Haqqani leader 'killed' by NATO drone

I suppose if Waco was all right for the US at home, why not do it overseas?

The next time we have a hostage situation, we should just blow the whole building up along with everyone in it. That'll show them.

Originally posted by butcherguy
'Executed' would be a more appropriate term than killed.

Along with 24 other people in the home that 2 missiles were fired into. Mostly family members, in other words women and children.

Very sad.

if i was a supposed leader of a terrorist group , i would have my loved ones as far away from me as possible. the man was either extremley stupid or arrogant

The Taliban denies that dude is dead. They claim that if he was dead, they would be proud about it. .

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Connman

 

They were with him.

If they are of a certain age and gender that may be acceptable, but if we are speaking of a man's wife and pre-teen children....
Where else would you expect them to be?

Then the fault is his. He endangered them. Would you do that to your loved ones? I wouldn't. It is sad, but the fault lies with the guilty party.

reply to post by ErroneousDylan


I do not think that the US coordinates drone activities inside Pakistan within NATO. This makes it so that it was not a NATO drone that did the killing but a US drone and ultimately the sole responsibility / credit is to the US.

reply to post by Panic2k11


The US does not acknowledge drone use. NATO is the only ones capable, which really means the US, but that is conjecture.

reply to post by ErroneousDylan


I think it's safe to say that eventually Americans will be threatened by whatever weapons they develop. A simple reason for this is "karma." If you don't believe in karma, then figure that greedy arms dealers will sell the weapons to whoever has the money for them, even if those people happen to be enemies of the US and plan to use the weapons against them. It seems to me that the US itself more or less condones this, though I can't quite understand the logic there... they'd rather these guys make money, even if it threatens Americans? But as far as I can tell, it's true.

Killing civilians is often unavoidable these days. War has become highly technological, and weapons so far cannot distinguish between soldiers and non-combatants. Also, the civilians themselves often become combatants for various reasons, making things even more muddled.

Maybe some day we'll learn how to talk out our differences, instead of killing over them. But considering how vicious even political discussions can get, that's probably not going to happen any time soon...

if i was a supposed leader of a terrorist group , i would have my loved ones as far away from me as possible. the man was either extremley stupid or arrogant

Or possibly his priorities were other than what yours may be. Or possibly his choices were limited. He doesn't have to be stupid, just because we didn't like him and (apparently) killed him.

Many of these people honestly believe that they are in jihad - holy war, a God-sanctioned (even God-commanded) war. Many of these people are sincerely devoted to their religion, to the point where they would consider it a great honor to suffer and die for it. Dying during jihad is among the holiest acts you can perform. You are assured of heaven (I'm not sure how accurate the virgin thing is, but still...).

As for his family - well, his male relatives would be included in the merit of dying during jihad. I don't know what the story is with the females. But keeping the family close may not be so dumb, if you're a devout Muslim.

Also, many of those folks are tribal, and simply have nowhere to park their families. They can't leave park them at a Motel 6 and hope for the best. Keeping them nearby may not have been a choice.

Originally posted by gladtobehere
reply to post by ErroneousDylan

 

The what network? Some other conjured up group.

They can now "legally" assassinate American citizens, who cares about some random "brown guy"?

Its the perfect plan: create more enemies in order to justify endless military spending.

Never ending cycle of spending and killing. Makes one proud to be an American.

edit on 25-8-2012 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)

Actually, the ideal way to make money is to get two non-US countries fighting, and sell just enough arms to each side to balance whatever the other side had, so that no one ever has a clear advantage. Kind of like how we did with Iran and Iraq.

I don't know who's doing what, but I'm pretty sure that we folks here at ATS don't have an effing clue what's going on. That *some* conspiracy exists, sure. But that it's any of the ones we've mentioned here? Not too likely. And even if it is - *which* one? If the truth is here somewhere, it's buried under tons of horse manure and no one will ever find it. It's better than locking it in a steel vault.

Originally posted by Connman
I`ll tell you why I don`t feel anything for those killed with him. They were with him. If you want to be around a target expect to get hit as well. Simple solution.

This hit is nothing more then people hiding behind family members. People that you take out when found. Now if he was not there and it happened then yes anger but it looks like he was so good job. I blame him for involving them not the strike.

Not likely that he was hiding behind family .... they just bombed his home while they all were there.....