US kills 80 at religious school in Pakistan

[motivez]

Now, let me preface this by saying that if we have a chance to go after Zawahiri or Osama, we should take it. Chances are those who died were not nice people, most likely support Al Qaeda, and would probably have defended them using force if given the chance.

Now, the article:

The Blotter

Ayman al Zawahiri was the target of a Predator missile attack this morning on a religious school in Pakistan, according to Pakistani intelligence sources.

ABC News has learned the raid was launched after U.S. intelligence received tips and examined Predator reconnaissance indicating that al Qaeda's No. 2 man may have been staying at the school, which is located in the Bajaur region near the village that is thought to be al Qaeda's winter headquarters.

Despite earlier reports that the missiles had been launched by Pakistani military helicopters, Pakistani intelligence sources now tell ABC News that the missiles were fired from a U.S. Predator drone plane.

Between two and five senior al Qaeda militants were killed in the attack, including the mastermind of the airliners plot in the U.K., according to Pakistani intelligence sources.

No word yet on whether or not Zawahiri was killed in the raid, but one Pakistani intelligence source did express doubt that Zawahiri would have been staying in a madrassa, which is an obvious target for strikes against militants. That source, however, did express confidence that Pakistani intelligence is closing in on Zawahiri's location.

One of the clerics who is believed to have been killed today, Maulana Liaquat, was one of the two main local leaders believed to be protecting Zawahiri.

Pakistani intelligence sources tell ABC News they believe they have "boxed" Zawahiri in a 40-square-mile area between the Khalozai Valley in Bajaur and the village of Pashat in Kunar, Afghanistan. They hope to capture or kill him in the next few months.

Now, I'm not going to defend the people who died, but I wanted to point out something that's interesting.. Attacks like these are what make it so easy for them to recruit new people.

When we attack their religious institutions, especially a religious teaching institution, it becomes much easier to for them to frame this conflict as a war against the religion of Islam, and thus being able to link it to a "new crusade".

They had a little snippet of something that I wasn't able to listen to on NPR today, but it talked about calling them things like Jihadists, and how while it is a negative association to be called it in the Western world, for them, it's a distinguished title and position of honor, because it means they're fighting in the name of God on a holy mission.

[6SpeedTA95]

1) Fantastic post and I think you raise a great point about them being able to frame thsi as a religious war when we have isntances like this.

2) Do we know this is accurate? ABC is constantly pulling stories especially from this portion of their website when they findout a few days later its fake and/or falsified.

[JaJae]

I agree. It pisses me off that we're doing the dirty work inside Pakistan. Just because we're willing to be the ones to drop the missile doesn't mean that Pakistan can't do it from within their own borders.

While I think we should kill these people rather than let them live. I think we need to get our names off the media reports as the country constantly doing it.

[ethyl]

BBC NEWS | South Asia | Pakistan madrassa raid 'kills 80'

The leader of the madrassa, radical cleric Maulana Liaqat, was among the dead.

He was a prominent member of a group of pro-Taleban tribal clerics, the BBC's Rahimullah Yusufzai in Peshawar says.

"We received confirmed intelligence reports that 70-80 militants were hiding in a madrassa used as a terrorist training facility, which was destroyed by an army strike, led by helicopters," army spokesman Maj Gen Shaukat Sultan told the Associated Press news agency.

404 US drone not found.

[motivez]

Yeah, the BBC story was posted first. This is supposedly "new information" about who carried out the attack.

I'd honestly be surprised if it was a Pakistani attack considering the target.

[ethyl]

Originally Posted by motivez

Yeah, the BBC story was posted first. This is supposedly "new information" about who carried out the attack.

I'd honestly be surprised if it was a Pakistani attack considering the target.

If it were a US drone attack, would Pakistan have any reason to take the blame instead of the US?

[7960]

I don't give a shit if he was hiding in a hospital for wall-eyed one-legged gay baby whales, if he's hiding there and we *know* it, blow it up.

.....but, *knowing* is the key.

[motivez]

While the Pakistanis are taking credit for this strike, the question arises as to whether this may have been conducted by Task Force 145, the U.S. special operations terrorist hunter-killer teams. Task Force 145 was responsible for the April raid in Danda Saidgai on the al-Qaeda’s training camp for Osama bin Laden’s Black Guard, his elite praetorian guard. Pakistan initially took credit for the Danda Saidgai strikes, but the Washington Post later revealed this was indeed a U.S. mission. Dawn notes the raid occurred “at around 5:00 am,” which means it was conducted in the dark. Pakistani helicopter pilots would need night training in flight and targeting.

Interesting information.

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by 7960

I don't give a shit if he was hiding in a hospital for wall-eyed one-legged gay baby whales, if he's hiding there and we *know* it, blow it up.

.....but, *knowing* is the key.

So if a murderer is hiding out in your kids school it would be ok to bomb the fuck out of the school just to get the murderer?

[7960]

Originally Posted by Donkey®

So if a murderer is hiding out in your kids school it would be ok to bomb the fuck out of the school just to get the murderer?

No, because it's here. If a terrorist is hiding out in a school or mosque or gay baby whale sanctuary over there, yes.

I'm sure it'll get your panties in a knot but

we >>>>>>> them
here >>>>>>> there
americans >>>>>>>> non-

[motivez]

Doesn't that line of thinking give them legitimate justification to attack?

If I was living in a country who was attacked by another one because they felt the lives of our citizens were worth less than theirs, and that they could pretty much do whatever they wanted because our lives didn't matter, doesn't seem like it'd be that difficult to become radicalized over it.

[7960]

Originally Posted by motivez

Doesn't that line of thinking give them legitimate justification to attack?

Probably. And I'm guessing that's why they keep turning down my offer to head up the war and end it in less than 6 months.

If I was living in a country who was attacked by another one because they felt the lives of our citizens were worth less than theirs, and that they could pretty much do whatever they wanted because our lives didn't matter, doesn't seem like it'd be that difficult to become radicalized over it.

IMO we need to act without so much regard for "how it's going to look."

Also, they have their reasons for hating us. Justified or not, there's nothing we can do to change their view. End this and bring everyone home.

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by 7960

No, because it's here. If a terrorist is hiding out in a school or mosque or gay baby whale sanctuary over there, yes.

I'm sure it'll get your panties in a knot but

we >>>>>>> them
here >>>>>>> there
americans >>>>>>>> non-

Holy shit. Hilarious. How about we just leave them alone in the first place? How about we just let them kill each other? Bomb each other...you know, since they are less than human...let them fight like the animals they are? Ever been to a zoo? Animals are in cages so they can't get out and attack us. It would be similar if we went ahead and just put ourselves in a cage and that would protect us as well as keep us isolated from the animals. Would that work for you?

[motivez]

Originally Posted by 7960

IMO we need to act without so much regard for "how it's going to look."

Also, they have their reasons for hating us. Justified or not, there's nothing we can do to change their view. End this and bring everyone home.

I'm not as much concerned with "how something would look" as I am with what it says about our society if we place such little value on human life simply because it's not American.

I think this quote sums it up nicely: "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster" ..

If we become morally equatable with them, why are we fighting to preserve our way of life when it's not so much different?

Would you feel the same way if it were Canada? Or France? Or Germany? Or the UK? Or Sweden?

[7960]

Originally Posted by motivez

I'm not as much concerned with "how something would look" as I am with what it says about our society if we place such little value on human life simply because it's not American.

I'm not saying I don't value life because it's not american. I'm saying *THEY* don't value life if they're hiding in a place that's going to kill a bunch of people when we find them.

If we become morally equatable with them, why are we fighting to preserve our way of life when it's not so much different?

If we fight like they fight, we'll end the fight.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by 7960

I'm not saying I don't value life because it's not american. I'm saying *THEY* don't value life if they're hiding in a place that's going to kill a bunch of people when we find them.
If we fight like they fight, we'll end the fight.

Thats a great point, they're the ones that are actually putting these other lives at risk by hiding in their homes, schools and churches. A point that is all too often overlooked. That doesn't mean we shouldn't use discretion but we seem to be a little too soft in this area.

[motivez]

I don't think it's overlooked, I just don't think it really is the question that should be asked.. We already know they're bad people who will put other people in danger, kill civilians to accomplish their goals, etc, etc..

The real question is whether or not we're going to travel down that road with them in order to kill 1 person who is very bad.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by motivez

I don't think it's overlooked, I just don't think it really is the question that should be asked.. We already know they're bad people who will put other people in danger, kill civilians to accomplish their goals, etc, etc..

The real question is whether or not we're going to travel down that road with them in order to kill 1 person who is very bad.

That honestly depends on the person. If its binladen I say go for it. If its muhammedbob I wanna be a terrorist then we probably shouldnt'.

[motivez]

So in your mind it's justifiable to kill how many people if it means we kill Osama?

3000ish so it's an eye for an eye with those who died on 9/11? Would it matter if they were children?

I just think it's dangerous to be so willing to devalue human life, even if the revenge is justified.. which it would be in the case of Osama.

[ethyl]

Originally Posted by motivez

So in your mind it's justifiable to kill how many people if it means we kill Osama?

3000ish so it's an eye for an eye with those who died on 9/11? Would it matter if they were children?