You're right. I'm not going to try and argue with The Smartest Guy in the Room.

Always wise. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33695]

4 hours ago, Hank Scorpio said:

 

ok, I just went down a huge rabbit hole reading about that. my reaction:

[TwiceHorn 30716]

33 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

ok, I just went down a huge rabbit hole reading about that. my reaction:

Same.  It's kind of hard to imagine something resembling a blade that doesn't just shear off when that thing impacts at high velocity.

[atomheartbevo 88751]

 

[atomheartbevo 88751]

[AnTiM 1629]

Just accept the fact this will not end until they are all dead or we are.  Since their mantra is Death To America, I would prefer the former..

Edited August 3, 2022 by AnTiM

['stache 21490]

2 hours ago, AnTiM said:

Just accept the fact this will not end until they are all dead or we are.  Since their mantra is Death To America, I would prefer the former..

I'm okay that we continued to track down and kill this fuckstain because it was still a direct link to 9/11, but I agree in general it's time to just focus our energies at home to prevent terrorism the best we can, and use intelligence overseas to stop it if at all possible before it gets here. Fighting a full out war over there to avoid them coming here was always stupid. It should have always been focused on pursing people directly linked to 9/11, not a war. It was always about W wanting to be a "war time president."

[RomaVicta 29472]

I wasn't aware of this new Hellfire missile. I'm glad of the development. Our errors will leave a smaller footprint. Our successes are less likely to include euphemisticlally-termed collateral damage.

[Guest]

So when do we start seeing flags like this flying?

[Francisco 2.0 31568]

 

 

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11486]

Pretty brutal photo of the impact

 

Spoiler

 

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11486]

Al-Qaeda:

never bring a knife to a gun fight. 

USA:

 

 

 

[Sawbonz 26736]