http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/world/asia/28qaeda.html

---

An American official said that a drone strike on Aug. 22 killed Atiyah Abd al-Rahman, a Libyan who in the last year had taken over as al Qaeda’s top operational planner. Mr. Rahman was in frequent contact with Bin Laden in the months before the terror leader was killed on May 2 by a team of Navy Seals, intelligence officials have said.

---

It's not surprising considering with Osama gone he would be the next biggest target.

Good thing I say. I mean I am not a horrible person but it just seems so wrong the things that Al Quada do to the USA. I kind of say that they deserve this, they brought it upon themselves.

Well i hope its true but tbh,osama ran out of money ages ago,since that alqaeda has been unable to pull much off

"I kind of say that they deserve this, they brought it upon themselves."

oh the hypocrisy.

As if the US didn't bring 9/11 upon itself.

geeogree : What do you mean by that? Could you explain that, please?

do you honestly believe that everyone around the world wants or likes having their countries bombed or their activities policed by the United States?

Just because the US (and it's business interests) feel the need to control the way the world works doesn't mean the rest of the world is going to like it.

Its good they got the SOB maybe our troops can get out of there that much sooner. I do agree with Geeo, America brought 9/11 on themselves. Here is a brief summary from my understanding.

American government and companies wanted to create a pipeline in the middle east and afghanistan was the best route (besides Iran). The Taliban , who had been the afghani government for atleast 4 years by 2001, told them they weren't allowed to build the pipeline and to basically stay out of their country. Then the American companies said they cancel the pipeline until the Taliban is out of power and there is more stability in Afghanistan. Then in 1999, the UN put sanctions against the Taliban and later Al-Qaida, here is a quote from an australian UN website. http://www.dfat.gov.au/un/unsc_sanctions/taqbl.html

"On 15 October 1999 the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) adopted resolution 1267 (1999) imposing sanctions against the Taliban in response to the continuing violations of international humanitarian law and of human rights, particularly discrimination against women and girls, and the continuing use of Afghan territory, especially areas controlled by the Taliban, for the sheltering and training of terrorists and planning of terrorist acts. On 19 December 2000, the UNSC adopted resolution 1333 (2000) which extended the sanctions to apply to Al-Qaida and Bin Laden. The sanctions imposed against Al-Qaida, Taliban and Bin Laden have been modified and extended by resolutions 1390(2002), 1455(2003), 1526(2004), 1617(2005), 1735(2006), 1822(2008) and 1904 (2009)."

geeogree : I forgot about that. Being a Criminal Justice student, I should know better.

Back to the topic at hand. I do believe it is a good thing that Al Qaeda's current leader has been taken down, but does this really defeat the organization? They have to have others ready to take the lead. The very last sentence in the article septembern presented says that "American officials are unclear as to who would take over the job."

yeah, I never argued this wasn't a good thing. However, the idea that the US is the innocent party in all of the wars and what not of the last 10 years is ludicrous. Just because the average American is completely blind to what their leaders and military are doing outside of their borders doesn't mean it's not happening.

This news pleases me. The more high ranking terrorist officials we can get the more lives are saved. It looks like we are winning.

geeogree : It's so refreshing to hear other people say that. We were never innocent, but that just gets brushed under the rug and if you try to point it out you are "un-American" and obviously hate the country.... *facepalm*

But yeah, all the world benefits from one less terrorist leader.

Elara : well, I'm not American , but I understand what you're saying.

The USA can't run around policing the world and not expect the "criminal" countries to fight back at some point.

geeogree : I know. But honestly I've never even heard non-Americans say it either.

Honestly, when you look at history of American foreign affairs and how we've mettled... it is amazing that something like 9/11 didn't happen long before that. We've made an awful lot of enemies over the years, and done some truly horrible things.

all in the name of "freedom"....

which should really be "friendly to US business"

geeogree : Well, prior to 1990 it was also "against Communism and the Soviets"... any country that had a remotely socialist or communist policy, we sent in the CIA to destabilize the country and pull of coups... which is how a lot of dictators got put into power. Interesting how that is turning out, right?

take that thought one step farther.... Communism was the ultimate in anti-capitalism.... meaning anti US business.... so it's really being going on for 60 years now.... just under different names.

Elara : related trivia note.hawai joined the use when britain and america staged a coup,america to gain more land,britain in return getting trade rights.

Can't say I'm surprised this guy might have bit the dust. He intentionally made himself public enemy number 1 to almost all Americans.

I'm surprised that there was anyone in Al Qaeda brave enough, (or stupid enough) , to take Osama's place.

Wrong thread
edit