• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. believes it killed al Qaeda No.3

Polynikes

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
522
Reaction score
163
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
U.S. believes it killed al Qaeda No.3 | Reuters


U.S. intelligence agencies believe that al Qaeda's No. 3 leader, Sheikh Sa'id al-Masri, was killed recently in the tribal areas of Pakistan, a U.S. official said on Monday.

World

"We have strong reason to believe ... that al-Masri was killed recently in Pakistan's tribal areas," the official said on condition of anonymity



This weekend/holiday just got significantly better.
 
Good riddance.

Now if we can only get rid of all the other Al Qaeda for July 4th, then 2010 is really gonna be rockin'!
 
Killing Bin Laden or Zawahiri would be incredible, and give Obama a huge boost with his public opinion numbers.
 
That's good news, but, uh...

January 31, 2008

ANOTHER AL QAEDA NO. 3.... Stop me if you've heard this one: al Qaeda's #3 man has been killed.

A senior al Qaeda terrorist who allegedly plotted and carried out attacks against U.S. and coalition forces was killed in Pakistan, a knowledgeable Western official and a military source told CNN Thursday.

He was identified as Abu Laith al-Libi, 41, who was on the military's most wanted list.

...

This is certainly welcome news. I'm curious, though, if anyone has a list of al Qaeda #3s who've been captured or killed recently. I was keeping a list for a while, and I think al-Libi is the seventh, following Hamza Rabia, Abu Faraj al-Libbi, Saif al-Adel, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Mohammed Sheikh Mohammed, and a senior operational leader identified in court documents as "C-2."


The Washington Monthly

That's at least the eighth "number three" we've gotten so far. :2razz:
 
U.S. believes it killed al Qaeda No.3 | Reuters


U.S. intelligence agencies believe that al Qaeda's No. 3 leader, Sheikh Sa'id al-Masri, was killed recently in the tribal areas of Pakistan, a U.S. official said on Monday.

World

"We have strong reason to believe ... that al-Masri was killed recently in Pakistan's tribal areas," the official said on condition of anonymity



This weekend/holiday just got significantly better.

Good riddance.

These low lives don't deserve to live, and I say good for the military in this action.
 
Last edited:
How many previous times has this sort of information turned out to have been wrong ?
I sense this to be propaganda - Al Qaeda supposedly released the news of his death.
Could Al Qaeda be lying, and our wishful thinking believes them ?
Or could this be our manufactured justification for the drone attacks ?

But, if true, he no doubt has already been replaced.
 
Last edited:
I usually pass over these headlines. Am I supposed to care? The allied forces in Afghanistan are pummeling their way through thousands of people to kill a few leaders who will be replaced instantaneously once they're dead. Sure, it will temporarily demoralize Al Qaeda, but it's not going to stop them. You can't stop an ideology.

So sick of this war. I wish Canada were pulling out of Afghanistan already.
 
U.S. believes it killed al Qaeda No.3 | Reuters


U.S. intelligence agencies believe that al Qaeda's No. 3 leader, Sheikh Sa'id al-Masri, was killed recently in the tribal areas of Pakistan, a U.S. official said on Monday.

World

"We have strong reason to believe ... that al-Masri was killed recently in Pakistan's tribal areas," the official said on condition of anonymity



This weekend/holiday just got significantly better.

Not to be a Debbie Downer (nobody wants this crap to end more than a military mom, trust me), but they've said stuff like this before, and then later it turns out they were mistaken, it wasn't the right guy they killed.

Also, isn't AQ pretty decentralized?
What I mean is, would it even matter if we killed the leaders?
Wouldn't new leaders just step up and keep everything going?

Oh, how I wish there were an end in sight.
 
As many of you have said I agree that we hear we killed number X and that another person will fill in the shoes. But it is nice to hear that we got another one of these bastards and that maybe, even if for a second, there is a light at the end of the tunnel.
 
U.S. believes it killed al Qaeda No.3 | Reuters


U.S. intelligence agencies believe that al Qaeda's No. 3 leader, Sheikh Sa'id al-Masri, was killed recently in the tribal areas of Pakistan, a U.S. official said on Monday.

World

"We have strong reason to believe ... that al-Masri was killed recently in Pakistan's tribal areas," the official said on condition of anonymity



This weekend/holiday just got significantly better.

Who cares? al Qaeda is like a ****ing Hydra, there is no victory against them, And that does not mean we don't keep fighting them, but all I'm sayin is, You kill their #3, and 10 #3's emerge in their place.
 
Last edited:
I usually pass over these headlines. Am I supposed to care? The allied forces in Afghanistan are pummeling their way through thousands of people to kill a few leaders who will be replaced instantaneously once they're dead. Sure, it will temporarily demoralize Al Qaeda, but it's not going to stop them. You can't stop an ideology.

So sick of this war. I wish Canada were pulling out of Afghanistan already.

Each high-level operative killed takes to the grave with them a significant amount of knowledge and a skill set perfected over decades. Like any organization, of course there are others below them who know the individual above thems job and are trained to take over in such an event, and some may be even more capable than the leader they are replacing. That being said, each operative killed is a huge success, and when they are replaced the next should be hunted and killed as vigorously as the one before them.

So sick of this war? Maybe the World Trade Centers coming down didn't have the same effect on you as it did on me. Could this be due to you being Canadian and the attack occuring in America? I don't understand how you don't see that as an attack on humanity, I can say 100% that if Germany or England, Canada or basically any other G-20 or NATO aligned country were attacked in such a manner I would fight and give my life if necessary in an attempt to prevent another such attack. You see the attack on America as a direct result of America's "immoral foreign policy" don't you? I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but that seems apparent in your post.

Your defeatist attitude is sickening. You can stop an ideology. We defeated Fascism, Communism and Nazism. Radical Islam will be no different. Wahhabism will perish like all the other perverted ideologies that have appeared in history.
 
Who cares? al Qaeda is like a ****ing Hydra, there is no victory against them, And that does not mean we don't keep fighting them, but all I'm sayin is, You kill their #3, and 10 #3's emerge in their place.


So stop hunting them? Let them get comfortable and regain the capabalities of carrying out another 9/11 or worse?
 
Not to be a Debbie Downer (nobody wants this crap to end more than a military mom, trust me), but they've said stuff like this before, and then later it turns out they were mistaken, it wasn't the right guy they killed.

Also, isn't AQ pretty decentralized?
What I mean is, would it even matter if we killed the leaders?
Wouldn't new leaders just step up and keep everything going?

Oh, how I wish there were an end in sight.

Yes, they are pretty decentralized and there are undoubtedly numerous cells with plans in the works that will not be affected by this whatsoever. However, the killing of senior operatives creates disorder and power vacuums that aren't easily filled. Often times they have trouble replacing such leaders in an efficient manner due to their inability to communicate caused by the fear of U.S surveillance. The killing of Abu Musab al Zarqawi in Iraq was a HUGE blow to AQI in Iraq, one that certainly led to disorganization within AQI. Such killings are also an important symbolic victory in a war where many successes go unheralded to their classified nature.
 
Last edited:
U.S. believes it killed al Qaeda No.3 | Reuters


U.S. intelligence agencies believe that al Qaeda's No. 3 leader, Sheikh Sa'id al-Masri, was killed recently in the tribal areas of Pakistan, a U.S. official said on Monday.

World

"We have strong reason to believe ... that al-Masri was killed recently in Pakistan's tribal areas," the official said on condition of anonymity



This weekend/holiday just got significantly better.

Another number three? How many number 3's are there?
 
This is good news, but being "number three" in Al Qaeda as described by the US is more for news purposes. AQ doesn't structure itself in strict hierarchy globally anymore, perhaps locally or regionally in some areas. So it may be more accurate to say #3 in the Afghan-Pak region, and even then one has to remember that AQ probably doesn't structure itself even at that level with #3s, perhaps it would more accurate to say he was a field commander or worked directly under Zawarhi. I don't know but still good news nonetheless.
 
So sick of this war? Maybe the World Trade Centers coming down didn't have the same effect on you as it did on me. Could this be due to you being Canadian and the attack occuring in America? I don't understand how you don't see that as an attack on humanity, I can say 100% that if Germany or England, Canada or basically any other G-20 or NATO aligned country were attacked in such a manner I would fight and give my life if necessary in an attempt to prevent another such attack. You see the attack on America as a direct result of America's "immoral foreign policy" don't you? I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but that seems apparent in your post.

Fighting to prevent another such attack is all well and good...but I have to question if our presence in Afghanistan, nine years later, is actually doing anything to reduce the likelihood of another such attack. And even if it is, is it reducing it ENOUGH to justify the cost (in terms of lives, money, and political capital) associated with our presence there.
 
Man. Being the number 3 guy in AQ is probably the most dangerous job in the world.
 
Fighting to prevent another such attack is all well and good...but I have to question if our presence in Afghanistan, nine years later, is actually doing anything to reduce the likelihood of another such attack. And even if it is, is it reducing it ENOUGH to justify the cost (in terms of lives, money, and political capital) associated with our presence there.

Had we not gone in to Afghanistan or pulled out with out it being somewhat stabilized against an Al-Qaeda/Taliban resurgence, then Al-Qaeda would have the same save haven they did prior to 9/11 to train and plan. We haven't spent anywhere near the amount in Afghanistan economically as was caused by the attacks of 9/11. If you are looking at it in terms of lives lost, a little over 1,000 service members, nearly all of whom are aware of the risk that their job entails, and would gladly lay down their lives if need be to protect America, compared to over 3,000 civilians on 9/11.
 
Last edited:
Who cares? al Qaeda is like a ****ing Hydra, there is no victory against them, And that does not mean we don't keep fighting them, but all I'm sayin is, You kill their #3, and 10 #3's emerge in their place.

Who cares? So this killing is insignificant and serves no purpose in the fight against Al-Qaeda? Following this logic, if it doesn't matter, then we should save our time, money and lives and cease hunting Al-Qaeda?

There is no victory against them? How many successful terrorist attacks have been carried out in the U.S since 9/11? That seems like a victory to me.

So what exactly are you saying then? Since I obviously am not getting the message.
 
Who cares? So this killing is insignificant and serves no purpose in the fight against Al-Qaeda? Following this logic, if it doesn't matter, then we should save our time, money and lives and cease hunting Al-Qaeda?

There is no victory against them? How many successful terrorist attacks have been carried out in the U.S since 9/11? That seems like a victory to me.

So what exactly are you saying then? Since I obviously am not getting the message.

:rofl you're getting irate about my post, which you should actually agree with. You can kill as much Taliban and Al-Qaeda as you want, go ahead. 10 more #3's will pop up in his place.

I don't think killing is making your country safer, because the majority of the threat is overblown. If there were 1000's of terrorists out there, they could cause havoc anywhere they wanted. I got on a greyhound bus a couple of weeks ago, my bags were not searched, my ID not checked, this was from Vancouver to Whistler straight after the Olympics, if a terrorist truly wanted to cause havoc, blowing up a bus would be the way, and since it's so easy, and it did not happen, I can only assume you are way, far, and way too scared.
 
Back
Top Bottom