U.S. Drone Bases now on East African targeting missions

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904106704576583012923076634.html

to prevent piracy, apparently.

I love the disconnect:

  Quote

"We do not know enough about the leaders of the al Qaeda affiliates in Africa," said a senior U.S. official. "Is there a guy out there saying, 'I am the future of al Qaeda'? Who is the next Osama bin Laden?"

So let's launch some drone strikes.

Also the US intelligence probably has plenty of information on al Qaeda. Probably just not using it efficiently.

we should have a ridiculous amount of information on Al Qaeda...the Western World's intelligence agencies created the damn thing.

4 planes for 50 million, or was it 500 million?

glad to know our Social Security is going towards a worthwhile and honorable cause.

  On 9/25/2011 at 12:21 AM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

we should have a ridiculous amount of information on Al Qaeda...the Western World's intelligence agencies created the damn thing.

Come on now Smetty.

Are you saying there was an organization known as "The Base" coordinating not only the Afghani mujaheddin resistance against Soviet invasion forces without complicit United States or Western European aid, weaponry, and training, but also sponsored and had subordinate rebel cells in every country in the Middle East, North and East Africa? That their leader was not trained by the CIA?

Aren't you putting down the failure to prevent 9/11 as not a conspiracy, but the ineptness of western intelligence agencies? Isn't the official argument that Western European intelligence agencies refused to cooperate in transferring evidence? Doesn't that suggest that we had intelligence on "Al-Qaeda"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNvqm_qgM5U

shut-up, maggot. stake your relevancy in such a topic (credentials) - or admit speculator.

next, you're going to be telling me how to conduct COIN

I've already said that we had plenty of intelligence on al Qaeda. However the US did not "create" al Qaeda. The US funded Afghani mujahedin in their (the US's) misguided belief that fighting a military battle against the communists would cause their downfall. However, the Afghani mujahedin barely tolerated the Saudi fighters who would become al Qaeda. The only reason they tolerated the Saudis was because bin Laden brought in tons of money.

I've seen the Power of Nightmares many times over. It's an excellent documentary, and provides much to think about, including ideological similarities between the neo-Conservatives and radical Islamist factions. There is however, clear evidence that al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations existed prior to the Afghan war. The war on terror is a farce, don't get me wrong, but it is simply the US exercising opportunism to further political goals.

They did create al qaeda. And nowadays if functions as a shadow puppet, rather than a real entity. But whatever.

  On 9/25/2011 at 1:32 AM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

Are you saying there was an organization known as "The Base"

I thought that it meant, the network.

Drone bass.

All your drones are belong to us.

  On 9/25/2011 at 9:48 AM, psn said:

Drone bass.

I'm afraid of the US and its robot armies

  On 9/25/2011 at 6:56 AM, delet... said:

"They did create al qaeda. And nowadays if functions as a shadow puppet, rather than a real entity. But whatever." (delet..., 2011)

i edited the quote so it'll be convenient to use in academic papers people might be writing in the future.

  On 9/25/2011 at 8:47 AM, delet... said:

  On 9/25/2011 at 1:32 AM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

Are you saying there was an organization known as "The Base"

 

I thought that it meant, the network.

The Database, The Base, The Network, all nicknames refer to the collective CIA dossiers on known mujaheddin leaders (see Operation Cyclone). There was no such thing as "Al Qaeda" until Western networks decided to deem it such an organization.

BTW, if a man giving out financial assistance to paramilitary groups is considered a terrorist network, then there are far, far worse and larger terrorist networks than Al-Qaeda.

  On 9/25/2011 at 5:57 PM, eugene said:

  On 9/25/2011 at 6:56 AM, delet... said:

"They did create al qaeda. And nowadays if functions as a shadow puppet, rather than a real entity. But whatever." (delet..., 2011)

 

i edited the quote so it'll be convenient to use in academic papers people might be writing in the future.

theres more than enough evidence to link to two:

Bush-Bin Laden business connections, first off

Gulbuddin Hekmatyar

Ali Mohamed

Omar Abdel-Rahman

many others

Am I claiming that a bunch of shadow govt. people rounded a bunch of Afghanis up and told them "Ok, now you are a terrorist network that needs to come bomb us so we can use you as a patsy."? No, but the US and Western intelligence agencies made it a terrorist network once they called it a terrorist network. If we were to go along with that logic, every country on earth is probably tied to a mastermind, highly organized hierarchical terrorist network that operates in every continent, because of financial assistance. So who is the conspiracy theorist?

If I was to give someone money, knowing they would purchase weapons to use against someone else, sure I might be complicit in an act of terrorism, but does that make me the mastermind behind a hierarchical network of terrorism? Im sure once the United States accused me of this, it wouldn't be hard to network at that point, what with all the publicity and erroneous connections intelligence makes between Al-Qaeda and Iraq, etc., etc., etc.

O no, not the Seychelles!

There goes the neighborhood...

I thought 'al Qaeda' was a term invented by the US as an excuse to use goat herders in Afghanistan for target practice?

That's the spirit,. ;-] .. And don't forget they that also like to bomb mud huts.

  On 9/25/2011 at 7:46 PM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

  On 9/25/2011 at 8:47 AM, delet... said:

  On 9/25/2011 at 1:32 AM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

Are you saying there was an organization known as "The Base"

 

I thought that it meant, the network.

The Database, The Base, The Network, all nicknames refer to the collective CIA dossiers on known mujaheddin leaders (see Operation Cyclone). There was no such thing as "Al Qaeda" until Western networks decided to deem it such an organization.

 

BTW, if a man giving out financial assistance to paramilitary groups is considered a terrorist network, then there are far, far worse and larger terrorist networks than Al-Qaeda.

  On 9/25/2011 at 5:57 PM, eugene said:

  On 9/25/2011 at 6:56 AM, delet... said:

"They did create al qaeda. And nowadays if functions as a shadow puppet, rather than a real entity. But whatever." (delet..., 2011)

 

i edited the quote so it'll be convenient to use in academic papers people might be writing in the future.

 

theres more than enough evidence to link to two:

 

Bush-Bin Laden business connections, first off

Gulbuddin Hekmatyar

Ali Mohamed

Omar Abdel-Rahman

 

many others

 

Am I claiming that a bunch of shadow govt. people rounded a bunch of Afghanis up and told them "Ok, now you are a terrorist network that needs to come bomb us so we can use you as a patsy."? No, but the US and Western intelligence agencies made it a terrorist network once they called it a terrorist network. If we were to go along with that logic, every country on earth is probably tied to a mastermind, highly organized hierarchical terrorist network that operates in every continent, because of financial assistance. So who is the conspiracy theorist?

 

If I was to give someone money, knowing they would purchase weapons to use against someone else, sure I might be complicit in an act of terrorism, but does that make me the mastermind behind a hierarchical network of terrorism? Im sure once the United States accused me of this, it wouldn't be hard to network at that point, what with all the publicity and erroneous connections intelligence makes between Al-Qaeda and Iraq, etc., etc., etc.

You do know that there was terrorism before al Qaeda right? I mean it's not like they just invented terror out of nothing. Terrorist networks like the IRA (who received plenty of funding from the US), the Tamil Tigers, Basque Separatists, etc existed for a long time before the idea of al Qaeda had even been heard in the US. or are you trying to say that al Qaeda had not committed terrorist acts prior to them being labeled as a terrorist network by US intelligence? The US heard of al Qaeda in 1996 - Dan Coleman's interviews with al Fadl were the first time they became aware of a terrorist group called al Qaeda.

Does the US government use the existence of this group to their advantage by propagandizing? Of course they do - all governments do similar things.

The Bush - bin Laden connections are moot, because Osama was condemned by his family in 1991.

I'm not sure why you bring up Hekmatyar - he sent back the Saudis when they arrived in Afghanistan to fight the Soviets.

Abdul-Rahman is currently serving a life sentence in the US - real cozy relationship. He was arrested like 6 years before 2001. He was allowed his tourist visa in the US because of bureaucratic incompetence.

Try reading "The Looming Tower" by Lawrence Wright. It's an easy read, well researched from a guy who actually speaks some Arabic.

Again - I agree with you, the war on terror is a stupid piece of political machination. But what seems more logical - some people get really pissed off about US army bases on their homeland, and decide to do something about it; or - the US government orders the CIA and FBI to create a terrorist organization out of nothing? Yes language matters (Thomas principle), but while the US government might have been engaging in some hyperbole when declaring how dangerous the threat of terrorism was, the facts were that al Qaeda was an organization that acted across international boundaries. Usually the number of members in far flung countries was small, but they did exist.

  On 9/26/2011 at 12:59 AM, chenGOD said:

  On 9/25/2011 at 7:46 PM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

  On 9/25/2011 at 8:47 AM, delet... said:

  On 9/25/2011 at 1:32 AM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

Are you saying there was an organization known as "The Base"

 

I thought that it meant, the network.

The Database, The Base, The Network, all nicknames refer to the collective CIA dossiers on known mujaheddin leaders (see Operation Cyclone). There was no such thing as "Al Qaeda" until Western networks decided to deem it such an organization.

 

BTW, if a man giving out financial assistance to paramilitary groups is considered a terrorist network, then there are far, far worse and larger terrorist networks than Al-Qaeda.

  On 9/25/2011 at 5:57 PM, eugene said:

  On 9/25/2011 at 6:56 AM, delet... said:

"They did create al qaeda. And nowadays if functions as a shadow puppet, rather than a real entity. But whatever." (delet..., 2011)

 

i edited the quote so it'll be convenient to use in academic papers people might be writing in the future.

 

theres more than enough evidence to link to two:

 

Bush-Bin Laden business connections, first off

Gulbuddin Hekmatyar

Ali Mohamed

Omar Abdel-Rahman

 

many others

 

Am I claiming that a bunch of shadow govt. people rounded a bunch of Afghanis up and told them "Ok, now you are a terrorist network that needs to come bomb us so we can use you as a patsy."? No, but the US and Western intelligence agencies made it a terrorist network once they called it a terrorist network. If we were to go along with that logic, every country on earth is probably tied to a mastermind, highly organized hierarchical terrorist network that operates in every continent, because of financial assistance. So who is the conspiracy theorist?

 

If I was to give someone money, knowing they would purchase weapons to use against someone else, sure I might be complicit in an act of terrorism, but does that make me the mastermind behind a hierarchical network of terrorism? Im sure once the United States accused me of this, it wouldn't be hard to network at that point, what with all the publicity and erroneous connections intelligence makes between Al-Qaeda and Iraq, etc., etc., etc.

 

You do know that there was terrorism before al Qaeda right? I mean it's not like they just invented terror out of nothing. Terrorist networks like the IRA (who received plenty of funding from the US), the Tamil Tigers, Basque Separatists, etc existed for a long time before the idea of al Qaeda had even been heard in the US. or are you trying to say that al Qaeda had not committed terrorist acts prior to them being labeled as a terrorist network by US intelligence? The US heard of al Qaeda in 1996 - Dan Coleman's interviews with al Fadl were the first time they became aware of a terrorist group called al Qaeda.

Does the US government use the existence of this group to their advantage by propagandizing? Of course they do - all governments do similar things.

 

The Bush - bin Laden connections are moot, because Osama was condemned by his family in 1991.

I'm not sure why you bring up Hekmatyar - he sent back the Saudis when they arrived in Afghanistan to fight the Soviets.

Abdul-Rahman is currently serving a life sentence in the US - real cozy relationship. He was arrested like 6 years before 2001. He was allowed his tourist visa in the US because of bureaucratic incompetence.

Try reading "The Looming Tower" by Lawrence Wright. It's an easy read, well researched from a guy who actually speaks some Arabic.

Again - I agree with you, the war on terror is a stupid piece of political machination. But what seems more logical - some people get really pissed off about US army bases on their homeland, and decide to do something about it; or - the US government orders the CIA and FBI to create a terrorist organization out of nothing? Yes language matters (Thomas principle), but while the US government might have been engaging in some hyperbole when declaring how dangerous the threat of terrorism was, the facts were that al Qaeda was an organization that acted across international boundaries. Usually the number of members in far flung countries was small, but they did exist.

like i said, i am not claiming the United States literally signed some sort of agreement with these men to agree to form an incredibly well-organized hierarchy known as Al-Qaeda. Bin Laden was just some jackass funneling money towards other terrorist groups-he had no direct control over the Somalis or other African cells, until the United States intelligence agencies decided that he did have direct control over all of these operations other than financial funding for decades, and controlled a sprawling terrorist empire that apparently went undetected for 15 years by intelligence. Isn't there a contradiction?

Al-Qaeda's Sudan cell, completely controlled by Bin Laden, controlled 50% of Sudanese pharmaceuticals at Al-Shifa? What about the Egyptian Islamic Jihad which had taken credit for the bombings? Oh right, its part of Al-Qaeda because its an Islamist terror cell.

You seem to be confusing me saying there was no such thing as a highly organized terror empire known as Al-Qaeda until the U.S. deemed it such, and someone excusing Bin Laden saying he isn't a terrorist.

Of course he is a terrorist.

If this book you are suggesting has hard documented evidence that Bin Laden had direct control over these over terror cells prior to 1999/2001, I will check it out. But even according to Richard Perle, Bin Laden was just a rich crazy sack of shit, not some head of a gigantic, hi-tech, well armed organization.

Well, Osama did live in Sudan for a lengthy period of time and his money there was a large part of the GDP. Egypt was always Zahawari - and while he and Bin Laden certainly had differences, they were also willing to work together on many issues.

Of course not every Islamist terrorist organization is part of the al-Qaeda network. Did you see the part where i agreed with you on that? Let me replay that for you:

"Does the US government use the existence of this group to their advantage by propagandizing? Of course they do - all governments do similar things."

But Osama remained influential over other groups, not least because of his money.

  On 9/26/2011 at 1:52 AM, chenGOD said:

 

But Obama remained influential over other groups, not least because of his money.

hehe

Doh! Dammit.

OSAMA remained... ah fuck I'll just edit my original post.

awesome. Well he is the current terrorist in chief.

  On 9/24/2011 at 11:54 PM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

http://online.wsj.co...2923076634.html

 

 

to prevent piracy, apparently.

every time I read the first post in this thread, I think of predator drones being used to target some kid downloading the latest kanye west album. Come to think of it, not such a bad idea...are you listening RIAA?