It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

France declares war against al-Qaida

page: 5
10
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by bruxfinn
 


It’s not if you read my original post you might know why, they are not declaring war against Al’Qa’ida they are talking about AQIM. These are just some tough words from the French against a old enemy, the war on terrorism is not in its final weeks for the war on terrorism cannot be won.




posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by bruxfinn
 


It’s not if you read my original post you might know why, they are not declaring war against Al’Qa’ida they are talking about AQIM. These are just some tough words from the French against a old enemy, the war on terrorism is not in its final weeks for the war on terrorism cannot be won.


That's strange...I didn't think it was possible to declare war against just a branch of Al Qaeda. Learning is fun.

Cannot be won? I suppose that's what we will see...once you find out what is the enemy its easy to win.

I assure you...this article appearing when it did is EVIDENCE that this war can be won, even Al Qaeda knows this and that is why on the same day France's article appeared, Zawahri has heard on an audio tape rallying his forces for imminent victory.

I suppose the belief that this war cannot be won is a source of comfort for many people...false comfort...but comfort nevertheless.

The article's appearance was the response to a successful attack upon Al Qaeda's core. If Al Qaeda can be hit, they can be destroyed.



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 08:55 PM
link   
I just thought of a question. Does this mean they're taking over for the U.S? We ken goez hom now?



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 08:56 PM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 


Can't stop or kill an ideology with bombs and bullets? Makes sense to me!!! Always has.



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


And I suppose you think France, not the French, but France doesn't know this?

what you can do, however, is change the ideology, corrupt it and make it false. or expose it as false, when men cannot see.

This is the true nature of this War...Al Qaeda is an idea, an idea that many people subscribe to...an idea that isn't just thought but action. The idea has know been exposed to be not what it said it was and is something else.

and will collapse under the weight of its own lies.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 05:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by bruxfinn
But isn't that what makes this article unusual...France is ALREADY fighting Al Qaeda... and has been for quite some time.

Why a separate article ... reporting stronger language than the French usually use in international affaris.

Something has changed...this is a different situation. It seems obvious that if you fight Al Qaeda anywhere then you are fighting them everywhere, so this article carries a far deeper, more subtle intent.

This war is in its final weeks.


Maybe to divert from domestic affairs, there is a big scandal involving a french government member at the moment. Politics work in the same manner everywhere.

kevinunknown summed it up perfectly already, this jihadist organisation broke from the algerian Armed Islamic Group (GIA) in the late 90s and was first known as GSPC as stated in the article. I am not sure they "merged" with Al Qaeda but they use the brand name now.
France is fighting this organisation for years, in Algeria and for some time in Sahel. This group was targetting french interests already before 9/11.

Nothing new really, except it's more front news now. MSM loves Al Qaeda, it's like a candy. And you don't upset anyone.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 06:25 AM
link   
reply to post by bruxfinn
 


You cannot win the war on terrorism, you can win the war against Al’Qa’ida or against AQIM but not against terrorism. Therefore this war can never been in its final weeks, the only way it can end is if American and her allies admit that the war on terrorism is not really a war, unless you are in Obama’s inner circle there is no way you could possibly know that.

The MSM and politicians like to through phrases like “Al’Qa’Ida”, “Al’Qa’ida linked”, “Al’Qa’ida funded” and so on around allot. I hate these terms they are inaccurate and overtly simplistic, just because a group uses the franchise name and follows a similar ideology does not make them the Al’Qa’ida with Bin Laden sitting controlling everything with a Egyptian doctor by his side. For example i noticed you assumed in one of your earlier posts that the Somali group Al-Shabaab was basically “Al’Qa’ida in Africa” there are in fact several groups that could qualify as that, none of them are actually “Al’Qa’ida in Africa”. Ironically the group most closely resembling “Al’Qa’ida” in Africa is AQIM IMO.

I also noticed that you suggested to one member that you could somehow destroy the ideology of radical Islam. Simply put you can’t.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by kevinunknown
You cannot win the war on terrorism, you can win the war against Al’Qa’ida or against AQIM but not against terrorism.


You can win a war against terrorism.

The UK demonstrated this with the defeat of the Provisional IRA (PIRA), in that the objectives of PIRA were not obtained, while the British objectives were, that of peaceful political process. The British demonstrated to the terrorists that wanton killing was not working and (in fact) it was becoming rather dangerous being a member of the said terrorist group.

Clearly, some elements of the US were not happy that the British won, as they had been merrily funding them for years. Ho hum.

To win against terrorism per se is (I agree impossible) because there will always be a bunch of gullible losers who think that terrorising people (i.e. terrorism) through killing and maiming will achieve some political aim – or rather the aim of the puppet masters and their sycophants who profit from the twisted ideology which suggests that blowing innocent people up does some good.

Regards



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by paraphi
 


Brittan did not “win” the “war” the PIRA are still on the go, last time I checked the JTAC website they had Irish republicans listed as a threat. Whist the objectives were not achieved there are still groups in Ireland who seek independence. You can win a war against a terrorist group, but not a war against terrorism itself.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 


The Provisional IRA were part of the peace process and have decommissioned their arms. They were the military wing of the Sinn Fein who threw in their lot when it became clear the British would not roll over.

There are a few Irish groups on the list of proscribed organisations and are a legacy of a bygone age. They occasionally pop up and kill the odd person e.g. the Continuity IRA (CIRA), but seem to be fading away into obscurity with no coherent organisation to effectively tell anyone in authority that they have stopped, or that they have evolved into organised crime – thugs with guns.

Like I said. I agree that there will always be terrorists, but PIRA were defeated.

Regards

edit to correct typo

[edit on 29/7/2010 by paraphi]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 05:13 PM
link   
That's like declaring war with the Nazi's after they've invaded or settled in with you, a little late.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 05:28 PM
link   
I just watched Zeitgeist and the documentary said the name "al-Qaida" is a US software program for the CIA's dealings with Bin Laden during the Russian occupation of Afganistan.



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by kevinunknown
 


would you call somebody who is disgruntled about not having independance a terrorist , surely that would apply to most of the worlds population.
britain bought peace to northern ireland ,on that point they won . you will always have a few die hards who would dissaprove or try to carry on the fight . on a percentage per capita , how many want to carry on the fight , if they want to carry on the fight that means they have weapons and if they have weapons then they did'nt keep to there end of the deal . so if they cant be trusted why should they be allowed in parliment?



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 02:05 PM
link   
This is very good.

I don't support the "War on Terror". But, that said, killing innocent aid workers should be punished with extreme force, to deter any such behavior in the future - and if it happens again, then once again it should be punished with extreme force, until the day when those who would harm innocent people dare not do it anymore in fear of the terrible consequences and price of such actions.

I wish the French good luck in their efforts to crush those Al-Qaeda cockroaches. And may Allah have mercy on their souls, because quite honestly, this world won't.




top topics



 
10
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join