Brave Iraqi Freedom Fighters attack New World Order Baghdad HQ

[GePap]

Originally posted by Defiant
If this country is hit again like 9/11, you will see what this country is really capable of.

Getting rid of this admin?

[Defiant]

"Why would they want to support you when your trigger-happy soldiers keep killing innocent civilians for no obvious reason?

An analyst from the Swedish Military Academy said on the radio news today that previosly peaceful people who have lost their family in recent weeks have taken up arms and attacked the Americans in pure revenge and anger."

Didn't I just hear today on the news that your military now works from 9-5 and not on weekends because on of your leaders said nobody will attack Sweden, just curious?

[Defiant]

"Getting rid of this admin?"

Doesn't matter what administration.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


The two embassies were not that hard a target, anymore than the UN compound in Baghdad. I would assume, given the history of the US in SA that the housing complex was supposed to be protected. The difference between soft and hard matters little to those killed. In fact , hitting soft targets, ie every day tagets, makes more sense for a terrorist, if what you want to do is spread terror.



It doesn;t matter if it was not Al qaeda: it is a terrorist attack under Bush's watch, in a place in which the Coolition has the responsiblity for security.

re: hard and soft targets.
For some time Salafist terrorists attacked their local regimes - eg in Alegeria and Egypt - ultimately to "nought" Al qaeeda's distinctive strategy appears to
have been to attack the USA directly, and to pull off attacks against particularly hard to strike targets - thus to show the US a paper tiger, and to unite what had been a cowed Islamic world around them, and then to easily overthrow the local regimes that had proved impervious to strictly local attacks. Therefore the important things about the attacks on the embassies, khobar towers,and the cole was that they were on US targets, and well protected targets at that. The WTC was technically a civilian target, not military or govt target like the others, but it was so central to US commercial like, and taking it out was so difficult, so unlikely, and so dramatic that it certainly fit the strategy. Since then AQ has been reduced to attacks on bars, hotels, and places of worship. In the unlikely hope that they can bring down the Indonesian or Tunisian economies by taking out their tourist industries (Islamists tried this for years in Egypt, and it didnt work)
I'll admit the Saudi housing complex was more of a hard target than the others, but it was still less protected than the military housing, and the price has been that Saudis have finally come down hard on the local AQ cells.

Baghdad - well from what im hearing it was NOT well protected, the UN itself was not that security concious, not thinking themselves a target.

[Buck Birdseed]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
In any case, withdrawl from the U.N. is still needed.

Would that be a Southern withdrawl?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Defiant
Doesn't matter what administration.

Please. Anyone who imagines some sort of apocalyptic response has no clue how the world works. Keep your fantasy of mass revenge if that is what gets you to sleep at night.

[Defiant]

"Please. Anyone who imagines some sort of apocalyptic response has no clue how the world works. Keep your fantasy of mass revenge if that is what gets you to sleep at night."

Then I submit to you that you do not know the American resolve. Fair enough, you are just wrong.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by HershOstropoler
"And its hardly too late - the world still has a chance to pull together."

Nobody wants a piece of your Iraq adventure. And after having blatantly violated international law and insulted about every nation that did not say "yeah great", it would take an amazing turnabout to get support.

Every country that supported us going in is still supportive. Some countries that sat on the fence going in now support us (notably the Netherlands and Norway) Turkey will be very likely be sending troops in, even without a further UNSC resolution. India has expressed that they would send in troops if there were a suitable UNSC res - whether its worth the concessions to get one is debatable. Germany has promised to aid in the physical and economic reconstruction of Iraq. The UNSC has welcomed the new Iraqi Governing Council.

Of course even more support would be very helpful to the people of Iraq.

[Sava]

this is terrible

according to what I've heard, these attacks are not primarily the work of Saddam-supporters... apparantly, militant islamic fundies from all over the mideast are descending upon Iraq in huge number much the same as in Afghanistan during the Soviet incursion. Most of these terrorists are "foreigners" or non-Iraqis. I'm sure they have formed shaky alliances with local warlords and Ba'athists in order to coordinate attacks against what they perceive as foreign invaders. I doubt they make any distinction between US/UK forces and the UN presence. These attacks won't stop until all UN/US presence has left Iraq or until all these terrorists are dead. And IMO, there are probably millions of fundies just dying to blow themselves up in order to smite the "infidel" invaders.

Mark my words... this will not end well for the people of Iraq or US forces. My suspicion is that this terrorism will keep occuring until all foreign elements are out of Iraq. This is a guerilla war, and the US will not win.

[GePap]

"reduced too"? Killing 200 people by blowing up a good sized block is not "reduced to" anything. Just getting that much explosive together is dififcult.

As for taking out the WTC: the difficulty was planning, not execution, which is porbalby always the case. The atatck on the Cole probalby took less planning, and even if it was a warship, the method of attack and place was so that they guys met no resistance.

[Az]

apparantly, militant islamic fundies from all over the mideast are descending upon Iraq in huge number much the same as in Afghanistan during the Soviet incursion.

does that mean that they're out of here?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap




I was responding to you. I said I don;t think a new 9/11 style attack is likely.

so what you meant to say was

" i see them as chicken little - but someone in the govt isnt as confident as I(GEPAP) am"

Oh, well that makes sense.

[Dom Pedro II]

In any case, withdrawl from the U.N. is still needed.

I say Texas's withdrawl from the USA is what is really needed... and take the other 10 with you! You don't have to make a new country together, but you can't stay here...


Oh, and take the Connecticut Cowboy with you...

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre
Why would they want to support you when your trigger-happy soldiers keep killing innocent civilians for no obvious reason?

I'm about ready to go into roid-rage after this comment. These are the same stupid idiots who run around claiming the Israelis should have psychic powers to decern which guy is the terrorist and which guy is just trying to get to work. The fact is when you realize your life could end if the wrong person gets to close to you then you get jumpy. Then you see & hear about terrorists ramming cars into check points and/or blowing up outposts with carbombs.

Olaf: I bet even you would get jumpy and possibly make a mistake in such a circumstance. You order the car to halt but he shows no sign of breaking but just keeps speeding towards your position. Is he a terrorist or is he some yahoo who wants to show how macho he is? You have two possibly three seconds to figure it out and then it's to late and you could be dead.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Defiant


Then I submit to you that you do not know the American resolve. Fair enough, you are just wrong.

American resolve???



You are confusing things Defiant. Vengence and resolve are two very distinct things. As it were, it take more resolve and will power no to hit a guy who insulted you than to hit them. There is were you misunderstand the concept.