al-Zarqawi killed

Trapper · 06-08-2006, 04:44 AM

Did they rid the world of a very bad man or more propaganda?

http://news.yahoo.com/fc/World/Iraq

Louis · 06-08-2006, 05:35 AM

I don't think it'll change the current situation.

Zap · 06-08-2006, 06:35 AM

They'll have to install a new puppet to assassinate.

I've heard the situation in Iraq described as a "clusterf*ck".

Prado · 06-08-2006, 10:30 AM

Don't you know that when we see some member of "the most-wanted terrorist" die it all makes us feel like this damn war is in some way valid.

Has anyone seen the Bagdad ER show? I thought I was going to vomit.

Dustin07 · 06-09-2006, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Al-Zarqawi, who had a $25 million bounty on his head, was killed at 6:15 p.m. Wednesday after an intense two-week hunt that U.S. officials said first led to the terror leader's spiritual adviser and then to him.

In other news.... an F-16 fighter pilot retired today.

JuggoPop · 06-09-2006, 09:41 AM

They better pay the man.

**South** · 06-09-2006, 09:46 AM

I didn't think about that. Would a soldier get the bounty, and if so....the trigger man? The guy on the ground who set the laser target? The guy who constructed the hit?

JuggoPop · 06-09-2006, 09:50 AM

they probably give it to the armed forces that pulled it off. so the airforce budget would get it I guess.

would be nice if they split it with the actual divison that did the job.

Dustin07 · 06-09-2006, 10:03 AM

Quote:

would be nice if they split it with the actual divison that did the job.

I agree. most of those guys probably wouldn't retire anyways.

JuggoPop · 06-09-2006, 10:05 AM

nope... and the money would probably end up helping the family of local fallen heros in their home towns.

Ferre · 06-09-2006, 11:57 AM

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artma...cle_8823.shtml

**South** · 06-09-2006, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Now, as a willing pawn manipulated by terrorists who are a hell of a lot smarter than our so-called leaders, we've given those he left behind even more reasons to kill and maim.

Article written in the newspaper with the catch line "Rational reporting of politics without Partisanship"

Trapper · 06-09-2006, 12:37 PM

Is being critical of the current administration make you partisan?

**South** · 06-09-2006, 12:41 PM

"terrorists who are a hell of a lot smarter than our so-called leaders" isn't critsism. It's passionate opposion, and that's partison.

Trapper · 06-09-2006, 01:01 PM

Not if they are as passionately opposed to the other party as well.

**South** · 06-09-2006, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trapper

Not if they are as passionately opposed to the other party as well.

\

Well ya got me there, though I seriously doubt that's the case in this instance.

Ferre · 06-09-2006, 01:25 PM

"You are either with us, or you are with the terrorists" - G.W. Bush, October, 2001

I viewed his speech again a few days ago and noticed he didn't say the ancient known phrase "You are either with us, or you are against us". He clearly changed that into: "You are either with us, or you are with the terrorists".

That dude is one sick mofo, and his team of fascist criminals also rooted devision into the American people, opposing the Bush administration is not just being against certain politics anymore, it is being with the terrorists, thus demonizing opposition as being terrorists or at least supporting terrorism. In any normal democratical system the opposite voice is part of the check and balance system, with demonizing opposition and declaring it suspect, the Bush administration creates the athmosphere that we see the results of in clearly in this case.

Sad thing is that American people got so used to it that for them it's all normal.

Trapper · 06-09-2006, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by southnow

\

Well ya got me there, though I seriously doubt that's the case in this instance.

You would probably say the same thing about Ferre, but he is obviously non - partisan. I wouldn't assume.