U.S. officials say top al-Qaida leader killed

[Contrary1]

So, if it's not Bin Ladin, which would be unlikely since he's long dead, could this guy really be #1, or would he still be considered #2? :crazy:

Will we kill him multiple times ala Bushco?
Also, I'm curious as to how the US would even know who, if anyone at all, died?

Pakistan denies any Predator attack in mountainous province

"A “high-ranking” al-Qaida figure was killed Thursday in an attack by a drone aircraft, U.S. officials told NBC News.

The officials did not identify who was killed, except to say that it was not al-Qaida’s supreme leader, Osama bin Laden. If the report is confirmed, it would be the first time coalition forces had killed a top al-Qaida figure in almost a year.

The officials said the killing was the result of stepped-up operations targeting al-Qaida leaders in recent weeks.

Pakistan officially denied that any such attack took place, disputing reports that at least four people were killed and four were injured in a U.S. Predator drone strike in the Ladha area of South Waziristan province. The discrepancy between the U.S. and Pakistani reports could not immediately be resolved."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34368206/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/

[FarCenter]

1. It was probably the "number 2" guy -- they always get the number 2 guy

They must have gotten a dozen number 2 leaders of AlQaeda in Iraq.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

8. Maybe. That's Zawahiri, which would be huge.

[ShortnFiery]

10. Cue Donald Trump. eom

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

20. That'd be nice.

Zawahiri is such an arsehole.

[treestar]

22. OBL must be dead

#2 is the one running the show. Every time he gets killed, #3 moves up to #2 and gets killed. Amazing they can get anyone to take that promotion.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

24. #2 has consistently been Zawahiri

and he's proven tough to locate.

Most likely, it was the #3 man who focuses on foreign operations. He has to go out and establish working relationships so he's more likely to be located and killed than anyone higher up the food chain (which is how we've managed to kill five of the last six of them).

[Bragi]

2. Thank God. Our decade-long nightmare is over.

:sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[KG]

3. again? it's like killing Spinal Tap drummers.

or Grateful Dead keyboardists. :eyes:

[Romulox]

5. LOL. "Dozens of Al Qaeda members spontaneously combust each year. It's just not widely reported."

:rofl:

[DebbieCDC]

4. Again?

[arcadian]

6. 1 down, 99 to go

Then we're out right?

[Contrary1]

14. LOL

99 al-Qaida leaders alive,
99 leaders alive.
Shoot 1 down,
Pass on his crown,
98 al-Qaida leaders alive

[arcadian]

18. Pass on his crown

LOL :rofl:

[FiveGoodMen]

7. Stop posting headlines from the Bush era!

What?


Oh.

[ShortnFiery]

9. Oh cool beans! More Vietnam-esque "Body Counts."

What's old is new again? :crazy:


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Y3CdVKVdJ7I/SW97zv9fQPI/AAAAAAAAAl4/avlyU1AFhFA/s400/death+card5.jpg

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

11. Is that really an accurate comparison?

After all, the focus these days is on the importance of the figures targeted for drone strikes and not on the overall number of dead. I don't really see anyone treating this as if it were a football score.

[ShortnFiery]

15. It's to the same effect. The only difference is that it's always some HIGH LEVEL OPERATIVE...

instead of, too often, some tall farmer. How many Women, Children and goats died with that ALMIGHTY #2 Guy, ya think? :eyes:

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

23. Uhm, there hasn't been a report of a high ranking al-Qaeda figured killed in over a year

so this idea that "it's always some high level operative" seems a bit out there.

Secondly, what civilian casualties? The U.S. hasn't reported any and the Pakistanis are still pretending no strike actually occured.

[ShortnFiery]

25. True ... much of it is hard to believe from our government. And when they come, they come ...

in bunches. :crazy:

Besides, we have NOT declared war on Pakistan. We have NO RIGHT (International Law?) to play Judge, Jury and Executioner.

Perhaps we all should take a moment to ponder what could happen if they turn these DRONES loose on US Citizens?

Not a comforting thought, aye? :wow: :scared: :nuke:

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

32. To me, it makes perfect sense that such attacks would come in bunches

They're based on intelligence work which often indicates the locations of multiple individuals at once. The military almost certainly attempts to hit as many of those targets as possible before they disappear again.

Secondly, no one is pretending we've declard war on Pakistan. However, I see no point in pretending that Pakistan's government flat out opposes these strikes, as they publicly pretend to, either. If they did, we wouldn't be there.

[ShortnFiery]

34. Does any PART of you wonder why the peoples of the Middle East hate our government?

We have no right to be operating in Pakistan. Further, KILLING people without trial is against International Law. Does that BOTHER you at all? It does me.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

36. Clearly, there is an established agreement btw the Pakistani and U.S. govts.

So how can you say we have no right to be there?

Killing people who have openly and on a number of occasions declared war on our country (and followed those words up with actions) doesn't bother me a whole lot, no. I'd be more than happy to discuss the reasons why if you have any questions.

[ShortnFiery]

38. No, we have not declared war. Therefore, allowing our MIC to go on KILLING SPREES is

immoral beyond words. These should be Police actions and the "suspects" should be taken alive, not summarily EXECUTED without charges or trial.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

39. But they're not going on "killing sprees", are they?

These are targeted strikes, conducted with the private support of the Pakistani government.

[ShortnFiery]

40. Yes, they are KILLING SPREES. WE decide who lives and dies?!?

That's fucking immoral and against International Law.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

42. Well, we'll have to agree to disagree with regard to whether these are "killing sprees"

Secondly, we're effectively at war with the Taliban and al-Qaeda so yes, we are deciding who lives and who dies.

[ShortnFiery]

43. No, only CONGRESS can declare war. These drone KILLINGS in sovereign nations

that we are not even occupying are against International Law.

By some far stretch of the imagination, the countries we are occupying can OK such "executions" but we can NOT declare "WAR" on amorphous "terrorists" and send our bombs all over the ME to KILL PEOPLE and not expect massive blow-back.

It's horrific to think that my beloved country approves of such immoral tactics on what is essentially A POLICING MISSION.

I'm deeply saddened and no, I will not ever vote for anyone other than a peace loving liberal again.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

46. You focus your attention on the public condemnations of the drone attacks

while ignoring the fact that if the Pakistani govt. were truly opposed to them, the drone program wouldn't be based there. They're putting on a show for their people, but at the end of the day, they're endorsing the program, thus your argument that this is a violation of Pakistan's sovereignty falls flat.

A policing mission? If you wouldn't mind, would you explain what you mean by that?

[spanone]

12. pic!

[Blue Owl]

13. I feel so much safer

don't you?

Let's spend a few more trillion dollars and see if we can get the #3 caveman.

[ShortnFiery]

17. And how very brave of those Drone operators and their supervisors - Judge, Jury and

EXECUTIONER. :puke:

[Echo In Light]

16. "Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia."

[Stinky The Clown]

19. Lemme guess ........ Number 2-196

[treestar]

21. They don't seem to be claimiing it's #2

Maybe they admit it's only #5 this time. There are only 100. So now there's only 99?

[ShortnFiery]

28. You're right. Since there's only about 100 over in Afghanistan, perhaps they'll give us

picture Trading Cards?

The Pentagon really does seemingly put the K in Klassy?

[QC]

26. Hardly a week passes without their #1 or #2 buying the farm.

They sure do have a lot of top leaders.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

33. It's been over a year since a top figure was killed.

[ShortnFiery]

35. I don't believe anything that our government feeds us. We've been lied to so many times. eom

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

37. Throw the baby out with the bathwater, eh?

[yurbud]

27. if Obama can find the freezer they're keep Osama in, he'd have an excuse to end the Afghan War

[ShortnFiery]

29. Yes, that last VIDEO. The Osama-tron presented right before the 2004 election ...

would not work today. Too much Grecian Formula. :P

[yurbud]

30. they'll still be doing Osama puppets long after we're dead.

[ShortnFiery]

31. I agree.

But I was so very disappointed in The American People when they attempted to scare the voters with the Osama-tron of 2004.

When the MSM displayed this video on my TV, I shouted back at the set, "OH COME ON NOW? Nobody's gonna believe this is real!?!"

I guess, since the election was close enough to steal, SOME people believed that the VIDEO was authentic? :shrug:

[yurbud]

45. those vids won't die until the MSM starts laughing at them.

[branders seine]

41. "Top?" Not more "Number Two?"

Is this a policy shift?

[clear eye]

44. Now can we go home? n/t