Celebrating Memorial Day With the Remote Killing of Al Qaeda’s No. 3
I am such a cynic, but who else finds it terribly convenient that news of the execution of Al Qaeda’s No. 3 — Mustafa Ahmed Muhammad Uthman Abu al-Yazid, aka Shaikh Sa’id al-Masri or Mustafa Abu al-Yazid — was released over Memorial Day Weekend, a time when we’re thinking about the brave men and women we’ve lost to people like this jerk? Particularly when he was killed, by a CIA drone attack in Pakistan, last week.
All of which means Al Qaeda is just elevating somebody else to its No. 3 post. Can we have that guy killed by Veteran’s Day?
“All of which means Al Qaeda is just elevating somebody else to its No. 3 post. Can we have that guy killed by Veteran’s Day?”
Yeah, why do we we even bother going after any Al Qaeda leaders? Let’s just leave them alone, I’m sure they’re over the whole “Death to America” thing anyway…
Besides, this article/post wasted valuable space and could have been used instead for another “Obama hates the gays” rant…that’s much more productive than killing any old Al Qaeda leader anyway…we have to know who our true enemies are blah blah blah…
· Flag
@Ronbo: And how can you even have a beef with any method utilized to kill a taliban scumbag???? Not even taking 9/11 into consideration if you were to announce you were Gay to any taliban ops within a matter of minutes you would be suffering a very grisly, torturous death………It boggles the mind that a Gay person could have any qualms with taking out any member of the taliban……….
· Flag
@Ronbo: Guess you would prefer to “reach out” and find “common ground” with the scumbag savages the taliban. Those filty scum would shred you to pieces in a very “repugnant” method in no time flat. What kind of a fucking rock do you dwell under? You have a problem with the US killing a major figure in the organization who protected the planner of 9/11?? Wake the fuck up, they wish you and every other Gay person in the world to die a slow painfull death.
· Flag
No. 7 · terrwill wrote, “@Ronbo: Guess you would prefer to ‘reach out’ and find ‘common ground’ with the scumbag savages the taliban.” While I don’t agree with what Ronbo actually said, “reaching out” to the Taliban is in fact a good idea because some of them will start to integrate our point of view. That doesn’t mean we have to invite Osama bin Laden to a state dinner or have the president directly involved, but injecting messages into those organizations is to our advantage.
Both the Taliban and Al Qaeda are continually losing members. In some cases we are killing them, but there is a natural attrition rate as most people don’t want to be in a quasi-military organization for the rest of their lives. If some of them start to see us as people, not demons, those views will slowly help shift the “rank and file” to a somewhat more moderate position, which means they’ll get tired of what they are doing sooner and therefore quit sooner. And compared to a cruise missile, talk is very cheap. Each cruise missile costs about $600,000, not including the staff to transport it and fire it, so if we avoid firing a few, you can use what you save to fund programs that might do some real good for us.
If we can get over a threshold so AlQaeda and the Taliban lose members faster than they gain members, the problems we are having with them will eventually go away.
Also, keep in mind that while we might never convince Osama bin Laden and the handful of people who report to him, if they have nobody signing up, they can’t do anything and even people who really hate us won’t give them any money if those guys are ineffective.
· Flag
I agree. This is fake news designed to ramp-up support for a repugnant killing system. If your source of “news” pushes this kind of bought-and-paid-for story, know that you are not watching the news. You are watching propaganda. Joseph Goebbels would be proud of the corporations.