Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

I think I made it abundantly clear why the two situations are comparable, using the words of President Obama, no less. If you want to disagree, that's your business.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

all I hear is

[✔] [item]Thunderfury, Blessed Blade of the Windseeker[/item] (Three)
[✔] [item]Sulfuras, Hand of Ragnaros[/item] (Two)
[✔] [item]32837[/item] & [item]32838[/item]
[✔] [item]Thori'dal, the Stars' Fury[/item]
[✔] [item]46017[/item]
[✔] [item]49623[/item] (Two)
[✔] [item]71086[/item]

Taliban kills 80 Pakistani's in revenge for OBL's death.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/1 ... 61436.html

Good thing we didn't... oh, nevermind.

Let me know when they kill some Americans, until then who cares, right?

Dvergar /
Quisling

RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]

On a serious note, this attack says some things about AQ and their current abilities. The first thing they do for 'revenge' is to kill a bunch of Pakistanis? The people Americans are now fairly suspicious of after this Osama-in-their-backyard thing? That was the best they could do?

It really just reinforces what others were saying, AQ is a pretty piss-ant organization at this point. Edited for clarity: We pretty much wrecked them after 9-11.

Dvergar /
Quisling

I'd say they were more wrecked by the wars in afghanistan and iraq than after a successful operation like 9/11.

you dont score a touchdown then throw in the towel.

after 9-11 being the things that happened after 9-11. I wasn't suggesting the organization consisted of 22 people.

Dvergar /
Quisling

The moment we start to underestimate their will to kill us, they're going to kill us. We can't take them lightly.

Their current capabilities are limited because we now have our hands on their playbook. They need to operate more cautiously and come up with other plans of attack. Hell, one of the things that's come out since the OBL assassination is their plan to attack our passenger railway systems by derailing trains in locations where the people would plunge to their deaths. We haven't seen that before and we wouldn't have know to protect against it without getting their playbook... so to think they're some pissant group incapable of attacking is outright wrong. Since 9/11, they (and people who pledged allegiance to Al Qaeda and their Jihad) have pulled off plenty of attacks (and launched many unsuccessful attacks), killing thousands and injuring many times more. Keep in mind that Americans and our military aren't always the objective in their attacks. Many times they just kill to kill... Americans, Europeans, Asians, Christians, Muslims, civilians, women/children, etc.

The bombing of the Pakistani training center wasn't the best they could do... I'm sure we have yet to see that.

The clip at the end of the kid getting kicked by the horse intrigued me. So, I went to find it specifically.



This kid should win some sort of award for stupidity...running up behind a horse and smacking its ass, what a fucking moron.

No one is talking about dismantling our security.



You haven't seen very many old westerns.



We won't be able to protect against it anyway. While knowledge is certainly helpful, a certain memo about Bin Laden attacking by hijacking planes didn't prevent 9-11. Oh I see, you feel that Obama is tougher on terror than Bush. I knew you liked him all along.

Dvergar /
Quisling

You're right. No one was talking about dismantling our security. I was talking about not underestimating them and you were calling them pretty much a pissant group which I interpreted in that they're insignificant and not a threat. We were attacked by Al Qaeda a couple times before they became a household name and people around the world have been killed/injured since 9/11... but I doubt many people remember that stuff.


And that makes the threat any less real or severe?


It's sad, but our methods of security are reactive instead of proactive. I bet security around railways would be beefed up if there was a large attack on the railways system, just like security was beefed up around airports and on the airplanes AFTER there was an attack. If knowing they plan on using the railway system as a means to attack then we'd be fools to not secure it.

Also, I don't think Obama is tougher on terrorism. Obama didn't like enhanced interrogation techniques, the wars or keeping Gitmo open. Without those three things Obama wouldn't have pulled down OBL. Fortunately, for Obama, Bush was the one who had the backbone to go after them and get the information needed. Obama was just in the right place at the right time... and I'm glad he was, but that doesn't mean he's tougher in any way.

Except that you don't need to be on or anywhere near a train in order to do what was mentioned. You could easily sabotage the rails in ways that are only going to be detectable if you rig every bridge in America (and a significant amount of land leading up to the bridge) with sensitive monitoring equipment. You don't even have to touch the rails to plant something near them. Trains simply won't ever be as secure as airplanes could be, and the cost to secure them would be immense. Far exceeding their worth.


Waterboarding didn't get the information leading to Bin Laden. Iraq played no part in getting Bin Laden (wanting to get out of Afghanistan after 9 years isn't the same as saying we should have never gone). Gitmo was a black eye for America and deserved to be shut down. The practice of holding prisoners for years without charging them, at times with only a vague notion that they might have done something wrong, that's firmly anti-American. For all the talk about "getting back to what made America great" conservatives sure miss the moral part.

Dvergar /
Quisling

Obama tried to shut down gitmo, but couldnt get anyone to take the prisoners there. He could'nt let them go(or he would have) and he certainly couldnt just execute them.

gitmo was never going to close.

I didn't say Waterboarding was the reason we got Bin Laden. I said it was Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (which includes waterboarding). It might be a moot point, but I figured I should clarify my statement. Don't think I'm suggesting that we waterboarded one guy and he said, "These are the GeoCoords to get Osama..." Anyways, NPR (and elsewhere) reports information on the courier (the man that led us to OBL) was acquired by EIT. Panetta even said EIT provided some of the information that was needed to hunt down OBL. I'm sure he doesn't know what he's talking about, though.

I'm not going to say Iraq did or didn't give us good information. We know that Al Qaeda had a branch in Iraq and we know we've detained people from Iraq. You don't know enough, either, to say definitively. Also, leaving Afghanistan early without the objectives being met isn't 'tough'...

Gitmo didn't deserved to be shutdown because a couple people acted up. When do we ever shut down anything based on the conduct of an individual? Do we shut down schools when teachers sleep with students? Do we shut down hospitals when a single doctor is convicted of malpractice? Do we close military bases when someone goes nuts and shoots a bunch of people? Those involved were charged, demoted, imprisoned and discharged from the military. Justice was served without closing gitmo.

And...? They're enemy combatants and I'm not sure the Geneva Convention says we have to charge POWs before detainment. The Supreme Court in 2008 said they get habeas corpus, so I'm not sure what the fuss is. Plus, what USD said.

We're at war; arguing that we should be moral with our enemies isn't going to work on me.