al-Libi

[RWebb]

I'm surprised no one started a topic on the death of Abu Laith al-Libi, apparently #3 with al-Qaeda.

News reports suggest we blew his ass to hell with a drone fired Hellfire missle.

That's great, but the more interesting part is that he was in Pakistan. So, it appears we are going to toughen up on our great friend and ally, Mushy.

Or maybe it was just some lucky intel.

[dd74]

The war on terror is so passé.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Another "senior A.Q." guy killed. Fine and dandy. They still can't get the ONE senior A.Q. guy that matters. Until they do that, I swear every 10th A.Q. guy they kill is reported as "senior" because it keeps the "War on Terror" propaganda machine going.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

seeing how Rudy was treated by voters everywhere and the economy is in the tank, the Admin will make a concerted effort to capture/kill/publicize AQ to scare the American people into a "it's the terrorist threat, stupid" mindset and help the Republican candidates, cause God knows they need a major successful terror attack to get elected at this point.

[Joeaksa]

One by one down they go.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by Shaun 84 Targa

... cause God knows they need a major successful terror attack to get elected at this point.

That would be Hillary winning the Democratic nomination.

[frogger]

So, have they named his replacement yet? Somehow, I think they haven't had too many problems filling their job vacancies. Perhaps we need to improve our comprehensive approach to winning the War on TerrorTM.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

That would be Hillary winning the Democratic nomination.

I was in that camp a few weeks ago Jeff, and have a serious dislike for her. But I no longer misunderestimate her.

the Democrats are going to label any Republican with "has the same mindset as Bush," the one that got our country into this mess we're in now, and that one message is going to mire them down more than the Nation's distrust and dislike for Hillary/Team Clinton.

[Mo_Gearhead]

QUOTE: "...approach to winning the War on TerrorTM."
__________________

There will be lulls ...and there will be claims made of successes, but the "war on terror" will N E V E R truly end. It is how people with grudge's against ANY country/government will always rebel.

To think that we (USA) will eradicate terrorism by some 'claimed victory' in Iraq (or any other place) is just mental masturbation.

Welcome to your/mine/our future.

QUOTE: "They still can't get the ONE senior A.Q. guy that matters."
__________________________

ONE?
SENIOR?
All propaganda ...even if B L is captured/killed.

Who's next????

[frogger]

Lovely, isn't it?

[island911]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

Another "senior A.Q." guy killed. Fine and dandy. They still can't get the ONE senior A.Q. guy that matters. Until they do that, I swear every 10th A.Q. guy they kill is reported as "senior" because it keeps the "War on Terror" propaganda machine going.

Strategically, it makes sense to take out the infrastructure of the enemy, else another picks it up and wrecks you with it.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

I agree, but far as I'm concerned, taking out "senior" operatives doesn't matter too much if OBL is still out there. He'll simply promote someone else to fill the void and we'll be back where we started.

Also, bit of a minor point, but isn't the whole thing with Al Qaeda supposed to be about how individual cells are "decentralized" and can act autonomously? If so, how much does it really matter if they kill one of OBL's buddies?

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they're finding and killing these nutcases, but I think the benefit is overstated for political gain.

[island911]

"overstated" ..hmmm. This news has hardly been hyped. More like a"BTW..."

As dd sez: The war on terror is so passé.

[djmcmath]

Originally Posted by Mo_Gearhead

There will be lulls ...and there will be claims made of successes, but the "war on terror" will N E V E R truly end. ... Welcome to your/mine/our future.

+1. The US is in a new era, where terror on our own soil is a realistic proposition. That's unlikely to change for a long, long time.


That said, it's always good to kill bad guys. Granted, it's not terribly challenging to find a replacement, but there is a finite number of replacements, and none of them are quite as good as the guy who was doing the job (else the smarter, stronger, meaner guy would be doing the job, instead of the guy who we killed). While it isn't as big of a deal as some politicians might make it out to be, it's still a serious hassle for the bad guys, and a real bummer for one in particular (the guy who got nailed).

If we could do this more often, we'd eventually burn through the collection of guys who are excited about stepping up to take the reins of power. I seem to recall a serious leadership void in West Bank terrorism a few years back after a particularly serious sequence of rocket assassinations carried out by Israel. The international community cried foul play because rockets have collateral damage, but the bad guys floundered for quite a while because nobody wanted to step up and be the next rocket target.

[frogger]

Originally Posted by djmcmath

but there is a finite number of replacements, and none of them are quite as good as the guy who was doing the job (else the smarter, stronger, meaner guy would be doing the job, instead of the guy who we killed).

The finite number is still a fairly large number and I don't think you can safely assume that the replacements are inferior. Some probably are, but some may prove an upgrade over the schmuck they replace.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

Originally Posted by djmcmath

...but there is a finite number of replacements, and none of them are quite as good as the guy who was doing the job (else the smarter, stronger, meaner guy would be doing the job, instead of the guy who we killed).

History would take issue with this statement. but it does sound comforting, almost like we are "winning."

[island911]

Originally Posted by frogger

The finite number is still a fairly large number and I don't think you can safely assume that the replacements are inferior. Some probably are, but some may prove an upgrade over the schmuck they replace.

You're right. We should stop fighting immediately. Shaun, go get fitted for a burka.

[frogger]

Brilliant post.

[strupgolf]

Originally Posted by Joeaksa

One by one down they go.

And one by one they get replaced. It never ends, #4 goes to #3, #76 goes to #75. etc.etc.etc.

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by Shaun 84 Targa

the Democrats are going to label any Republican with "has the same mindset as Bush,"

All except Ron Paul want to stay the course.

FYI: the Democratic nominee will be called a “defeatist.”

Rove previews strategies against Clinton, Obama
By Sam Youngman
Posted: 01/16/08 02:55 PM [ET]
http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/rove-previews-strategies-against-clinton-obama-2008-01-16.html

Rove said the candidate should get firmly behind the war effort, painting the Democratic nominee as “defeatist.”