| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration will allow you to join in the discussion which is amazingly free of personal rancor and trolls! We are currently looking for posters from both the left and the right who have a demonstrated capacity to discuss fervently without letting personalities get in the way. Is that you? We need more staff. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Zarqawi | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Jun 9 2006, 08:43 AM (286 Views) | |
| Post #1 Jun 9 2006, 08:43 AM |
|
|
Zarqawi was alive when the Iraqi police arrived on the scene and when American soldiers arrived later. He tried to roll off the gurney and get away. Before he died, he knew we had gotten him. Sweet. __________________________________ On cleaning Zarqawi up for the pictures, the coalition spokesman, US Army Major General William Caldwell said,
You see, we are the GOOD guys. |
Administrator
  ![]](http://z2.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
 
|
 |
| Post #2 Jun 14 2006, 03:34 PM | 2BCano |
| This is no big deal, has been widerly publisised that he held no official important post, what he has left behind someone else will pick up. |
Newbie
|
|
|
|
| Post #3 Jun 14 2006, 03:50 PM |
|
|
Actually, it's a big deal. He was in charge of most of the terrorism going on and, as such, had a lot of documentation about who was where. Immediately following the bombing, we acquired intel from that "safe" house that led to dozens of raids that killed or captured hundreds of terrorists. You are right to the extent that al Qaeda announced their new leader in Iraq. The world collectively said, "Who?" He is a nobody with no terrorist credentials. Al Qaeda is not America. When they have a leadership change, there is zero guarantee that Zarqawi's followers will follow the new guy without a lot of violence. In America, we can hate the result of an election, but we will generally use free speech on each other and the ballot box to try to correct the situation. Terrorists don't necessarily have an orderly succession, particularly when the new guy has not established himself. Killing Zarqawi, by no means, killed the terrorism. But, it wounded the heck out of it. I expect a slight uptick as plans already in the works are rushed, just to prove al Qaeda is not dead. Then there will be a huge lull as they run out of ready-to-go operations and al Qaeda restructures in a bloody way. |
Administrator
|
|
|
|
| Post #4 Jun 14 2006, 03:53 PM | 2BCano |
|
Was told a lot different here Pal, said that nothing came from the Killing! and that he had already lost the respect of most of al Qaeda officials, so really all this did was offer Publicity to the 'War On Terror'. But to be honest mate who can trust waht the media say? i have the article somewhere in the house and 2morrow morning i will dig it up and see what they said about this. |
Newbie
|
|
|
|
| Post #5 Jun 14 2006, 04:08 PM |
|
| He had lost the faith of al Qaeda external to Iraq, mainly becauser his attacks were killing mainly Iraqi Muslims, and that was hurting the world-wide terrorist organization. However, within Iraq, he was running most terrorist operations. His fingerprints were not on every attack, since al Qaeda, by its design, operates decentrally. Still, we got enough C&C info from his "safe" house for a mess of anti-terrorist operations! |
Administrator
|
|
|
|
| Post #6 Jun 15 2006, 06:42 AM | 2BCano |
|
Well in that case brilliant, seems like more things are going wring at the minute tho, more British troops are dying, had a few more over the past couple of weeks, other things in other country's like reported massacre in Sudan (Although not Terrorist related as such) and the goings on in Somalia. On the BBC News last night id had a man from some Expert Group in DC talking about what the 'Experts' believed, and from surveys etc, they said that 84% of these Experts believe that the World is a more dangerous place now than it was just after 9/11, what are your thoughts on that? |
Newbie
|
|
|
|
| Post #7 Jun 15 2006, 09:42 AM |
|
|
I have no doubt that media reports make things sound bad. I also have no doubt that that causes people to fret. Fretting may not be the goal of the reporting (I fear it is), but it is the result, even if the only motivation is "If it bleeds, it leads." BTW, reports are now up to 100 raids off the intel from the Zarqawi bombing, with possibly hundreds more in the offing. Despite reporting to the contrary, the plan in Iraq is well on its way. The government is now completely formed and is taking responsibility away from the Coalition. This crackdown in Baghdad is of Iraqi origin. We did not want to do it. However, we are participating with our newly constituted ally: the Iraqi government and its security forces. I seriously expect more drawdowns in forces (There have already been small ones), in the very near future. |
Administrator
|
|
|
|
| Post #8 Jun 15 2006, 09:47 AM | 2BCano |
|
Well lets hopes so. This is not what i was talking about earliar but it is something that caught my eye, so thought i would post it here:
The survey questioned 17,000 people in 15 countries, including the US. The latest in a series of annual polls by the Pew Global Attitudes Project interviewed respondents between 31 March and 14 May 2006. |
Newbie
|
|
|
|
| Post #9 Jun 15 2006, 09:53 AM |
|
|
And I have no doubt that those attitudes are due to biased media portrayal of what is going on in Iraq. I thank God that we no longer have a president whose actions are driven by polls. Instead, the current president weighs what he thinks is right and wrong and strives to do the right thing. IMO, he almost always does. He makes what I consider mistakes, but I am willing to accept the fact that the only president whose actions would always be satisfactory to me is me. |
Administrator
|
|
|
|
| Post #10 Jun 15 2006, 10:01 AM | 2BCano |
|
My opinions sway from time to time, it is hard to support something when the Media is constantly showing Deaths of troops, Troops coming back to Engalnd in a Box with the Union Jack drapped over the Coffin. Not only that but you hear of atrosities of Soldiers Killing innocent civilians, the media is Biased by a long way. Deep down i know that this war is something that we had to do! But like i said i do get annoyed when US media often refers to it jsut as an American war and does not recognise other participants ;) |
Newbie
|
|
|
|
| Post #11 Jun 15 2006, 10:12 AM |
|
|
Every death by a British soldier is a tragedy. I would just ask for perspective. In terms of war, very few are dying, far fewer than Iraqis Saddam would routinely kill over the same period of time. The reporting I see mentions the British contribution quite a bit. It also uses the term "Coalition Forces" to refer to the troops there. Of course, when reporting to Americans, the media does focus more on American involvement--usually critically, so you might consider it a positive that they don't talk as much about your soldiers. BTW, I personally honor all who risk their lives and give their lives in our armed forces. Thanks to the British military, too, for putting their lives on the line. I salute them. |
Administrator
|
|
|
|
| Post #12 Jun 15 2006, 10:18 AM | 2BCano |
|
I respect all soldiers that have been involved from many different country's. I think it was only a few times when i have been watching Fox News channel and it has been quite passive of other country's involvement. |
Newbie
|
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
 |
|
| « Previous Topic · The War on Terror · Next Topic » |
4:26 PM May 20