Al Qaeda Leader Al-Zawahiri killed by US Drone Strike

So the fact that they harbor terrorists that attack the US civilian population on US soil, outlaw school for women, treat girls and women as property, and rule through terror has nothing to do with our refusing to recognize them? duh, sometimes the crap you post is baffling

 

but it would have been an hour about what a great job he did and why he is so great and how lucky we are to have such a great man willing to lead us

 

Didn't we already kill this dude? Man some of these names start to blend in together...

 

I don't care who took this terrorist out, exterminating this rodent is great news. Biden and the CIA did a good thing for this world and should pat themselves on the back

 

Very different perspectives from the Soufan Center, which always does the best job on any such events of assessing the significance of such an action given world events

U.S. Kills Al-Qaeda Leader Ayman al-Zawahiri with Drone Strike in Afghanistan

Under Zawahiri’s leadership, al-Qaeda was able to remain a coherent organization, as he delegated autonomy to the branches, affiliates and franchise groups. Criticized as a ‘caretaker,’ Zawahiri was ruthlessly pragmatic and was able to help al-Qaeda weather the storm of the Arab Spring and subsequently, the rise of the Islamic State (ISIS).

Although al-Qaeda has been decimated over the years by personnel losses, including having ISIS poach large numbers of militants in various theaters where both organizations operated, Zawahiri stayed the course. Accordingly, he worked assiduously to cultivate ties with potential recruits more focused on local targets and motivated by parochial grievances in regions engulfed by civil war and insurgency. In both the Sahel and the Horn of Africa, al-Qaeda-linked jihadists have strengthened ties with the organization’s core leadership and remain responsive to its direction. There is also growing evidence that at least some of al-Qaeda’s franchises are once again attracting foreign fighters. The selection of al-Qaeda’s next leader will tell a great deal about the future plans of the organization. President Biden dedicated much of his speech yesterday evening to victims of the September 11attacks in the United States, noting that “My hope is that this decisive action will bring one more measure of closure,” and reciting a quotation from Virgil that marks the 9/11 Memorial in New York City: “No day shall erase you from the memory of time.”

and Spencer Ackerman, whose perspective on such matters goes against everything I hold dear, but always makes me think

First Impressions on the Execution of Ayman al-Zawahiri


It is true that Zawahiri, like bin Laden, like his other colleagues in al-Qaeda's 9/11 era leadership, chose violence and bear inescapable moral responsibility for murdering nearly 3000 of my neighbors here in New York. He used religion as a mechanism to justify violence and beatify the violent—you can find this all through his 2001 book Knights Under The Prophet's Banner. It's also worth noting that Biden's recent abject performance before Mohammed bin Salman, his declaration in Jerusalem that he is a Zionist, his cultivation of Abdul Fattah al-Sisi of Egypt, all prove Zawahiri a failure. America is in no substantive, material sense "out" of the Middle East despite his and his coconspirators’ attempts to drive it out with murder, or however useful that argument is in driving the U.S. closer to a war with Iran or facilitating the devastation of Yemen. Facing geopolitical competition from China, currently the U.S. seems desperate to recommit to the region, as cold wars recapitulate themselves. Zawahiri's life yielded, we can say with finality now, nothing beyond reactionary violence.

But the fact is that the United States indeed chose to respond to 9/11 with (1) a war; (2) across the globe; (3) unlimited by time (4) or by a specific definition of the enemy. All of these choices, and all of the human and constitutional carnage downstream of them, were made and ratified by U.S. policymakers. You can decide, if you are so inclined, that any of these choices are merited. But there was nothing inevitable about any of them. They are choices, particularly now that Zawahiri's killing takes away the final significant driver of 9/11, that the Biden administration continues to make, choices that have exposed the hollowness of Biden's pretensions to a U.S. regime that "protect the innocent, defend liberty, and we keep the light of freedom burning."

 

A what?

 

And the former president undoubtedly would have embellished the drone strike with a graphic description of how al-Zawahiri died as he did when he announced that al-Baghdadi was killed by the SEALs.

 

We have relations with the Saudis, all this stuff is completely arbitrary and selective.

 

or justice? And was he out of the terrorist business?

 

I have to agree taking out al-Zawahiri is a good thing.

What I have doubts about is Afghanistan as my assumption is al-Zawahiri was in Kabul under the protection of the Taliban. A man who has kept hidden up to this time doesn't appear suddenly out of nowhere without some assurances and protection.

This also raises the question of a reconstitution of al-Qaeda combined with Taliban support.

 

We were losing the equivalent of a 9/11 a day from COVID and people sort of shrugged their shoulders and went about their lives, sort of like no one knew we needed to get this guy because "justice" until we got him. This was revenge, lets not sugar coat it. America is a rogue nation and we get to kill who ever we want, that's how it works when you are the big bully of the world, not tied to any principles or international agreements, formal or informal.

 

You'll get no disagreement from me as to a declaration of war against a specific nation. The US declared a war against terrorism and terrorist groups where ever they reside. That's hegemony at it's ultimate peak. The question being is it the right approach as from a global perspective that opens the doors to a unilateral decision versus a diplomatic decision among nations.

For the moment the US feels safe in this approach what some do not realize is drones work on all fronts and I wouldn't be too surprised if we experience the same tactics coming to our shores.

 

Fear that fascism is coming to America and celebrating the president getting to kill whoever he wants is a hell of a mental juxtaposition.

 

Yes, we feel safe in doing it because our defense spending is vastly higher than anyone else's, there is no one and nothing to challenge us operating in this manner. We are not even bound by the agreements we have made ourselves with other nations, or our own stated principles. Our counter-terror tactics have already come home in many forms, so you are correct, the chickens always some home to roost.

 

Is it just me, or does it seem like we kill "Bin Laden's righthand man" every couple years?

 

That episode was called "balance of terror".

 

kill whoever he wants? get real for just a moment. There are a bunch of legal reviews on any of these targets before authorization is given

 

Oh, you think there were serious legal reviews when we assassinated that Iranian general? Literally an act of war that could result in unpredictable blowback, and it still happened. Even if there were the president still was like "so what, lets kill him." And we did. The president has a kill list and he can act on it.

 

He was referring to infrastructure, largely training camps and logistics. Has been his argument since 2009. He always reserved “over the horizon “ strikes like this one could be occasionally necessary.