US war on terrorists and terrorism

[Luddly Neddite]

Elsewhere, some posters are whining because President Obama is not planning to go to France because those whose job it is to protect him say he would be at an unacceptable risk. Some here say President Obama has not and is not fighting terrorists and terrorism. So, for their reading pleasure -

The Terrorist Notches on Obama’s Belt
The list of senior terrorists killed during the Obama presidency is fairly extensive.


There’s Osama bin Laden, of course, killed in May.


Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) leader Anwar al-Awlaki as of today.


Earlier this month officials confirmed that al Qaeda’s chief of Pakistan operations, Abu Hafs al-Shahri, was killed in Waziristan, Pakistan.


In August, ‘Atiyah ‘Abd al-Rahman, the deputy leader of al Qaeda was killed.


In June, one of the group’s most dangerous commanders, Ilyas Kashmiri, was killed in Pakistan. In Yemen that same month, AQAP senior operatives Ammar al-Wa’ili, Abu Ali al-Harithi, and Ali Saleh Farhan were killed. In Somalia, Al-Qa’ida in East Africa (AQEA) senior leader Harun Fazul was killed.


Administration officials also herald the recent U.S./Pakistani joint arrest of Younis al-Mauritani in Quetta.


Going back to August 2009, Tehrik e-Taliban Pakistan leader Baitullah Mahsud was killed in Pakistan.


In September of that month, Jemayah Islamiya operational planner Noordin Muhammad Top was killed in Indonesia, and AQEA planner Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan was killed in Somalia.


Then in December 2009 in Pakistan, al Qaeda operational commanders Saleh al-Somali and ‘Abdallah Sa’id were killed.


In February 2010, in Pakistan, Taliban deputy and military commander Abdul Ghani Beradar was captured; Haqqani network commander Muhammad Haqqani was killed; and Lashkar-e Jhangvi leader Qari Zafar was killed.


In March 2010, al Qaeda operative Hussein al-Yemeni was killed in Pakistan, while senior Jemayah Islamiya operative Dulmatin - accused of being the mastermind behind the 2002 Bali bombings – was killed during a raid in Indonesia.


In April 2010, al Qaeda in Iraq leaders Abu Ayyub al-Masri and Abu Omar al-Baghdadi were killed.


In May, al Qaeda’s number three commander, Sheik Saeed al-Masri was killed.


In June 2010 in Pakistan, al Qaeda commander Hamza al-Jawfi was killed.


Remember when Rudy Giuliani warned that electing Barack Obama would mean that the U.S. played defense, not offense, against the terrorists?


If this is defense, what does offense look like?

Note that the above is dated 9/30/2011.

Even though Bush's War dead tops one million, on the 2013 anniversary of the 9/11 attack, Bush again said

"To be honest with you Oprah, Bin Laden wasn't really on my radar,"
While the right whines about Benghazi, they ignore what happened under Bush.

A List of Deadly Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Diplomatic Targets Under President George W. Bush, 2001-2009

Here is a chronology of the deadly terrorist attacks on United States embassies, consulates and traveling U.S. personnel during the presidency of George W. Bush. The list below does not include foiled attacks or those that did not result in fatalities (other than those of the attackers). The descriptions for each incident are excerpted from the University of Maryland's Global Terrorism Database.

Then there's this -


Bush Interrogated Terrorists to Get Information; Obama Kills Them With Drones

(CNSNews.com) - What's the difference between harsh CIA interrogation techniques and drones that kill civilians, a reporter asked White House spokesman Josh Earnest on Monday. The reporter noted that the lethal use of drones has "actually increased under this administration."


Earnest did not explain the difference, except to say that the U.S. works in "close consultation and cooperation with local governments and making sure that it's local forces that are taking the fight on the ground to these extremist elements."


Earnest also said the U.S. military and intelligence community takes "enormous precautions" when targeting terrorists to eliminate or minimize the impact on civilian populations.

According to Human Rights Watch, "Targeted killings have been a hallmark of this administration's counterterrorism strategy. Obama sharply increased the use of armed drones (begun under George W Bush), which have conducted lethal strikes against alleged terrorists in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. The strikes have killed hundreds of people, including civilians, and some have clearly violated international law."


Facts show that Bush let them go.

Obama kills them.

 

[occupied]

Doesn't matter to them, he is not beating the war drum and wrapping himself in patriotic glory enough to suit them. Besides, to acknowledge his successes is to admit that their narrative of him being soft on terrorists is bullshit.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Obama's victories have been based on on-the-ground intelligence and a more surgical approach than a major invasion, occupation and nation-building.

Not perfect, obviously, innocents have died. But far less destructive on multiple levels than an all-out war.

And the most important thing, young American military personnel are far safer in that environment.

.

 

[Esmeralda]

If he did go, they'd find reasons why that was wrong too. It doesn't matter what he does, they will say it is wrong. Have they ever suggested that anything he has done was the right thing to do?

 

[Kosh]

Elsewhere, some posters are whining because President Obama is not planning to go to France because those whose job it is to protect him say he would be at an unacceptable risk. Some here say President Obama has not and is not fighting terrorists and terrorism. So, for their reading pleasure -

The Terrorist Notches on Obama’s Belt
The list of senior terrorists killed during the Obama presidency is fairly extensive.


There’s Osama bin Laden, of course, killed in May.


Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) leader Anwar al-Awlaki as of today.


Earlier this month officials confirmed that al Qaeda’s chief of Pakistan operations, Abu Hafs al-Shahri, was killed in Waziristan, Pakistan.


In August, ‘Atiyah ‘Abd al-Rahman, the deputy leader of al Qaeda was killed.


In June, one of the group’s most dangerous commanders, Ilyas Kashmiri, was killed in Pakistan. In Yemen that same month, AQAP senior operatives Ammar al-Wa’ili, Abu Ali al-Harithi, and Ali Saleh Farhan were killed. In Somalia, Al-Qa’ida in East Africa (AQEA) senior leader Harun Fazul was killed.


Administration officials also herald the recent U.S./Pakistani joint arrest of Younis al-Mauritani in Quetta.


Going back to August 2009, Tehrik e-Taliban Pakistan leader Baitullah Mahsud was killed in Pakistan.


In September of that month, Jemayah Islamiya operational planner Noordin Muhammad Top was killed in Indonesia, and AQEA planner Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan was killed in Somalia.


Then in December 2009 in Pakistan, al Qaeda operational commanders Saleh al-Somali and ‘Abdallah Sa’id were killed.


In February 2010, in Pakistan, Taliban deputy and military commander Abdul Ghani Beradar was captured; Haqqani network commander Muhammad Haqqani was killed; and Lashkar-e Jhangvi leader Qari Zafar was killed.


In March 2010, al Qaeda operative Hussein al-Yemeni was killed in Pakistan, while senior Jemayah Islamiya operative Dulmatin - accused of being the mastermind behind the 2002 Bali bombings – was killed during a raid in Indonesia.


In April 2010, al Qaeda in Iraq leaders Abu Ayyub al-Masri and Abu Omar al-Baghdadi were killed.


In May, al Qaeda’s number three commander, Sheik Saeed al-Masri was killed.


In June 2010 in Pakistan, al Qaeda commander Hamza al-Jawfi was killed.


Remember when Rudy Giuliani warned that electing Barack Obama would mean that the U.S. played defense, not offense, against the terrorists?


If this is defense, what does offense look like?

Note that the above is dated 9/30/2011.

Even though Bush's War dead tops one million, on the 2013 anniversary of the 9/11 attack, Bush again said

"To be honest with you Oprah, Bin Laden wasn't really on my radar,"
While the right whines about Benghazi, they ignore what happened under Bush.

A List of Deadly Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Diplomatic Targets Under President George W. Bush, 2001-2009

Here is a chronology of the deadly terrorist attacks on United States embassies, consulates and traveling U.S. personnel during the presidency of George W. Bush. The list below does not include foiled attacks or those that did not result in fatalities (other than those of the attackers). The descriptions for each incident are excerpted from the University of Maryland's Global Terrorism Database.

Then there's this -


Bush Interrogated Terrorists to Get Information; Obama Kills Them With Drones

(CNSNews.com) - What's the difference between harsh CIA interrogation techniques and drones that kill civilians, a reporter asked White House spokesman Josh Earnest on Monday. The reporter noted that the lethal use of drones has "actually increased under this administration."


Earnest did not explain the difference, except to say that the U.S. works in "close consultation and cooperation with local governments and making sure that it's local forces that are taking the fight on the ground to these extremist elements."


Earnest also said the U.S. military and intelligence community takes "enormous precautions" when targeting terrorists to eliminate or minimize the impact on civilian populations.

According to Human Rights Watch, "Targeted killings have been a hallmark of this administration's counterterrorism strategy. Obama sharply increased the use of armed drones (begun under George W Bush), which have conducted lethal strikes against alleged terrorists in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. The strikes have killed hundreds of people, including civilians, and some have clearly violated international law."


Facts show that Bush let them go.

Obama kills them.

And the far left propaganda comes out to support the illegal wars of Obama..

 

[occupied]

.

Obama's victories have been based on on-the-ground intelligence and a more surgical approach than a major invasion, occupation and nation-building.

Not perfect, obviously, innocents have died. But far less destructive on multiple levels than an all-out war.

And the most important thing, young American military are safer in that environment.

.

There you go, nothing more glorious to the warhawks than seeing our young men go off to war, god how they love it, of course they are less enthusiastic about taking care of them when they come back maimed and mentally damaged.

 

[Mad Scientist]

The War on Terror only make huge sums of money for Corporations and buries our Children.

 

[Kosh]

The War on Terror only make huge sums of money for Corporations and buries our Children.

Yes next the conspiracy theory will be that these corporation fund these groups in order to make that money.

The war of Muslim vs Christian is not new, anyone that has studied history knows that dates back more than 2000 years.

If you want this war to end I suggest all of the far left go and teach all these radicals that war is not answer.

So which far left drone is up for the challenge?

 

[jknowgood]

If he did go, they'd find reasons why that was wrong too. It doesn't matter what he does, they will say it is wrong. Have they ever suggested that anything he has done was the right thing to do?

Yeah, he has been the best gun salesman in world history.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

......Or, people could try being part of the solution instead of part of the problem. The op represents part of the problem as well as some of the replies.

When complete hacks point the finger at each other instead of pointing it at the real enemy, the enemy wins. The war isn't between these lock step leftists and lock step righties. The war is between western civilization and Islamists.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

......Or, people could try being part of the solution instead of part of the problem. The op represents part of the problem as well as some of the replies.

When complete hacks point the finger at each other instead of pointing it at the real enemy, the enemy wins. The war isn't between these lock step leftists and lock step righties. The war is between western civilization and Islamists.

As I said in the OP, I was responding to other posters who had said Obama is not fighting terrorist and/or killing terrorists. Since several mentioned Bush, I did as well.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

As I said in the OP, I was responding to other posters who had said Obama is not fighting terrorist and/or killing terrorists. Since several mentioned Bush, I did as well.

You play the same game of cowboys and indians in every post.

You are just the flip side of the partisan hack coin from those who go on and on about "liberals" with every post.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

If he did go, they'd find reasons why that was wrong too. It doesn't matter what he does, they will say it is wrong. Have they ever suggested that anything he has done was the right thing to do?

Obama and another guy are fishing in a boat. The guy falls overboard and is drowning. Obama gets out of the boat, walks on water, and saves the mans life. The headline of the event the next morning: "Obama can't swim".

 

[Statistikhengst]

President Obama did the right thing by not going. With over 1.7 million in attendance at the rally, tons of police dignitaries, and the general population of Paris, under these conditions, there is no way that the SS could provide the kind of protection that the most powerful man in the world needs when he travels. Yes, other dignitaries were there, none of them are as powerful as our president, and none of them are as threatened as our president.

His not going does not make him any less decisive in his determination to fight terror. His adminstration has brought more terrorists down than any other in history.

End of story.

and in the spirit of the day:

 

[occupied]

As I said in the OP, I was responding to other posters who had said Obama is not fighting terrorist and/or killing terrorists. Since several mentioned Bush, I did as well.

You play the same game of cowboys and indians in every post.

You are just the flip side of the partisan hack coin from those who go on and on about "liberals" with every post.

I, being a liberal, am sick of these reactionary motherfuckers putting me and Al Qaeda on their same big list of enemies. Conservatives decided that we should have a big glorious war on terrorism and yet it seems to me they have abandoned it as soon as a democrat is thrust into a position to lead the big open-ended war they wanted. Mr. Obama gets no support, no credit, no nothing from them for doing what it is they wanted, killing terrorists. In spite of his success he gets branded a sympathizer or even being to cahoots with them. Sick of these crybabies schizophrenically wanting a wider war but are not about to give the president the slightest support to fight it. Fuck them, if a republican president asked them to support to huge misguided invasion of, for example, Syria they would fall all over themselves to sacrifice their children and their tax dollars on the altar of freedom but when Mr Obama wants to drop a few bombs all they can say is "How much is it going to cost?"

 

[Statistikhengst]

BTW, good thread, Luddly Neddite .

 

[Statistikhengst]

As I said in the OP, I was responding to other posters who had said Obama is not fighting terrorist and/or killing terrorists. Since several mentioned Bush, I did as well.

You play the same game of cowboys and indians in every post.

You are just the flip side of the partisan hack coin from those who go on and on about "liberals" with every post.

I, being a liberal, am sick of these reactionary motherfuckers putting me and Al Qaeda on their same big list of enemies. Conservatives decided that we should have a big glorious war on terrorism and yet it seems to me they have abandoned it as soon as a democrat is thrust into a position to lead the big open-ended war they wanted. Mr. Obama gets no support, no credit, no nothing from them for doing what it is they wanted, killing terrorists. In spite of his success he gets branded a sympathizer or even being to cahoots with them. Sick of these crybabies schizophrenically wanting a wider war but are not about to give the president the slightest support to fight it. Fuck them, if a republican president asked them to support to huge misguided invasion of, for example, Syria they would fall all over themselves to sacrifice their children and their tax dollars on the altar of freedom but when Mr Obama wants to drop a few bombs all they can say is "How much is it going to cost?"

Dear occupied,

I have a suggestion for you.

Take your IQ: XXX

multiply that by the number of brain cells represented by Rrrrrrrraging Rrrrrrrrighties who say such horseshit: 0

And if the number is 0 or less, then ignore the trolls. It will infuriate them and bring your BP down.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

God is looking testy these days. Maybe that's because his children continue to slaughter each other, in His name.

 

[Statistikhengst]

God is looking testy these days. Maybe that's because his children continue to slaughter each other, in His name.

Hmmmmm, possible.... possible.... possible...

 

[Derideo_Te]

......Or, people could try being part of the solution instead of part of the problem. The op represents part of the problem as well as some of the replies.

When complete hacks point the finger at each other instead of pointing it at the real enemy, the enemy wins. The war isn't between these lock step leftists and lock step righties. The war is between western civilization and Islamists.

There is no "war" because you cannot declare "war on terror". Bush jr tried and failed miserably.