Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

We had to take out Zarqawi with bombs?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
JCMach1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 11:30 AM
Original message
We had to take out Zarqawi with bombs?
Doesn't that say something significant about how things are going in Iraq now?

We couldn't project ground forces to this location?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well, there is one good reason for that...
even if we could send troops in, by the time they get there, it's likely that Zarqawi will be alerted by spotters in the streets and escape. The same thing can't happen with planes traveling at supersonic speeds
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullimiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. i dont believe it. either we control the country or we dont.
WE DONT. So bombs it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #3
8. Of course we don't control the country...
is anyone claiming that we do? I don't even see Bush or Rumsfeld saying we "control the country."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benburch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. You just affirmed the OP.
We don't control the streets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. Again, I don't think anyone is claiming that we have 100 percent control..
of the streets :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullimiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. who said anything about 100% ?
Edited on Thu Jun-08-06 12:24 PM by bullimiami
we dont control enough of iraq to even surround a neighborhood and capture people.

all we have is tossing bombs and hoping they land on someone we want killed.

pretty pitiful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. As I said in my first post...
I think we certainly do have enough troops to surround a neighborhood and move in. However:

1) That could result in American casualties

2) All it takes is one spotter to call Zarqawi on a cell phone, and he could escape

3) Bombing the shit out of him removes both of those possibilities.

I mean, I see your point that this could be a sign of relative insurgency strength, but I think my point of view is equally valid, if not moreso.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rsmith6621 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
2. But Rummy said....


That is very HUMANE....it is clean...It shows love and respect..Remember?????...ByGosh watch F9/11 the comment is on there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beaverhausen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 11:33 AM
Response to Original message
4. Does the picture of him look like someone killed in a bomb attack?
Edited on Thu Jun-08-06 11:34 AM by Beaverhausen
Is it just me or does anyone question when and where he really was killed? Wouldn't you be a lot more broken and bloodied if you were in a bomb attack?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Here's a different pic:


From the Official Iraqi Freedom Website

http://www.mnf-iraq.com/Releases/2006-06/060608a.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kagemusha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #4
9. Depends on too many factors to quantify
For the faithful no proof is required; for the skeptic no proof is sufficient. And for something like this, which relies on believing the fingerprint matching story, who's really to say.

Fact is, if Zarqawi is dead, it just leaves the insurgency to more competent and professional, if less internationally flashy, leaders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Casual_Observer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 11:35 AM
Response to Original message
5. Zarqawi is silenced now.
It would appear that they wanted it this way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
10. See that's just it, they have to use bombs...
because since Zarqawi never really existed, sending in ground forces would mean that they would actually have to show he was 1) real and 2) if he was real, deal with that uncomfortable thing called a trail.

We all see how much of a kangaroo show Saddam's trail has turned into, could you imagine if they actually brought in this Zarqawi poser?

Curtis LaMay once stated that with the new Air Force ground troops will be unnecessary. First of all LaMay was a war criminal of the highest degree, but what his legacy does show is, if you can bomb them into submission, then you can say that anyone was killed or dead and that ends the mess of having to follow the Geneva Conventions.

No body, no problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #10
13. well, perhaps this Z. chap will show up somewhere else in a week or
two. I do not know what to believe.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
az chela Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
12. Since he has been reported killed several times I say PROVE IT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #12
19. Yeah, but we didn't produce a body any other time...
we said he "might" be killed.

Here, there's a body that, according to the admittedly untrustworthy Pentagon, is confirmed as Zarqawi through facial recognition and fingerprints.

I guess my question is, what would it take for you to accept that this is Zarqawi? How much proof do you need?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzteris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
14. How many others died
in the "airstrike"??

Was this an "isolated house"? Or in a neighborhood?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenny blankenship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
15. Just like all the other times
Sure what's the problem with that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demosincebirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
18. We should have slipped a note under his door, first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yupster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-08-06 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
20. Just finished reading a book called "Jawbreaker"
It was written by CIA leader with the Northern Alliance during the Afghan campaign.

There was a vignette in the book where I think this guy made a horrible miskate, but he doesn't mention it as such.

Kabul had just fallen which presented a problem because the Taliban headed south to Kandahar and none of the Northern Alliance tribal groups had any interest at all in going south of Kabul to chase them. They had Kabul. Now it was time to fight for your group's spot in the new government.

Anyway, the CIA guys basically had to start over and organize a "Southern Alliance" from Pushtins (?). Hamid Karzai was part of this group. Then they went to work on an "Eastern Alliance."

Meanwhile, they were getting reports that Osama was passing through towns and was probably in the caves of Tora Bora. This guy got one of is three man teams to a local village where guides brought them with a mule train up the high mountains. Finally after two days the guides gave them binoculars and told them to look down, and sure enough there was a huge training camp with caves and obstacle courses and trucks and pickups and Al Quaida guys running all around. They called the author of the book and told him they found them and the author clled for every air asset available and we started bombing the crap out of the Al Quaida guys.

That started a running battle with the Al Quaida guys running from cave system to cave system further up the mountains and the spotters would find them again and they'd bomb the crap out of them again.

They quickly paid Afghan tribal leaders to gurd the outlets to the mountains and the Pakistani Army said they'd guard their side.

They found 500 bodies and one had a radio on tuned to Al Quaida's frequency. This is whene they reportedly heard talk of Bin Laden, and even talk by Bin Laden.

The CIA men spoke to the guards watching the passes and were depressed. First it was Ramadan, so the guards would leave their positions every evening to break their fasts with their families and then return the next morning. Speaking to one tribal leader who was guarding the exits to the mountains, the Afghan told the CIA guy that a month ago he was fighting as part of the Taliban in a bunker near Mazar-i-sharif and an American bomb killed 40 of the 45 comrades in his bunker, and he'd never forgive the US for that -- and he was supposed to stop Bin Laden from escaping.

The author of the book demanded US troops to cover the escape routes and they found 800 rangers who could get there by parachuting into small valleys and marching to the passes. The idea was rejected as too dangerous which sent this guy into a rage saying you don't tell Army Rangers things are too dangerous. That's what they're trained to do.

Anyway, the point of this long post is that I think the guy made a serious error in immediately bombing the Al Quadi camp once they found it. Wouldn't it have been better to watch them a few days. Get the corridor estabished (huge mountains maybe a 50 mile corridor through the mountains), and get plenty of Americans on the scene before starting to pound them? What ended up happening was a running battle which killed tremendous numbers of bad guys but was boiund to let some escape.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 16th 2024, 04:45 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC