Al-Qaida Backs McCain as President

[1BiGG1]

I hope he wins too so he can exterminate this vermin plague and look very close at their friends in Iran while he is at it. Obama doesn't have the balls to do what is needed here I'm affraid ...

Al-Qaida-linked Web site backs McCain as president

WASHINGTON (AP) - Al-Qaida supporters suggested in a Web site message this week they would welcome a pre-election terror attack on the U.S. as a way to usher in a McCain presidency.

The message, posted Monday on the password-protected al-Hesbah Web site, said if al-Qaida wants to exhaust the United States militarily and economically, "impetuous" Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain is the better choice because he is more likely to continue the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"This requires presence of an impetuous American leader such as McCain, who pledged to continue the war till the last American soldier," the message said. "Then, al-Qaida will have to support McCain in the coming elections so that he continues the failing march of his predecessor, Bush."

SITE Intelligence Group, based in Bethesda, Md., monitors the Web site and translated the message.

"If al-Qaida carries out a big operation against American interests," the message said, "this act will be support of McCain because it will push the Americans deliberately to vote for McCain so that he takes revenge for them against al-Qaida. Al-Qaida then will succeed in exhausting America till its last year in it."

Mark Salter, a senior McCain adviser, said he had heard about the Web site chatter but had no immediate comment.

The message is credited to a frequent and apparently respected contributor named Muhammad Haafid. However, Haafid is not believed to have a direct affiliation with al-Qaida plans or knowledge of its operations, according to SITE.

SITE senior analyst Adam Raisman said this message caught SITE's attention because there has been little other chatter on the forums about the U.S. election.

SITE was struck by the message's detailed analysis—and apparent jubilation—about American financial woes.

"What we try to do is get the pulse of the jihadist community," Raisman said. "And it's about the financial crisis."

Al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden issued a videotape just four days before the 2004 U.S. presidential election directly addressing the American people.

 

[vince]

It makes sense that Al-Qaida would want a President that would followed the same failed strategies in Iraq and Afghanistan. They can continue to expand their membership and continue to hide in Pakistan.

Hasn't Obama not ruled out attacking Al-Qaida in Pakistan?

The last thing the terrorists want is for the US to get it's shit together under a strong leader.

 

[tripod]

Republicans need terrorism to win elections. Without 9/11 the Republican party would be fucking NOTHING but crooks and liars. Instead, the terror attacks allowed an opportunity for them to portray themselves as the true patriots of America... it was a clever ruse... kind of played out, but effective nonetheless.

In the absence of terror, the Republicans are seen as the crooks that they have always been.

What the Republicans need is a good ol' terror strike... they need to draw blood and for people to die in order for them to win. I am sure that we will get one in a week or so.

 

[B_starinvestor]

Republicans need terrorism to win elections. Without 9/11 the Republican party would be fucking NOTHING but crooks and liars. Instead, the terror attacks allowed an opportunity for them to portray themselves as the true patriots of America... it was a clever ruse... kind of played out, but effective nonetheless.

In the absence of terror, the Republicans are seen as the crooks that they have always been.

What the Republicans need is a good ol' terror strike... they need to draw blood and for people to die in order for them to win. I am sure that we will get one in a week or so.

Jezuz, Tri. That's pretty harsh.

 

[1BiGG1]

It makes sense that Al-Qaida would want a President that would followed the same failed strategies in Iraq and Afghanistan. They can continue to expand their membership and continue to hide in Pakistan.

Hasn't Obama not ruled out attacking Al-Qaida in Pakistan?

The last thing the terrorists want is for the US to get it's shit together under a strong leader.

I doubt the general population in Iraq or Afghanistan agrees with you on alleged “failed strategies” in fact, I’m certain it’s quite the opposite.

The extremist religious wacko’s have been expanding worldwide for quite some time and this has nothing to do with George Bush or anything he did = he is the reason there are fewer in power and that precedent needs furthering, not abandonment.

And no, Obama has not ruled out action in Pakistan last I heard.

 

[1BiGG1]

Jezuz, Tri. That's pretty harsh.

LOL! Not to mention alleging that republicans are any different in the “crooks and liars” department was good for a smile but maybe he’s running for Liberal-Apologist Poster Boy or something. :wink:

 

[MuscledHorse]

Anyone who even cares what a terrorist group thinks and allows them to sway his voting decisions is no longer an independent thinking person.

 

[D_Fiona_Farvel]

I doubt the general population in Iraq or Afghanistan agrees with you on alleged “failed strategies” in fact, I’m certain it’s quite the opposite.

The extremist religious wacko’s have been expanding worldwide for quite some time and this has nothing to do with George Bush or anything he did = he is the reason there are fewer in power and that precedent needs furthering, not abandonment.

And no, Obama has not ruled out action in Pakistan last I heard.

How are you certain? What are your sources?
From what I've read, and certainly in Afghanistan, where there are issues with famine and errant air strikes, your statement is not true. Even Seth Jones has admitted there is an issue of discontent with average Afghanis.

 

[D_Tintagel_Demondong]

Obama doesn't have the balls to do what is needed here I'm affraid ...

He's got the balls to end the futile war in Iraq (but likely stay in Afghanistan where the terrorists actually are), and save thousands of American and Iraqi lives. In fact, he should go over there and teabag Bin Laden to death.

It makes sense that Al-Qaida would want a President that would followed the same failed strategies in Iraq and Afghanistan. They can continue to expand their membership and continue to hide in Pakistan.

Hasn't Obama not ruled out attacking Al-Qaida in Pakistan?

The last thing the terrorists want is for the US to get it's shit together under a strong leader.

QFMFT.

This war that was was going to take a 'few months' is an embarrassment to America and it's military. Of course Al-Quida wants this farce to continue. They aren't getting any poorer or losing any ground, but the Coalition is spending $billions per month on this fiasco and getting nowhere.

 

[Skull Mason]

Anyone who even cares what a terrorist group thinks and allows them to sway his voting decisions is no longer an independent thinking person.

There are very few independent thinking persons left in this country to begin with.

 

[tripod]

Jezuz, Tri. That's pretty harsh.

It was probably the harshest thing I've ever said on this site... I agree that it was nasty... but that is how I feel most of the time.

There are very few independent thinking persons left in this country to begin with.

Yeah but... isn't truly independent thinking impossible unless we live in a vacuum?

 

[vince]

I doubt the general population in Iraq or Afghanistan agrees with you on alleged “failed strategies” in fact, I’m certain it’s quite the opposite.

The strategy in Afghanistan has not captured bin Ladin, the Taliban are resurgent, coalition soldiers are still dieing, opium production is up. Why? Because Bush and Co. took their eye off the ball decided to go after Saddam. Thereby diverting resources and out of the Afgan theatre and letting the enemy regroup. They continued to tolerate the pro-Taliban elements in the Pakistani goverment and security services.

Saddam and the Bathists were sworn enemies of religious fantic terrorists. Islamic fundamentalism was supressed in pre-war Iraq and the 911 commission found no crediable evidence of a connection between Al qaida and Saddam.

I shed no tears for Saddam. I am glad he is dead. But when it comes to the realpolitik of terrorism and the middle east, practical, rather than ideological notions should govern the actions of the west. We should have used and manipulated that SOB to our own ends.

But this has all been thrashed round and round here before and there is not much point in discussing it. Opinions are set in stone and won't change.

If Al Qaida is favoring McCain, then they must fear Obama more. Simple logic. They would rather have a stupid, erratic opponite than a smart one.

I won't be surprised at all to see an attack somewhere in the world in the next couple of weeks. I hope the dumbasses in the White House have the security forces on heighten alert.

 

[D_Tintagel_Demondong]

Republicans need terrorism to win elections. Without 9/11 the Republican party would be fucking NOTHING but crooks and liars. Instead, the terror attacks allowed an opportunity for them to portray themselves as the true patriots of America... it was a clever ruse... kind of played out, but effective nonetheless.

In the absence of terror, the Republicans are seen as the crooks that they have always been.

What the Republicans need is a good ol' terror strike... they need to draw blood and for people to die in order for them to win. I am sure that we will get one in a week or so.

I wrote pretty much the same thing about wagging the dog here:

http://www.lpsg.org/78933-the-war-in-iraq-4.html#post1314173

 

[1BiGG1]

How are you certain? What are your sources?
From what I've read, and certainly in Afghanistan, where there are issues with famine and errant air strikes, your statement is not true. Even Seth Jones has admitted there is an issue of discontent with average Afghanis.

Afghanistan is a wasteland that suffered far worse under the warring factions like the Taliban before NATO’s arrival. This is Afghanistan today …

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/afghanistan/afghan-survey2007.html

 

[trumasseur]

amazing how we sit around, half-a-world-away and think we have a friggin clue what life in Afghanistan, or any other country, is like day-to-day.
"we" love to pontificate based on narrowed vision and insistance that things are "just as we believe" "I saw this online or in other media" "I selectively chose these ideas to subscribe too..."
We should discuss things we actually know, not what we "think" or "convince" ourselves about....

 

[1BiGG1]

The strategy in Afghanistan has not captured bin Ladin, the Taliban are resurgent, coalition soldiers are still dieing, opium production is up. Why? Because Bush and Co. took their eye off the ball decided to go after Saddam. Thereby diverting resources and out of the Afgan theatre and letting the enemy regroup. They continued to tolerate the pro-Taliban elements in the Pakistani goverment and security services.

Bush & Co. did not “take their eye off the ball” in Afghanistan to go after Saddam. Afghanistan is a NATO controlled war and maybe we should be looking at NATO allies to pitch in a little more instead of letting the USA harbor most of the responsibility. Germany, France, Italy and Spain for instance do not allow their troops into combat zones leaving the dirty work for USA, British, Canadian, Danish and Dutch forces.

Summing this up saying we allowed the enemy to regroup is making a worldwide problem way too simple anyway. This war was never gonna end in Afghanistan or with bin Laden’s death.

Saddam and the Bathists were sworn enemies of religious fantic terrorists. Islamic fundamentalism was supressed in pre-war Iraq and the 911 commission found no crediable evidence of a connection between Al qaida and Saddam.

We attacked Saddam for a host of reasons including his continuous acts of war like shooting missiles at our jets in the no-fly zones. He also promised unadulterated access but hampered those efforts every chance he got like remember when he said the evidence showing he got rid of his WMD was lost when Clinton lobbed a few missiles he way? George did not believe Saddam and Saddam paid the price not furnishing that proof and for laughing in the faces of the many dead/maimed/injured American soldiers who paid him a visit the first two times after he attacked Kuwait.

I shed no tears for Saddam. I am glad he is dead. But when it comes to the realpolitik of terrorism and the middle east, practical, rather than ideological notions should govern the actions of the west. We should have used and manipulated that SOB to our own ends.

This goes beyond Saddam and Iraq. It’s no wonder we never got anywhere with the worthless UN enforcing anything against him when Russia and France along with a few others were doing dirty deals behind our backs.

But this has all been thrashed round and round here before and there is not much point in discussing it. Opinions are set in stone and won't change.

If Al Qaida is favoring McCain, then they must fear Obama more. Simple logic. They would rather have a stupid, erratic opponite than a smart one.

That’s not what the article said.

I won't be surprised at all to see an attack somewhere in the world in the next couple of weeks. I hope the dumbasses in the White House have the security forces on heighten alert.

They are not dumbasses in my mind and I think history will look favorably at them for their actions in the Middle East. If Japan had fucked US after WWII I think there’s a 99+% chance we would have paid them another visit and history would look favorable upon US if we did. The same will happen with Iraq as two-bit dictators and their crooked cohorts in the UN do not belong running the show.

 

[chosencock399]

I don't believe Al Qaida exist.

 

[vince]

bin Ladin is somewhere in the world thumbing his nose at the west and planning more attacks. Bush and Co. have failed to bring him to justice for Sept 11. Maybe they don't want to. Maybe they need an enemy so they can keep pouring contracts into their friend's defense businesses. I don't know. Without an enemy they are fucked.

You keep blaming Clinton. Or the UN or France or Russia. Or Motherfucking Goose, but never Cheney or Bush. Why is that?

That game can keep on going back further and further in history. Blame the Zionist's why not? Or the Brits. Or the Ottoman's. Or why not the Crusader's for losing thier wars and letting the arabs have Palestine.

They went into Iraq with too little force to control the situation. If MacArthur had tried to occupy Japan with a couple hundred thousand guys they just MAY have tried something in time. But you know what? He wasn't that stupid.

You are totally irrational and in deep denial Big. Face that facts man. Bush and Cheney and Rummy FUCKED UP. History will not absolve them.

They are leaving a hell of mess for President Obama to clean up.

 

[D_Fiona_Farvel]

Afghanistan is a wasteland that suffered far worse under the warring factions like the Taliban before NATO’s arrival. This is Afghanistan today …

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/afghanistan/afghan-survey2007.html

I'm sorry, but Afghanistan was far from a wasteland before the Taliban.
It was culturally rich, admittedly with a strong hierarchal society, however education and Westernism where the norm, including for women, in many provinces. Please read material on Sima Samar, Lila Abu-Lughod, and others who have a deep knowledge of life in Afghanistan beginning pre-Taliban.

Further, this is a reference for a slice of the current state of affairs in Afghanistan:
http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/110/Jon04022008.pdf

 

[B_cigarbabe]

amazing how we sit around, half-a-world-away and think we have a friggin clue what life in Afghanistan, or any other country, is like day-to-day.
"we" love to pontificate based on narrowed vision and insistance that things are "just as we believe" "I saw this online or in other media" "I selectively chose these ideas to subscribe too..."
We should discuss things we actually know, not what we "think" or "convince" ourselves about....

QFT!
Thank you and thanks Tripod,Vince and others for your astute vision of what is really going on in this country.
Hey Big 1 what about the religious and extremist's wackos in this country like good ole' Pat Buchanon and yourself who continue to support this failed,funky-assed president?
cigarbabe:saevil: