Zarqawi followers 'vow revenge'

[dreamer]

link http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/5069186.stm .

Al-Qaeda in Iraq will launch "major attacks" to avenge the death of leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a web statement thought to be from the group has said. The attacks would "shake the enemy from its sleep", the statement said. The organisation said it had renewed its allegiance to Osama Bin Laden, but no successor to Zarqawi has been named. The statement came as two US army doctors completed an autopsy on Zarqawi, who was killed after a US bombing raid on Wednesday

It seems that we all need to keep our eyes open there are nutters about. Dreamer

[Scribbler1]

They don't need a reason. This is just an example of their leaders not wanting to let this guys death go to waste. It's not like killing al-Zarqawi got these idiots all fired up for the first time.

[nm420]

As if such vows were not to be wholly exected.

Here's a pseudoprediction. Our government (or some other related entity) will go and find these terrorists right before they are about to carry out their grand scheme. The result being the claim that these new laws suspending our various civil liberties are crucial and effective, and so should be expanded and made permanent. Or, our government will fail to intercept these terrorists before their scheme is hatched, resulting in loss of yet more life and the claim that our new terrorist laws suspending various civil liberties are not effective enough and thus need to be expanded and made permanent. The point being that our government has a pretty sweet thing going on right now. They can terrify the populace by averting disaster or running headlong into it, enabling yet more repressive tactics as evil as the terrorism they claim to be fighting. Where is Joseph Heller when you need him?

[rmnunez]

A much more likely prediction given Zarqawi followers' vows, the raids in the aftermath of his death and the intelligence allegedly obtained at the site, it seems more likely we will see the foreign terrorist problem get tackled with greater success in the next few days or couple of weeks.

[lily]

I'm going to have to agree with you.........if the intelligence obtained is real. Also...you'd think there'd be an awful lot of looking behind thier backs, for a while. Not only wondering if someone was after them, but if the guy behind them was the one that turned in Zarqawi.

Speaking of the one who turned him in.........not to go competely off topic........but um........if they collect the reward, one would assume that the US would get them out of Dodge, so to speak, like they did with the informer that turned in Sadaam. Now, I'm no genius, but if Sam, the terrorist was gone the next day and so was his immediate family.....wouldn't you sort of suspect that Sam the terrorist was the "tattler"...........and then go after all his family and friends?

...........and while I'm rambling.......we got Sadaam with a reward. We got Zarqawi with a reward......why start wars? Just offer money.........it's costing us billions any way.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: lily ...........and while I'm rambling.......we got Sadaam with a reward. We got Zarqawi with a reward......why start wars? Just offer money.........it's costing us billions any way.

heh. I had an idea once about Viet Nam: Why not just put the POWs in real nice accomodations with nice food, entertainment, liquor, drugs, whores, whatever they want...

Then "repatriate them" to infect all their buddies with how nice detention in a US POW camp is...How long would it be before mass defections crippled the enemy's war effort?

And if I recall correctly, the invasion of Baghdad was facilitated by payoffs to Iraqi generals. It's a good tactic, only thing is it doesn't generate the martial enthusiasm of conflict, doesn't create the desired local hatred from collateral damage to innocents, doesn't use up military hardware and ammo, doesn't result in promotions within the US Brass, doesn't do ALL the good stuff that a nice war does! Strategery!

Anyhow if Zarqawi's snitch actually gets the $25 million, I am sure he can go far, far away and secure a new identity... I wouldn't worry about him...

[rmnunez]

Definitely the dollar approach sounds attractive, take the total expenditure so far, divide it by the number of enemy killed and you probably come up with way too high a price. Wouldn't Saddam have agreed to regime change for $80 or $200 billion?

How about calculating the value of civilian life and coming up with an amount to pay for the united statians to stop killing them. What would it be worth, how much would critical lefties and Euros concerned over the depravities in Iraq pay to prevent any more?

[tinybear]

Hey, not too long ago, there was serious doubt about whether Zarqawi existed at all. Now they say they're going to avenge his death??? Since when did fiction transform itself into reality?

[rmnunez]

tiny, I think the idea is that his role was fictionalized, that he existed is more or less accepted.

[tinybear]

If his role was fictionalized, what was he doing at that high-level Al Qaeda meeting? Watching the World Cup?

[rmnunez]

They were playing dominoes!

[tinybear]

And they fell like dominoes.

[brien]

Quote by: dreamer link http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/5069186.stm . It seems that we all need to keep our eyes open there are nutters about. Dreamer

The US is ALWAYS going to be the Great Satan. There will be, for the forseeable future, ALWAYS the great JIHAD. These terrorist groups will just replace one leader with another however, the new boss won't be as famous as the old boss, but he will be the same as the old boss.

[dreamer]

Quote by: brien The US is ALWAYS going to be the Great Satan. There will be, for the forseeable future, ALWAYS the great JIHAD. These terrorist groups will just replace one leader with another however, the new boss won't be as famous as the old boss, but he will be the same as the old boss.

Yes i agree but the next one always comes across worse than the last one. why are we as leading nations not leading with high morals instead we show the world gutter morals by killing the innocent.
Dreamer

[jose]

Abu Hamza al-Muhajir (which translated means son of hamza the immigrent) is the new goldstein
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhajir
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Qa...ssor_0612.html

[rmnunez]

Al Qaeda in Iraq vowed on Sunday to carry out large-scale attacks that would "shake the enemy" after the killing of its leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, but did not name a successor. The group, in an Internet statement, said its leading body held a meeting after Zarqawi's death to discuss strategy and renew a pledge to al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. "We plan large-scaled operations that will shake the enemy and rob them of sleep, in coordination with the other factions of the Mujahideen Council," said the statement posted an a Web site often used by Islamist militants. http://reuters.myway.com/article/200...-QAEDA-DC.html

“Al Qaeda in Iraq”? Didn’t know there was one, thought these claims of foreign terrorist involvement were supposed to be united statian propaganda, gross distortions and just efforts to justify continued occupation. And what is this about the group’s “leading body” and this “Mujahedeen Council”? I've been led to believe it was just a bunch of bona-fide Muslims reasonably upset over support for Israel, now they have subsidiaries in foreign countries with “leading bodies” and “councils” to administer them?

Al Qaeda in Iraq named a successor following the killing of the group's leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, according to an Internet statement on Monday. "The shura council of al Qaeda in Iraq unanimously agreed on Sheikh Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, to be a successor to Sheikh Abu Musab al-Zarqawi," said a statement signed by al Qaeda and posted on a Web site frequently used by Islamist militants. "Sheikh Abu Hamza al-Muhajir is a good brother, has a history in jihad and is knowledgeable. We ask God that he ... continue what Sheikh Abu Musab began," it said. Muhajir, little known in the West, was not among the names that al Qaeda experts had expected as Zarqawi's likely successor. http://today.reuters.com/news/newsar...src=rss&rpc=22

What about this “shura council”, how does it fit between the “Mujahedeen Council” and that “leading body” mentioned before? They reportedly agreed unanimously on Zarqawi’s successor, so they voted and follow democratic procedures?

[dreamer]

Quote by: jose Abu Hamza al-Muhajir (which translated means son of hamza the immigrent) is the new goldstein http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhajir http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Qa...ssor_0612.html

Yes your right he it comes the next circle link
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/5074202.stm . tee not looking good for the future off Iraq.
Dreamer

[brien]

Quote by: dreamer Yes i agree but the next one always comes across worse than the last one. why are we as leading nations not leading with high morals instead we show the world gutter morals by killing the innocent. Dreamer

The reason is simple. The current US government is involved in Imperialism. When these policies are finally abandoned, the US will be able to lead through example and not through force. Until then, the US is the target of every nation and terrorist group that see the government for what it really is, Imperialistic in its designs around the world. Abandon Imperialism and the big red bull'e eyes will be removed from our backs.

[Rainbow]

Al-Qaeda in Iraq will launch "major attacks" to avenge the death of leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a web statement thought to be from the group has said. The attacks would "shake the enemy from its sleep", the statement said.

It seems that U.S. intelligence cooperates with others pretty well.
I expect more Islamic fanatics to join al-Zarqawi, since those guys underestimate the power of electronics.

[Scribbler1]

So al-Zarqawi is dead and presumably someone is going to make a pot of money because of it. Since they wasted no time replacing him this could become a cottage industry in Iraq. Just drop a dime on everyone in the top spot and collect the cash.

It's a good thing the GOP doesn't care about government spending.