Slog
News & ArtsMonday, September 10, 2012
2012 The Most Dangerous Job in the World...
Posted by Paul Constant on Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 1:55 PM
...is being the number two man in Al Qaeda:
SAN'A, Yemen—An airstrike killed al Qaeda's No. 2 leader in Yemen along with five others traveling with him in one car Monday, senior Yemeni Defense Ministry officials reported. If confirmed, Saad al-Shehri's death would be a blow to the militant group.
The officials said the missile that killed Mr. al-Shehri, a Saudi national, was believed to have been fired by a U.S. operated drone, but that couldn't immediately be confirmed. The U.S. doesn't usually comment on such attacks although it has used drones in the past to go after al Qaeda members in Yemen.
Something I just noticed yesterday is that the last of the three presidential debates scheduled just before the election will be about foreign policy. That's gonna be a tough one for Romney.
1
If Romney's meetings are all going to be with Al Qaeda leaders, then his presidency will probably be a foreign policy success.
3
Abu: Jamal! Good news!
Jamal: What? Really?
Abu: Top management and I have been talking and you have been promoted to NUMBER TWO!
Jamal: Uhhhhhh... I...
Abu: Now. Don't be modest. All that after hours work around the cave has been noticed. The "Infidels R 4 Xploding" decal designs you did for our suicide vests were very popular.
Jamal: But... I'm just the graphic designer.
Abu: And a very good one. You tight kerning and eye for color has been invaluable to morale. Now, you're NUMBER TWO!
Jamal: I thought Khalid was...
Abu: No. He has been martyred by the infidels while washing the van, may the prophet curse them. The van was total loss.
Jamal: I think I'll pass.
Abu: You sure? It's 17 extra shekels a week?
Jamal: Pass. Why don't you take...
Abu: Nooooo. No. No. No. No. Noooooo-oh.
Jamal: Yeah.
Abu: HEY! Atiyah! Guess what? Good news! you've been promoted...
Jamal: What? Really?
Abu: Top management and I have been talking and you have been promoted to NUMBER TWO!
Jamal: Uhhhhhh... I...
Abu: Now. Don't be modest. All that after hours work around the cave has been noticed. The "Infidels R 4 Xploding" decal designs you did for our suicide vests were very popular.
Jamal: But... I'm just the graphic designer.
Abu: And a very good one. You tight kerning and eye for color has been invaluable to morale. Now, you're NUMBER TWO!
Jamal: I thought Khalid was...
Abu: No. He has been martyred by the infidels while washing the van, may the prophet curse them. The van was total loss.
Jamal: I think I'll pass.
Abu: You sure? It's 17 extra shekels a week?
Jamal: Pass. Why don't you take...
Abu: Nooooo. No. No. No. No. Noooooo-oh.
Jamal: Yeah.
Abu: HEY! Atiyah! Guess what? Good news! you've been promoted...
6
I'd like to hear Romney's answer to how he expects to be an effective Commander In Chief when he dodged the draft on religious grounds. If he believes military service to be morally unacceptable, how can he ask others to that which he believes is immoral?
7
If Romney were smart and publicly opposed assassination (he hasn't), he could ask Obama if it's better than torture under the Constitution and international law.
8
@6 Well, he could just say that he'd make it US policy to never instigate war. Like @2 said. That should go over well with the GOP.
9
@8: Regardless of who instigates the war, you know none of his five sons will ever serve, on religious grounds.
Plus, all that Iran saber-rattling works against the "never instigating war" tack.
Plus, all that Iran saber-rattling works against the "never instigating war" tack.
10
In 2008, Obama promised this is what he'd do and what McCain said he would not do. Obama has been extremely effective in taking out terrorists. Why would we want to stop now?
11
@9 He'll never get asked that question. Don't we wish?
So are we all, as liberals (those of us who are), okay with drone strikes? Or assassinations, really; let's call 'em what they are.
I am, I guess, if they're taking out people who are trying to blow us up. But does that mean that I'm okay, by precedence, with Israel's assassinations of Palestinian leaders? Or of Salvador Allende and any head of state we don't like?
Would it have been okay to assassinate Hitler or the local military leadership that carried out the Rwandan genocide?
I feel like it should almost be a popular-vote thing, like American Idol. "Which of these leaders should be the next target? Call now and let your voice be heard!"
It kind of resembles a mob more than a formal agreement among parties.
So are we all, as liberals (those of us who are), okay with drone strikes? Or assassinations, really; let's call 'em what they are.
I am, I guess, if they're taking out people who are trying to blow us up. But does that mean that I'm okay, by precedence, with Israel's assassinations of Palestinian leaders? Or of Salvador Allende and any head of state we don't like?
Would it have been okay to assassinate Hitler or the local military leadership that carried out the Rwandan genocide?
I feel like it should almost be a popular-vote thing, like American Idol. "Which of these leaders should be the next target? Call now and let your voice be heard!"
It kind of resembles a mob more than a formal agreement among parties.
12
@11 Yeah, it's a tough issue. It's easier to justify if we're killing leaders of a terrorist group. A bit tricker if we're going after the leader of a country. Add in the democratically elected leader of a country, and it would take a huge threat for most of us to feel good about it.
13
As a liberal I'm not okay with extrajudicial killing - a term which I'm using not to gloss over the ugly word "assassination" but to emphasize the absence of accountability, rules of evidence, right to a fair trial, etc.
But as a realist, I have to reluctantly admit that it's better than the previous method of trying to prevent terrorism through unprovoked war on nations that may or may not harbor some number of terrorists.
And it appears as if the choice before voters now is between unprovoked war plus drone strikes or just drone strikes.
So are we all, as liberals (those of us who are), okay with drone strikes?
As a liberal I'm not okay with extrajudicial killing - a term which I'm using not to gloss over the ugly word "assassination" but to emphasize the absence of accountability, rules of evidence, right to a fair trial, etc.
But as a realist, I have to reluctantly admit that it's better than the previous method of trying to prevent terrorism through unprovoked war on nations that may or may not harbor some number of terrorists.
And it appears as if the choice before voters now is between unprovoked war plus drone strikes or just drone strikes.
15
(caveat - I'm ok with drone strikes in Yemen, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, quite frankly - but then I've been shot at)
16
I'm with @13. If the alternative to these (probably illegal) drone strikes is a legal war like we had in Iraq, where 100,000 civilians were killed, bring on the drones.
17
I don't really have a problem with surgical military airstrikes against designated combatants in hostile territory. War is war, soldiers die, and we're at war with Al-Quaeda. This is not strictly limited to front line war fighters directly under arms. It also applies to staff officers, propaganda guys, what have you.
I think Obama's displayed remarkably good judgement about when where and who we send Droney the Friendly Robot Murder Plane to pay a little visit to.
I think Obama's displayed remarkably good judgement about when where and who we send Droney the Friendly Robot Murder Plane to pay a little visit to.
18
I don't think we're going to get a third debate. I think there's going to be so much blood, tears, and shit spilled when Unterseebootfüherer von Romneypants gets up thinking he's going to debate the Kenyan-born, teleprompter-dependant stuffed suit they've been prepping him for that he won't come back for Round 2, much less Round 3.
I'm actually beginning to think that this erection cycle may be a desperate attempt from within to save the GOP. They convince their heavy hitters and up and comers to stay out of this one, ramp up the crazy so hard that Williyard Mittgingfjord von Romneypants actually looks like the least of all probable evils, and use his fuckening in November to justify a long, broad, slow tack to the left.
I'm actually beginning to think that this erection cycle may be a desperate attempt from within to save the GOP. They convince their heavy hitters and up and comers to stay out of this one, ramp up the crazy so hard that Williyard Mittgingfjord von Romneypants actually looks like the least of all probable evils, and use his fuckening in November to justify a long, broad, slow tack to the left.
20
Re: ethics of drone attacks. If anyone listens to podcasts, I highly recommend this episode of Hardcore History. Yeah, it's 2.5 hours long, but it really goes into detail about strategy behind warfare when we stepped from land battles to air strikes.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
GOP Congressman: We Have to Ban Abortion Because Fetuses Are Masturbating In There by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: The Tell-Tale Handjob by Dan Savage
-
Foie Gras Tastes Like Cat Food by Callan Berry
-
Cap Hill Is Becoming a Little Like What? by Charles Mudede
-
SL Letter of the Day: Let Me Think... by Dan Savage
-
Pizza Update: Breaking the 5-Minute Barrier by Goldy
-
President Obama Says NSA Spying Is "Transparent" by Paul Constant
-
The Wednesday Morning News by Goldy
-
Less Than a Quarter of Americans Have Confidence in Newspapers by Eli Sanders
-
Jobs-Killing Socialism Drives Seattle's Unemployment Rate Down to 4.7 Percent by Goldy
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (20) RSS