|
Post by Dane on May 6, 2011 11:07:19 GMT -5
@crom
Bergen, Peter (2006). The Osama bin Laden I Know: An Oral History of al Qaeda's Leader (2nd ed.).
Might want to look into that one. Or a quick google search.
I said I thought it was significant. You don't have to agree, but the rest of the world seems to think so too, since it's news. If you don't thats fine but you'll have to give reasons for it.
If he didn't have any information (which you're suggesting), why would he have 12 hard drives and hundreds of usb sticks?
Also, for future reference. I'm sick of you talking down to people as if they know nothing while providing no evidence or information of any sort yourself. If you're such an expert start stating facts instead of talking crap. I'll be the first to admit that I don't know everything about terrorism or al-Qaeda but to say it's not significant is a bit ignorant. How important something is varies from person to person. I'm sure to the families of 9/11 victims it's extremely important. Others might not care so much.
In the context of how al-Qaeda is run, it might not change their day to day operations but he was a very important person for them. Whether you think so or not is fairly irrelevant.
Unless you're suggesting they aren't terrorists I really don't know where you're trying to go with this. I really don't care what you think you know on the subject. Al-Qaeda have claimed responsibility for acts of terrorism. That makes them terrorists. We're not talking about something that is up for interpretation.
|
|
|
Post by Crom-Cruach on May 6, 2011 11:35:21 GMT -5
Bergen, Peter (2006). The Osama bin Laden I Know: An Oral History of al Qaeda's Leader (2nd ed.). I'd suggest you look into the history of the Mujahiddeen, and particularly Abdullah Yusuf Azzam, whom was Ossama's mentor. A major figure in Islamic based terrorism as well Soviet history in Afghanistan. Ossama's rise to prominence in such a context would never have happened without him and the network was already there. Saying he founded Al-Qaeda within this context is not very accurate. Since simply rose to power in an organizational structure that already existed before he became one of the central figures. taking in Peter Bergen as your only source is not advisable since the subject of terrorism is full of differing opinions. Plus his outlook neglects a lot of facts if he actually says Ossama is the founder and leader. If you don't thats fine but you'll have to give reasons for it. I never said the world doesn't think it's significant. I said it isn't actually significant. Ossama's death will have little impact on the ability of Al-Qaeda to operate or their activities They employ a loose structure of groups that thrive on their ability to keep functionning even if several others are taken out. Ossama's death won't stop them from being able to continue to carry out terrorist acts. If he didn't have any information (which you're suggesting) I didn't suggest he didn't have information. I'm saying the value of the information and whether it will stop Al-Qaeda (or other groups operating inside the network Al-Qaeda operates) from being able to continue is what people are wrong about. Also, for future reference. I'm sick of you talking down to people I haven't talked down to anyone here present (least of all you whom I have nothing but respect). And you can't argue that the loudest people talking about it aren't acting like morons (fox new anyone?) but to say it's not significant is a bit ignorant. No, it isn't because of the loose structure of how terrorism operates and how they hold and build power. How important something is varies from person to person. irrelevant to how actually important in terms of real impact it will have. People may believe it is important. Doesn't mean it actually is I'm sure to the families of 9/11 victims it's extremely important. And if they understood how Al-Qaeda operates they'd understand that his death won't solve the problem, avenge the death of their loved ones, or prevent more horrific acts like 9/11 (which I'll point out is 1 tragic incident, but not an isolated one) In the context of how al-Qaeda is run, it might not change their day to day operations but he was a very important person for them. Not really, what makes terrorist groups dangerous is fluidity. Everything is replaceable, everything can be rebuilt as long as there is a way. Most likely scenario, he'll be made a martyr and whatever group of more authoritative figures (in again a very large and loose network) will use this opportunity to readjust and change their operations. Ossama was never essential to the organization. And that's part of the problem and what makes Al-Qaeda scary. Unless you're suggesting they aren't terrorists They are terrorist, horrible terrorist. I never said or even implied otherwise. That is not even my point. My point is most people don't know how terrorism works, and why it manages to survive. And again chill dude. I never talked down to you. I just said I believed you were wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on May 6, 2011 11:56:47 GMT -5
Actually, kind of everywhere says he was the leader of al-Qaeda. I never said he founded their beliefs. But every source I can find says he was the organizational leader.
No, it won't stop them in the short-term but taking out their leadership will ensure they won't be issued with new missions. Of course Osama wasn't the only leader but if you keep taking out more and more, the soldiers won't know what to do. I think the larger issue you're getting at is why people are willing to go to these extreme lengths to begin with and that is the more worrying thing.
Maybe not. I mean none of us really know what was contained on those drives. They might have everything or nothing.
I'm sorry but it really does come across that way when you say things like "You really have no idea how terrorists operate right?". It's obvious that not everyone is particularly well informed, let alone our beloved associates at Fox News and their parent companies, who do a fantastic job. But people do the best they can of assessing the situation from the information they have. I think the problem they run into is when some media outlets try to report what they want people to hear and not what factually happened.
All I'm saying is Bin Laden's death is important to a lot of people. Not that Al-Qaeda is going to sink into the ocean.
Well, defeating terrorism is more than just killing one man. It may take decades if not centuries for this problem to go away.
To be totally honest, I never thought it would. I'm not an American. While 9/11 was really horrible, the Bali bombings were a lot closer to home for me and there have been even worse things in other places.
It is indeed. The scarier thing is that large countries harbor intolerant murderers.
Most people don't really want to study terrorism. They just want it to go away.
|
|
|
Post by Dane on May 6, 2011 11:59:34 GMT -5
On that note, I'm off to bed. It's like 3am or something.
Odinsleep for me z_Z
|
|
|
Post by Crom-Cruach on May 6, 2011 12:24:09 GMT -5
Actually, kind of everywhere says he was the leader of al-Qaeda. I never said he founded their beliefs. But every source I can find says he was the organizational leader. Which unfortunately isn't true, most of the organization and structure to what would become the core organization dubbed Al-Qaeda was already established at least 5 years before Ossama got a leadership position. That why I argue he wasn't. Abbdullah Yussef Assam is the on that made Al-Qaeda. And this is setting aside the larger problem that many groups identified to be Al-Qaeda are only members in the loosest of sense and some aren't even that and were actually founded by lesser known persons. but taking out their leadership will ensure they won't be issued with new missions. that is sadly untrue. The loose structure, control and varying lines of communication mean that most operations get planned and carried out with little oversight by people like Ossama. This is both for security (so if he gets caught, he can't spill the beans) and because the loose structure offers deniability on the international level which is useful to keeping up good will in the various communities where they are supported. I think the larger issue you're getting at is why people are willing to go to these extreme lengths to begin with and that is the more worrying thing. Yes and more. The larger problem is the pool where new adherents, money as well as support of various levels exist in a larger global problem where until those problems are solved, they will have an endless supply of new adherents and wealthy, competent new leaders ready to take the place of the ones that have been eliminated. Maybe not. I mean none of us really know what was contained on those drives. They might have everything or nothing. Al-Qaeda isn't run by morons and Ossama wasn't an idiot. He would never put everything with him, because he knows if he gets caught, he can;t afford to be the nail that destroys his holy war. Likely the info will be useful to track down a few cells and leaders. But that takes time, and by then the organization will have changed and be restructured (as if how these groups operate sadly) and these next leaders to fall will have lost important. It's like the hydra, cut off one head and 3 more grow. I'm sorry but it really does come across that way when you say things like "You really have no idea how terrorists operate right?". I'm sorry, perhaps I should have phrased that better then. I simply meant that I got the impression that there were some aspects of terrorism you really misunderstand. I didn't mean disrespect (although I concede rereading that it sounds that way and I should have phrased that better). The comment was a flippant way to ask you what you do know. No disrespect intended. But people do the best they can of assessing the situation from the information they have. I think the problem they run into is when some media outlets try to report what they want people to hear and not what factually happened. I think the problem runs deeper then this personally. I get this feeling that people are trying to force how they believe reality should be onto facts instead of really trying to understand the world around them. All I'm saying is Bin Laden's death is important to a lot of people. Not that Al-Qaeda is going to sink into the ocean. And I'm arguing that the importance of his death is being innacurately assessed by most and that is dangerous. Because it means a mistake might be made that might cost more lives. And that has to be prevented at all costs. Well, defeating terrorism is more than just killing one man. It may take decades if not centuries for this problem to go away. Violence won't make it go away. Violence is what creates terrorism. The real way to stop terrorism is to eliminate the conditions that foster the birth of extremism. In the communities where they recruit, terrorist thrive on their ability to provide exactly what will make them appealing to the people the live with. To be totally honest, I never thought it would. I'm not an American. While 9/11 was really horrible, the Bali bombings were a lot closer to home for me and there have been even worse things in other places. exactly. It is indeed. The scarier thing is that large countries harbor intolerant murderers. an important question that needs to be asked a lot more is why? What makes them attractive to so many people that they would protect them. That's what needs to be solved and stopped. So the number of allies they have will diminish and disappear. Most people don't really want to study terrorism. They just want it to go away. Knowledge is power, without knowledge you are powerless. Because you can't control something you don't understand.
|
|
Matezoide
Team Buster Ledger
Elephants!
Posts: 2,240
|
Post by Matezoide on May 7, 2011 7:55:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Crom-Cruach on May 7, 2011 16:47:14 GMT -5
LOOOL!
|
|
|
Post by Erik-El on May 7, 2011 20:04:03 GMT -5
LMAO.
|
|
|