BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Ron Davies
Date: 12 Jun 06 - 11:47 PM

Ah Doug--with your patented incisive foreign policy analysis, you have again homed in on--by far--the less significant development of the day, Zarqawi's death --meaningless except for poor beleaguered Bushites who are desperately grasping at straws. (Could that possibly include your good self?)

And of course you ignore by far the more important development of the day--the completion of the Iraqi cabinet--including a Sunni as Minister of Defense. Well done, good job.

You--and of course Fox News--can be proud of yourselves for missing the point-- yet again.

And of course the Cabinet news may well also prove a transitory piece of good news--especially if, as I've said before, the constitution is not amended to better suit Sunnis.

The death of Zarqawi is totally meaningless--unless it can somehow be used to persuade Shias to disband their militias. An open question--to say the least.

Jon Stewart noted that the main question now is whether they would perhaps look to a non-traditional source for the new Iraqi terror leader--perhaps a woman or a non-Moslem. (That's humor, Doug--don't get your knickers in a twist.)

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Ron Davies
Date: 12 Jun 06 - 11:58 PM

Or new Iraq terror leader--yes, I am aware Zarqawi was Jordanian. In fact the terror organzation in Iraq will be much stronger if it is headed by an Iraqi. And it's not Terror, Inc.--more like lots of terror franchises all over with tenuous--or absolutely no--loyalty to Osama--or anybody. Not to mention the continuing sectarian violence.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Peace
Date: 13 Jun 06 - 09:52 AM

"Torturers are not born, they are nurtured, trained and supported. In many countries they rely on foreign governments for the tools of their trade and expertise in how to use them. Some governments are directly involved in the torture trade; others prefer to turn a blind eye. Few have shown the political will to put an end to this trade whose profits are built on the suffering of countless torture victims.

Some of the tools of the torturer's trade seem almost medieval — shackles, leg irons, thumbscrews, handcuffs and whips. However, in recent years there has been a marked expansion in the manufacture, trade and use of other kinds of technology used by security and police forces, especially electro-shock technology. New research for this report has shown that the number of companies worldwide known to be producing or supplying electro-shock equipment had risen from 30 in the 1980s to more than 130 by 2000."

Lest we forget.

from

http://www.amnestyusa.org/stoptorture/index.do

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 13 Jun 06 - 03:43 PM

they took a sample of Zarqawis DNA so they could clone him
and kill him a second time closer to the Midterm elections.
(thanks to John Stewart for thatone)

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: robomatic
Date: 13 Jun 06 - 04:46 PM

Ron, Petr: Appreciate the Jon Stewart references. I no longer get to watch him and miss Daily Show terribly. At least I can download "Wait Wait Don't Tell Me" weekly.

Bruce, anyone who believes torturers are made not born has no idea of the range of human nature, nor paid attention to what little boys do with magnifying glasses, gunpowder caps, and bugs or little brothers.

Saying that the death of Zarqawi has no significance more than once in this forum is like the atheist spending a lot of time trying to convince folks in the unexistence of God.

In other words, nice to hear from ya, but can ya read the thread title?

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Ron Davies
Date: 13 Jun 06 - 09:59 PM

Robo--

The thread title itself is meaningless--unless we are to imply that his death has an impact on the Iraq war. ( It seems reasonable to infer that this was the intent of the thread originator.)

Point is: not likely--depends on whether it can be used to persuade militias to disband---which is unlikely. Cabinet is more important--by far--and ignored by said thread originator.


"Wait, Wait" on a par with Jon Stewart? Surely you jest.

I never get a chance to see Jon Stewart the first time--just the repeat--at least a day later. But in today's (repeat) program he did have some good observations about the changing of the terrorist guard in Iraq--to expound on what I mentioned earlier.

He did say they might look outside--at non-traditional sources--perhaps the Tamil Tigers--or for somebody with organizational skills, a soprano.

I was so convinced that would make this a musical thread--as in "What's the difference between a pit bull and a soprano? Lipstick".   But Jan tells me he might well have been referring to a TV program.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: GUEST,Woody
Date: 13 Jun 06 - 10:39 PM

A USA Today/Gallup poll released Tuesday found that most Americans considered the killing of al Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi a "major achievement'' and suggested that opinion which has turned steadily against the war remains volatile.

The poll found that 51 percent of Americans still say it was a mistake to go to war in Iraq, a drop from nearly 60 percent at the end of last year. The new poll found that 48 percent believe the war is winnable, up from 39 percent in April.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Ron Davies
Date: 13 Jun 06 - 10:44 PM

"The war is winnable"--now there's a classically meaningless statement--remember it's the "war on terror", as we've been assured by the maladministration more than once.

When do you think "terror" is going to surrender, pray tell?

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: GUEST,Dean
Date: 13 Jun 06 - 11:08 PM

"the idea that we're going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong,"

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Arne
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 12:52 AM

Almost to the day that Dubya snuck in to that modern-day Elysium of Baghdad, we're set to hit the 2.5K dead mark for U.S. soldiers over there. But it won't stop there, like some climber reaching the magical plateau, easy street from there on. Nope. We'll end up with as many dead in Iraq as we had on Sept. 11th, and for no discernible purpose outside of Dubya's incompetence, arrogance, political opportunism, and "shrunken dick" syndrome.   Nope, just another three thousand more (and countless more Iraqi) senseless deaths.

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: dianavan
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 02:19 AM

Woody - I thought we won the 'war in Iraq'. Isn't that what happened when Saddam was ousted and a new government was 'democratically' elected?

How can you win a war that you have already won?

Oh, I am so confused. Is it a war in Iraq or is it a 'war on terrorism'?

If its a 'war on terrorism', why are we fighting it in Iraq? I thought most of the terrorists were from Saudi Arabia.

...and why are we killing all those women and children?

Who cares about al-Zarqawi? The only changes he can make is in American polls. He's dead. Now can the soldiers come home?

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: robomatic
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 01:54 PM

Ron -

There ya go again. I did not say Wait Wait is on a par with Daily Show. I think that's a comparison of apples and oranges. I mentioned that I no longer see the Daily Show, and then I mentioned I can download Wait Wait. See how what people say can be turned around by those who like to make associations and conclusions and inferences out of thin air? (prob'ly not).

Love the Sopranos. you can download that, too, if you know how.

As for Zarqawi, PBS re-aired an entire Frontline show about him and his impact on the Al Qaida in Iraq and the internecine actions going on amongst the so-called insurgents (terrorists) who we are fighting there. Seemed significant to a lot of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Amos
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 02:17 PM

There's no question that killing a Terrorist Leader is excellent PR for those who promote a "War On Terror". But there's little indication this was a strategic advance in any real way. He has been replaced in his organization already, as might have been predicted. The resources of the organization have not been significantly depleted. The motivation of the group has not been diluted. The organizational structure and location of the group is no better known to intell.   So why is this a major event? Because of the media coverage afforded to it?

I can only hope it is genuinely demoralizing to some of the Al Qeda-in-Iraq sub-echelons, but I kinda doubt that to be the case, and certainly not for very long.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: robomatic
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 04:57 PM

Amos:

I think it's a major event because we all watch too much television and this is like the ending of a major supporting character on a show we can't turn off. But it matters to the show and anyone who watches it. As far as the administration goes, I think they could have overplayed it and did not, which shows they are capable of learning from the past. That's a good sign.

Robo

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Ron Davies
Date: 14 Jun 06 - 10:00 PM

Robo--

Whatever you say, Mr. Reagan.

You did mention "Wait, Wait" and Jon Stewart in the same paragraph. Rotten apples and wonderful oranges, in my opinion. "Wait, Wait", for lack of a better phrase, is puerile tripe-- (I like the word "tripe"). Jon Stewart is probably the best political and social satire in the US in decades. YMMV.

Re: Zarqawi: as mentioned earlier in the thread, Zarqawi had proven recently to be an embarrassment--or worse--to the insurgency. See for instance the reaction to his attack on the Jordanian hotel. At this point he's far more useful as a martyr--this was even noted by the Wall St Journal recently--with the suspicion that he was betrayed for just this reason.

PBS aired an old show about Mr. Z. I hope it helped their ratings. But, as Shania said-- that don't impress me much--(does that make this a music thread?)

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Wolfgang
Date: 17 Jun 06 - 09:25 AM

The organizational structure and location of the group is no better known to intell.   So why is this a major event? (Amos)

They have found a lot of data beneath the bodies, memory sticks and all that. Several successful raids in the last couple of days are a consequence of those finds. That makes it a major event and not alone the propaganda value of killing a leader of the enemy.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Ron Davies
Date: 17 Jun 06 - 09:49 AM

Time will tell how important it was.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: DougR
Date: 17 Jun 06 - 04:40 PM

But why wait, Ron? After all you have already declared it an unimportant event? That makes it so, right?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Ron Davies
Date: 17 Jun 06 - 04:51 PM

I said its importance hinges on whether it can be used to persuade Shiite militias to disband. That is the single biggest obstacle to more Sunni participation in the government. They will also have to ease off on "de-Baathification"--which it appears they are starting to do--possibly using the reconciliation approach of South Africa after apartheid.

It would be refreshing if you would read carefully for once, Doug. Though it goes against your strongest beliefs--i.e. that all you need to know you can get from Fox News and the Arizona Republic (an).

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: GUEST,Woody
Date: 18 Jun 06 - 11:03 AM

http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=12662

How Al Qaeda Lost Iraq

6/18/2006   Strategy Page

A side benefit of killing al Qaeda leader Abu Musab al Zarqawi on June 7th, was the capture of many of his working documents. Much of what these documents contained had been obtained in earlier raids, and from interrogations. But this time, American intelligence officers had an up to date record of what al Qaeda was thinking, what their plans were and, perhaps most importantly, how they thought they were doing. Zarqawi believed al Qaeda's situation was bleak, and getting worse. The main reason for that glum assessment was the growth of the Iraqi security forces (army and police), and the movement of these forces into Sunni Arab areas of central Iraq during the past year. The battle of Fallujah last Fall was the beginning of the end, and the constant pressure since then has made it more difficult for al Qaeda to plan and carry out terror attacks. The mass media found nothing newsworthy in al Qaedas declining fortunes, but Zarqawi and his lieutenants were certainly paying attention.

Interestingly, Zarqawi mentions unfavorable media coverage of al Qaeda with in Iraq, without admitting that the deaths of thousands of Iraqis by terror attacks might have anything to do with it. According to Zarqawi, those deaths would not be so harmful if it wasn't because of the way the Iraqi government propaganda made al Qaeda look like a bunch of unfeeling butchers. Zarqawi was also dismayed at the number of Sunni Arabs who were turning away from al Qaeda, and supporting the government. Zarqawi was also feeling the financial pinch, apparently from the American and Iraqi operation to shut down the smuggling across the Syrian border, and international efforts to reduce foreign funding of al Qaeda operations in general. Zarqawi was also unhappy with the growing number of foreign countries that were setting up embassies in Iraq, which made the government appear more legitimate.

Zarqawi had a plan for a comeback, which depended on increased recruiting, establishing more bomb workshops, having more of his people join the army and police (to spy, and recruit new terrorists) and to improve discipline within the ranks of al Qaeda in Iraq. All of these ideas are indicative of an organization that was falling apart.

But it gets worse, at least for Zarqawi. His "victory plan" involved instigating battles between Shia factions, between Shia and Kurds and, best of all, between the U.S. and Iran. With all of his enemies thus distracted, al Qaeda would unify the Sunni Arabs and take over Iraq. That was the plan, apparently it still is. Zarqawi believed that he could depend on media in Moslem countries, as well as anti-American media in the West, to help get the al Qaeda version of reality out. There was evidence at the June 7 bombing site, that Zarqawi kept up on Iraqi and foreign media. But he apparently didn't notice that al Qaeda was not popular at all. Zarqawi was still popular to the hard core al Qaeda fanboys, but was rapidly losing traction in the rest of the Islamic world.

Zarqawi, and his strategies, had become a liability to the other al Qaeda brass. For them, Zarqawi's death was timely, and quite useful. Zarqawi's successor faces a pretty grim situation. While the new guy appears to be another foreigner, most of al Qaeda in Iraq is staffed, and run, by Iraqi Sunni Arabs. These fellows are the radical fringe of the Iraqi Sunni Arab community, which is now largely seeking to make deals with the Iraqi government. So the new al Qaeda leadership in Iraq has to first deal with dissent within the Sunni Arab community, before turning to the larger issue of democracy and majority rule in Iraq. The Sunni Arabs make up less than twenty percent of Iraq's population. Actually, given the many (over a million) Iraqi Sunni Arabs who have fled the country in the last three years, that's probably closer to fifteen percent these days.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Ron Davies
Date: 18 Jun 06 - 02:50 PM

Woody--

Al Queda victory plan included, from your own just-posted article, Woody--instigating war between the US and Iran. Now who do you suppose is playing into al-Queda's hands on just this point? As Carol has pointed out elsewhere--try Mr. Bush.

Don't you even read what you yourself post? Or do you just lift it from your source without thinking? Admittedly that would fit the typical Bushite approach.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: GUEST,Woody
Date: 18 Jun 06 - 10:46 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5093266.stm

Palestinian rivals 'nearing deal'

Hamas supporters demonstrate outside Palestinian parliament building in Ramallah

Rival Palestinian factions Hamas and Fatah are close to agreement on an initiative that would implicitly recognise Israel, officials say.

Senior figures have been in talks to resolve deep divisions over the move.

Hamas, which now controls the Palestinian government, refuses to recognise Israel's right to exist - in contrast to Fatah's position.

President Mahmoud Abbas has threatened to hold a referendum next month on the plan unless Hamas accepts it.

Hamas also challenges the legality of the referendum, which has been announced for 26 July.

The plan sets out formal Palestinian claims to an independent state on land occupied by Israel in 1967, and implicitly adopts a two-state solution.

The two factions have been locked in an intense power struggle since Hamas gained control of the Palestinian parliament in elections in January.

In another development, the factions have reached agreement on the division of the security forces, the Israeli Haaretz website reports.

Hamas is also under intense financial pressure, as the EU and US cut off funding after it came to power because of its stand on Israel.

But Western powers have agreed moves to release more than $120m of EU funds to support local health services and cater for the basic needs of poor Palestinians, but bypassing the Hamas government.

'Positive outlook'

The plan, known as the "prisoners' document", is based on proposals by Palestinian militants in Israeli jails.

It calls for continued resistance on lands occupied by Israel in 1967, but proposes an end to attacks inside the area internationally recognised as Israel.

Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniya - a leading Hamas figure - said in a statement that "tangible progress" had been made in the talks.

Earlier Aziz Dweik, a Hamas leader and parliament speaker said that in the coming days "we will have a new and optimistic step for our Palestinian people."

A Fatah spokesman, Tawfiq Abu Khussa, told the AFP news agency that agreement had been reached "on almost all of the issues in the prisoners initiative and things are looking very positive."

Another senior Fatah figure, Abdullah Ifranji, also predicted agreement would be reached in the coming days, saying: "There is an agreement on the document with reservations, but the movement is positive."

The Palestinian parliament which is dominated by Hamas will hold a debate on the referendum issue this week.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: dianavan
Date: 19 Jun 06 - 12:52 AM

Why are you discussing Hamas and Fatah on a thread about al-Zarqawi?

I am beginning to think you have absolutely no thoughts of your own and can only cut and paste (even when it has nothing to do with the topic).

Start your own thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: DougR
Date: 19 Jun 06 - 08:02 PM

I have been mulling in my mind who is the rudist poster on the Mudcat, Ron Davies, or Greg F.? Although it's a close race you, Ron, I believe have the edge. Just my opinion of course.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 19 Jun 06 - 08:40 PM

What, I'm not even in the running for "rudist" (sic) poster? Well, fuck you, too. :(

Anyways, I don't think anyone's mentioned this lately, but there was a little girl killed in the blast, after all. Possibly Zarqawi's daughter, which would, of course, make her at least half terrorist, and thus, like, fair game, or some shit. Do you hope that she "died a very painful death, too, Doug? And do you wish that she could've "suffered a bit longer before entering the gates of hell," as well? Huh, Doug?

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Arne
Date: 19 Jun 06 - 10:04 PM

I feel slighted as well, Lepus.

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Ron Davies
Date: 19 Jun 06 - 11:33 PM

HEY, I WON!!!!! First time I ever won anything.

But, contrary to usual practice, I'd like to say there is plenty of room at the top. I'm sure Doug can come up with trophies for anybody who feels the process wasn't fair. I swear I didn't do anything Abramoff didn't do.

But at least it does mean that Doug is actually starting to read posts--big progress.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Arne
Date: 20 Jun 06 - 12:02 AM

I dunno, maybe I'll settle for a Preznitential Medal of Freedom.

I'd note that DougR's maligning of my best efforts is quite rude in itself, but not up to professional standards though....

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: GUEST,Woody
Date: 20 Jun 06 - 12:34 AM

http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/2006/06/forward-togetherday-2.html

Thursday, June 15, 2006

Forward Together...Day 2
Baghdad sounded quieter than usual today, and the sounds of bombs retracted before the tide of official announcements that took the news headlines replacing the usual bloody scenes....

.......I agree that the raid that killed Zarqawi led us to some significant findings and revealed a lot of information but it didn't reveal everything, so I agree with Mr. Rubaie that the end of Zarqawi marked the beginning of al-Qaeda's end in Iraq and I do believe the government has a golden opportunity to deal with al-Qeada and its allies as the death of Zarqawi left his organization and followers in a state of shock and huge suspicion that the network's lines have been infiltrated, and I feel that most of them are behaving clumsily out of fear from being already identified and located. Of course this will make their moves more noticeable and will eventually expose them, that's if they're not already exposed.
Moreover, the government is sending vague messages through the local media stating that some of the documents seized near Zarqawi included names of well known political figures and I think this kind of leaked information is choking the involved elements.

In fact some people here are suggesting a link between the arrest of the head of the city council in Kerbala and the information found in those documents building these speculations on the nature and timing of the arrest, some are expecting similar arrest to follow against even more important figures.
That's what we're going to find out soon but in general these announcement and leaks stand as part of a necessary psychological war that-if performed well-can further lower the morale of the terrorists and their allies.

One of the most significant things about this operation is that we did not see any serious rejection or opposition to it from any of the influential parties or clerics which indicates that there's a general desire to back this operation or at least let it pass without complications and accept it as a means to get out of the deteriorated security situation.
Maybe that's because this particular operation doesn't give an impression that it's directed against a certain segment or sect as the case would be if the operation was conducted in Najaf, Sadr city or Ramadi for example.

The current feeling in Baghdad is that the operation is in the benefit of everyone and this is a good advantage that should be used to achieve success.

Posted by Mohammed @ 23:36

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Greg F.
Date: 20 Jun 06 - 10:10 AM

I have been mulling in my mind who is the rudist poster on the Mudcat...

Suggest you glance in the mirror, Douggie-Boy.

But as long as we're taking nominations, how about a "Most Ignorant, Inane and Self-Satisfied" category for which Douggie, Old Fart & Wordy are pretty much running neck and neck lately. Winner to get the Mudcat Hubris Award.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 20 Jun 06 - 03:02 PM

"Al Queda victory plan included, from your own just-posted article, Woody--instigating war between the US and Iran. Now who do you suppose is playing into al-Queda's hands on just this point? As Carol has pointed out elsewhere--try Mr. Bush."


This has got to be one of the most idiotic statements made on this thread yet.

Are you saying, Ron, since one of al-qaida's stated goals is to provoke a war between US and Iran, then the current tensions that are there are a direct result of Zarqawi and his murderous gang?

It seems to me that the bearded ding-a-ling that's in charge over there now in Iran has had a lot to do with it. His saber rattling and statements that Israel should be wiped off the face of the earth has done more than I think Zarqawi could ever be capable of doing. Afterall, we're talking about a man who couldn't even figure out how to shoot a gun without being shown how.

Now Ron and Greg....I know that Zarqawi was your hero. He was your current excuse to support your "we're losing agenda". But don't worry. There will be someone else to take his place. He may be just as good as Zarqawi but only time will tell. The only thing is...we will find him and kill him too.

Afterall, that is what this war is designed for now. To hunt down terrorists and kill them. We've gotten rid of Saddam and a new government is now in place. Now we can get back to killing terrorists like what is being done in Afghanistan and places elsewhere.

Even Zarqawi's own documents and others found before state that they want to take advantage of what's going on in the US now. What's that, you ask? It's the constant complaining and whining that is being done by people on the left comparing this action to Vietnam or the constant moaning and bitching about "Let's bring the troops home". The more bitching and whining that is done by you and your crew does nothing but build up their confidence and compassion to continue their killing. It's really a sad thing when your message and the terrorists message are the same one.

Here's a novel idea. Why don't you try supporting OUR troops and supporting OUR cause in this mission. Stop agreeing with the terrorists and keep insisting that we cut and run before the job is done. That's what we did in Mogadishu and look what's going on there today. Where's the peace? Do you really want to go to bed at night knowing that if we do the same in Iraq then the same might happen there? Or do you not care? Has your hatred for this administration clouded your vision when it comes to people in other countries?

If the terrorists want to go to Iraq, then we'll stay there and kill them. If they want to go back to Afghanistan, then we'll kill them there. Wherever they go, they will be hunted down and killed if they choose to stay the current course of action that they are on and keep killing Americans.

They are, afterall, of the same group that hi-jacked four commercial airliners and took down two of our high profile buildings and one government structure and killed 3000+ people in two of our large cities on a sunny September morning. Do you remember that? It seems as if you conveniently forgot where this all started.

Up until that point, every time Al-qaida attacked us somewhere, what was the line?

"We will find the ones responsible for the this atrocious act and we will bring them to justice."

Everytime this phrase was said, people cheered and took to heart that something would be done. Up until then, nothing ever was....oh yeah wait, something was done...Clinton bombed an aspirin factory. That made a difference.

Now we are doing something. We are hunting down the freaks that subscribe to this philosophy and finally bringing them to justice.

Are you upset because we're not slapping them on the hand and asking them to not ever do nasty things like that again and instead landing 500 pound bombs on their dining room tables? Would you rather us just stand by and take it on the chin after every attack and continue to provide lip service to the American people as to why we're not going after the bad guys?

Come on Ron and Greg. I really hope that you two are bigger men than that. I really hope that you appreciate the country that you are living in and want to see it last and lead the world whether they like us or not.


If not, it seems as if the terrorists over in Iraq need instructions on how to shoot a gun. Maybe you should go show them. You're arguing for the same things, anyhow.


Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 20 Jun 06 - 03:06 PM

Now come on guys...I want to know how you really feel instead of personally attacking me and pointing out how I never post in the music threads.


Quite frankly, that's getting a little old and tired.


Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Ron Davies
Date: 20 Jun 06 - 06:38 PM

Hubby--


"old and tired"--you misspelled "true"--now why would that be?

Also I invite you to produce any evidence--as distinguished from your usual spewings-- that Zarqawi was a hero to anybody on Mudcat.

Now see if you can follow this--it may be too complex for your giant brain to grasp.

1)   al-Queda wants the US to attack Iran.
2)   Bush-- (supported by you, as I recall)-- is showing signs he plans to do so.
therefore
3)   Bush, by carrying out an attack on Iran, would be carrying out al-Queda's wishes. It makes no difference that he would not be "taking dictation" from al-Queda. He would be giving al-Queda exactly what it wants--a war between the US and Iran.   

Is that simple enough for you to master?

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Greg F.
Date: 21 Jun 06 - 09:12 AM

Ron-

You're playing into this asshole's hands by answering him.

Same thing as "debating" a Holocaust denier- you're only legitimizing his vomit.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Jun 06 - 09:23 AM

Ron,

To borrow your own logic,


1)   al-Queda wants the US to abandon Iraq
2)   Many liberals here are demanding a pull-out from Iraq.
therefore
3)   Manay liberals here, by demanding a pullout form Iraq, would be
carrying out al-Queda's wishes. It makes no difference that they would not be "taking dictation" from al-Queda. They would be giving al-Queda exactly what it wants--a pullout from Iraq.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: GUEST,Fernando
Date: 21 Jun 06 - 09:24 AM

All this quibble about Iran and nukes paralells the same bullshite we went thru with Iraq.

Everybody says Iran has them or will soon have them but they are too chicken shit to do anything about it. Then when someone has the balls to do something about it, they are called a liar if the nukes are not there.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Jun 06 - 10:48 AM

from another thread...


"If there is a 1% chance that my theoretical grandchildren, due to our actions, might not get to live on a planet that is fit for purpose, thats a chance I am unwilling to take. "

Of course, if that was about Iran using nuclear weapons, it is required to be 100% before any action can be considered.

Like Iraq.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jun 06 - 01:45 PM

That's classic, BB!


It's all about consistency. Not just latching onto every negative piece of info (whether true or not) to advance an agenda.



Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Ron Davies
Date: 21 Jun 06 - 10:43 PM

The only problem is BB is (as usual) dead wrong. A pullout from Iraq would not in fact be "al-Queda's wishes". Al-Queda (Osama) hopes we stay there --and suffer the death of 1,000 cuts--with our soldiers being picked off by twos and threes---- forever.

And not only that, even the Bush "team" realizes this. BB and Hubby must be 2 of the last (literate?) people left who don't realize this.

The Bush regime --desperately-- also wants a pullout from Iraq---but wants to declare victory (again) before doing so. They realize the bloom has been off the rose a good long time now---Bush's allegedly virtually bloodless victory (US blood, anyway)--soured right quick--and the steady trickle of US and UK coffins from Iraq continues. Pointing this out is not, as you oh-so-reasonable Bushites like to picture it, sympathizing with Osama. It's just stating facts. So sorry if they're not to your liking.

At this point "victory" for the Bush regime can only be an Iraqi government strong enough to not need US military assistance. First question is how long it will take to get to that stage--if Iraq ever reaches it. Second question is how many dead Coalition (read US and UK) troops it will take to get there.

It is also true that it would be Osama's fondest hope that the US would start a war with Iran, as Carol and I--and others--have said over and over.

And it's obvious why Osama wants us both in Iran and Iraq. Anybody who likes to stir up trouble--and that's his MO for sure--any argument there?--needs a bogeyman, as Bobert has pointed out. And the US, as embodiment of the rich, decadent West, is the perfect villain. So the more Moslems the US attacks, the better for Osama.

If you don't believe this, please tell us exactly why--as distinguished from your usual--classic Bushite approach--of smearing anybody who doesn't agree with you as terrorist sympathizers. How about some logic--for once?

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: GUEST,Fernando
Date: 22 Jun 06 - 12:54 AM

There was an ancient time when people thought that what they saw was just something that evil spirts made them see. The reality was not what they saw but something completely different.

Some of the people here, infatuated with their superior intelligence, are still effected by the mentality of that age.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: GUEST,Woody
Date: 22 Jun 06 - 01:12 AM

http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct=us/1-0&fp=449ad5fbca80fe9c&ei=OCSaROD8L4uOwQHqoLmBBg&url=http%3A//www.businessday.co.za/articles/topstories.aspx%3FID%3DBD4A205662&cid=0

In a tape aired on Arab television in April, Osama Bin Laden denounced the United States and Europe for cutting off funds to the Hamas-led Palestinian government, accusing them of leading a "Zionist" war on Islam, and urged followers to fight any U.N. peacekeeping force in Sudan.

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: beardedbruce
Date: 22 Jun 06 - 06:49 AM

Ron,

"A pullout from Iraq would not in fact be "al-Queda's wishes". Al-Queda (Osama) hopes we stay there --and suffer the death of 1,000 cuts--with our soldiers being picked off by twos and threes---- forever."

This is a debatable point. The stated intent of al-Queda is to drive the US out of Iraq.


"as distinguished from your usual--classic Bushite approach--of smearing anybody who doesn't agree with you as terrorist sympathizers."

"(as usual) dead wrong"... "of the last (literate?) people"...


Hardly conducive to a reasonable discussion. Would you care to show me ONE case where I have stated that those who disagree with me are terrorist sympathizers?

If you do not like the logic I presented, perhaps you should consider NOT using it upon those YOU disagree with.



BTW, why is it that even a small chance of danger from global warming justifies a complete change in our society, with the attendent upheaval and economic destruction, while a perceived threat of nuclear war requires overwhelming proof before ANY action can be done?

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 22 Jun 06 - 11:29 AM

Anything is "debatable," breadedbruce. The fact that something is "debatable" doesn't make all opinions on the matter equally valid. In this case, Ron has facts, logic, and the majority of experts of the subject on his side. Perhaps if he buried you in a barrage of lengthy copy-and-pastes, you'd understand this.

Anyways: Of course al-Qaeda wants the US in Iraq. And of course they're going to announce that it's their goal is to drive the US out of Iraq. American soldiers in an Arab/Muslim country is great PR for al-Qaeda, proving everything they've claimed for years about us. And a goal like "driving out the Crusaders" is a wonderfully effective recruitment tool. Same sort of deal the US military did after 9/11. This is all common knowledge. Yanno, what everyone knows.

Go ahead. Say something like "Al-Qaeda is a liberal invention meant to advance the gay/global warming agenda in Catholic schools!" Or "I say the Earth is a mystical cube of angel-dander, and 'evolution' is a homosexual-Muslim plot!" Or, more likely, a bunch of copy-and-pasted articles saying so. You're wrong about most everything, and you're not convincing anyone. No-one here is that fucking stupid.

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: DougR
Date: 22 Jun 06 - 08:03 PM

Gee, I don't know. Maybe Greg F. IS the rudist. I just can't decide.
Such an awesome responsibility.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 23 Jun 06 - 05:30 PM

Truth is that they tried to take Zarqawi out years ago but Bush stonewalled it. He needed an enemy to promote his Iraqi occupation. He hasn't found bin Laden and is unlikely to because one: bin Laden may already be dead and two: Bush has stated that he doesn't know where bin Laden is and doesn't care or think about him.

The Zarqawi event is a red-herring.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 24 Jun 06 - 12:39 PM

"Truth is that they tried to take Zarqawi out years ago but Bush stonewalled it."


Man, I'm still feeling the wind off of that spin. Whew! If you want to play that game then, here goes....


I guess none of this would be happening then, if Clinton would have taken bin Laden from the Sudan when he was offered as well.

We can play games like that all day long. The fact still remains that we are cleaning up what has been refused to be taken care of by administrations from both sides of the aisle in the past.

Ron, quit making excuses. You're making yourself look more inept as the days go by.


Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Ron Davies
Date: 24 Jun 06 - 02:47 PM

OK Hubby, simple question. No need to provide a tome of copy-pastes or your patented dodging technique. Perhaps you can muster the brain power to actually answer it.

The more Moslem countries we attack, the better for Osama.

True or false?

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 24 Jun 06 - 06:08 PM

Hubby, Clinton is the only president that tried to take out bin Laden. Bush didn't and ignored him. Clinton is the only president that recognized bin Laden as a threat. bin Laden as a threat was discovered during the Clinton Administration. I doubt very much whether Bill Clinton would have let 911 happen. As it was, he uncovered and thwarted quite a few plots such as the attempt to blow up International Airport in Los Angeles.

The facts are not game-playing.

Ron, Osama (if he is still alive, which might be doubtful since he requires dialysis) is rejoicing at the ineptness of this Administration. He doesn't have to do another 911. Bush's incompetence is making his job easier.

Osama (if he is alive) is a dangerous man because he knows the Bush vulnerabilities and is taking advantage of them daily.

Unfortunately, brutal fanaticism does not necessarilly equate with stupidity. But it's necessary for someone in our government to really know how it works. Bush doesn't have a clue.

All ya' gotta' do is listen to the words of bin Laden. His thing is that he doesn't want foreign troops dictating religious views on Muslims. It's that simple. He doesn't have the capacity to dominate the world economically or militarilly. He's winning recruits by default.


Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Susu's Hubby
Date: 24 Jun 06 - 09:06 PM

"The more Moslem countries we attack, the better for Osama."

"True or false?"


Ron,

You are so one-sided that it's really starting to concern me.


Let's address your premise first.

Let's break this question down.

We don't and didn't attack countries because they were "Moslem". It just so happens, that's where the terrorists are.

Why do you climb mountains? Because they're there.

Were you ever "it" in hide-n-seek? It's sort of the same situation here. You don't wait around and wait for the people that's hiding to come and find you.


Next is, who the hell cares what Osama thinks?

I know I don't. Should we not be over there fighting just because Osama wants us to leave? Is that really what you believe? Hell, Hitler wanted us to leave. Mussolini wanted us to leave. Emporer Hirohito wanted us to leave. Should we have left those countries too just because they wanted us to leave or do you think that the world would be better off if they had stayed in power?

Remember, this is the man who masterminded the killing of over 3000 people and the destruction of numerous buildings and aircraft all in one day. I don't think that the vast majority of the people that were directly affected by those 3000+ (some of which were muslim) losses really gives a rat's ass about what Osama thinks.

Why do you care so much about what he thinks?

Just who's side are you on?


Hubby

Subject: RE: BS: Bye Bye Abu Musab al-Zarqawi
From: Ron Davies
Date: 25 Jun 06 - 09:53 AM

Hubby--just answer the question. Or I will be forced to the conclusion that you are not smart enough to do so. One word answer will suffice:   yes or no.

And without your, also patented, Bushite smearing of people who don't agree with you as unpatriotic.

Thank you so much.

It's such a pleasure debating with you.