Mossad Tied to 'Underwear Bomber'

Originally posted by osc121
Even geographically Yemen is an ideal launch pad for terrorism. It sits at the mouth of one of the busiest shipping lanes and leads directly to oil fields and political instability.

To the South the Somali Pirates, to the north the whole of the middle east boiling pot, a fantasticc location to become "middle men"

Terrorist in Yemen? Pirates in Somali?

Its just a matter of time before "boots are on the ground in Yemen , to

get those "nasty" terrorist.

Then , the big O will go after the "nasty " pirates, or more "terrorist in

Somali, after stabilizing those regions .....

The US will have control of the Gulf of Aden, one of the Busiest oil

routes in the world.

reply to post by ModernAcademia


A terrorist in my opinion wants to target the local population in hopes of forcing a political change whether it be religion or ideology. Similar to killing a doctor with anti-abortion agenda. Kill one scare a thousand. For example blowing up a marketplace in Pakistan because of Pakistans support of the U.S. or just being too pro-Western.

Originally posted by deltaboy
A terrorist in my opinion wants to target the local population in hopes of forcing a political change whether it be religion or ideology. Similar to killing a doctor with anti-abortion agenda. Kill one scare a thousand. For example blowing up a marketplace in Pakistan because of Pakistans support of the U.S. or just being too pro-Western.

Okay, better response than I thought

But in my opinion it's again the same thing.

There are terroists that target local populations maybe near embassies or ranks of the govt. when that govt. is a puppet govt.

I don't think it's similar to killing an anti-abortion doctor, but I see your point.

Bombs in a marketplace however I believe that to be covert ops of some sort.

reply to post by ModernAcademia


Bombs in marketplace can do wonders as well, it can also be a double edge sword. It scares the populace into forcing the govt. to appease to terrorists demands or it could turn the populace against the terrorists. Depends on how you use it effectively and the populations' response.

Originally posted by Sean48

Originally posted by osc121
Even geographically Yemen is an ideal launch pad for terrorism. It sits at the mouth of one of the busiest shipping lanes and leads directly to oil fields and political instability.

To the South the Somali Pirates, to the north the whole of the middle east boiling pot, a fantasticc location to become "middle men"

Terrorist in Yemen? Pirates in Somali?

Its just a matter of time before "boots are on the ground in Yemen , to

get those "nasty" terrorist.

Then , the big O will go after the "nasty " pirates, or more "terrorist in

Somali, after stabilizing those regions .....

The US will have control of the Gulf of Aden, one of the Busiest oil routes in the world.

Isn't that exactly what the Brits tried to in Aden and the Suez Crisis when they were trying to protect it's routes to the Empire?

I'm not advocating that the US would invade anywhere! just that there has always been instability in that particular region, well for the past century or so anyway. And wherever there's instability, insurgency follows.

If you conveniently forget the "Weapons of Mass Destruction" lies, and concentrate on pure terrorism , then there would probably more reasons to get involved in the Yemen rather than the stupidity in Iraq, both commercially and politically

thats a nice dots connecting

it makes perfect sense - US and Israel play like they arent in best relations on surface yet they outsource thier dirty work to israel so there is no paper trail or any witnesses or any gov agency ties.

thats how i see it.

To be honest for them to prove that terrorism is even possible in western countries they would like smuggle a nuke or something and not get caught...

there is already so much radiculous security on airports - why would terrorist wana blow up a plane? if he can easy get to US by mexican border and blow other things ...

thats just nonsense

Originally posted by deltaboy
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

Whos to say Yemen needs to be hub for flying first class. Look at Afghanistan. Think terrorists wanted Afghanistan as a hub for flying? Or just a place to train and spread their brand of Islam in Asia, as you said before Afghanistan is a key battleground for the fundamentalists even though its got very poor infrastructure for flying. Think of Yemen next to Saudi Arabia and other countries of the ME. Perhaps I should post a couple of videos of Saudi forces fighting in Yemen currently. Even they know that Yemen has become an important battleground to fight for.

First not only did I go to vocational school to study travel management but I spent over a decade working as a travel agent, agency manager and owner so I do know quite a bit about geography and the airline network.

Second Karachi functions as the main hub for Arab and Islamic insurgents going in and out of Afghanistan, not Kabul.

Second travel to Saudi Arabia is highly restricted by the Saudi Government. If you aren’t from Saudi the only permissible times to travel to Saudi Arabia is during Hajj the annual pilgrimage that all good Muslims are supposed to make once in their lifetimes to Mecca and Medina.

The rest of the time getting into Saudi Arabia requires a VISA personally issued by the Saudi Economic Minister.

Those are not easy to get by the way. The chances of Yemenis terrorists using Saudi Arabia as an air hub are extremely small.

The reason Pakistan is a hotbed is because of its better strategic location, extensive air roots and large on the ground network of Islamic fundamentalists complete with the largest stockpiles of an assortment of weaponry and computers in private hands ideal for fighting insurgent low intensity conflicts and terrorist actions.

Yemen really is not a center for Islamic Terrorism. It’s just the Zionists looking to extend more of their control over the vital Persian Gulf region. They had hoped to use Georgia and create a bridgehead to get to the Caspian from there that would put it directly across from Iran for naval landings and operations by carving out a small swath of the Russian Federation territory for that bridgehead but Putin shut that down in a hurry and dealt the MOSSAD, the CIA and Blackwater/XE a serious blow in the process.

Now strategically the next best place is Yemen.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


Did you even read my post? As I had said before why is Afghanistan the place where Islamic terrorists are fighting if Afghanistan has poor infrastructure to be even considered a flying hub as a logistics choice as you have mentioned in comparison to Yemen which is a poor country also. Why fight in Afghanistan if you are a terrorist? Why not just stay in Pakistan? If you are soooo intent on emphasizing on logistics area only just because its inconceivable for Yemen to be a place to fight because it has a sucky infrastructure for flying, seriously you should considered Yemen as more than a place to fight for than just logistics.

reply to post by deltaboy


Laugh out loud, I sure read your post by chance did you read my post or any newspaper since 1981 that demonstrates that the Wars in Afghanistan are run out of Pakistan that has excellent air-hubs?

Trying to help you out here DeltaBoy, your professors at College don’t have all the answers my friend.

It’s all about logistics, logistics, logistics, or as they say in the real estate business location, location, location.

The most extensive networks exist in Pakistan. The most extensive support structure exists in Pakistan. The people with the most expertise exist in Pakistan.

Easy to fly in and out of, everything a short little cab ride away once you get there.

ATS also happens to be a great place to learn things friend, not just teaching and preaching.

Thanks!

So let's all completely ignore the 1,400 year long Islamic Jihad that has been waged against all non-muslims. Toss out the vast quantities of historical records chronicling the rise and spread of Islamic Imperialism at the expense of indigenous cultures and people. Let's utterly disregard the military history of Europe and Asia where the blood of defenders and the souls of the innocent were taken by muslims spreading Islam.

We'll just close our eyes and turn our back on a vista of death and destruction spanning 14 centuries. We'll blame America and the Jews.

reply to post by mike_trivisonno


ummmmm
See even those opposed to your views won't mention the Byzantine Empire unless you force them too, but they won't start the topic.

Let's forget about the past, those 14oo years you speak of... too many were part of imperialism.

talk about today and you will find your points more focused and on-topic
my 2 cents

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
reply to post by mike_trivisonno

 

ummmmm
See even those opposed to your views won't mention the Byzantine Empire unless you force them too, but they won't start the topic.

Let's forget about the past, those 14oo years you speak of... too many were part of imperialism.

talk about today and you will find your points more focused and on-topic
my 2 cents

Wow. That is pretty callous. So when it is convenient, you spit on the dead. It's just easier that way isn't it?

Now's not the time to argue about who killed who. lol

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


I read your post very clearly, but you emphasis on logistics so much you never even considered the terrorists' objective for Yemen especially so close to Saudi Arabia and the rest of the ME. As I will repeat myself, why is Afghanistan being fought for? As a terrorist would you stay in one place? Is Yemen a good place to setup shop because you can cross the borders of Saudi Arabia and commit acts of terror? Oh by the way wasn't Yemen where Osama Bin Laden was born? Nah it can't be that important.

Anyways you notice that many Islamic terrorists are diverse which means what exactly? Yemenis or Egyptians or Saudis or Pakistanis, etc. Whats the trend here? Trying to think here, its soooo hard. It can't be conquest, its so UnIslamic. Overthrowing the countries? Nah thats impossible.

reply to post by mike_trivisonno


I agree with the OP

as well as disliking it when a thread is derailed

Originally posted by deltaboy
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

I read your post very clearly, but you emphasis on logistics so much you never even considered the terrorists' objective for Yemen especially so close to Saudi Arabia and the rest of the ME. As I will repeat myself, why is Afghanistan being fought for? As a terrorist would you stay in one place? Is Yemen a good place to setup shop because you can cross the borders of Saudi Arabia and commit acts of terror? Oh by the way wasn't Yemen where Osama Bin Laden was born? Nah it can't be that important.

Anyways you notice that many Islamic terrorists are diverse which means what exactly? Yemenis or Egyptians or Saudis or Pakistanis, etc. Whats the trend here? Trying to think here, its soooo hard. It can't be conquest, its so UnIslamic. Overthrowing the countries? Nah thats impossible.

They aren't terrorists. They are muslims spreading Islam through jihad. Same as it ever was.

All the intelligence and analysis in the world won't help unless the ideology that drives the system is defined. It is Islam that drives this system.

Originally posted by deltaboy
reply to post by ModernAcademia

 

Bombs in marketplace can do wonders as well, it can also be a double edge sword. It scares the populace into forcing the govt. to appease to terrorists demands or it could turn the populace against the terrorists. Depends on how you use it effectively and the populations' response.

No, there is only one outcome, the population will stand against the terrorists. Do you have one exemple in mind of the contrary ?
I can't find reasonable motives for some terrorist attacks (all of them are unaceptable of course !), the logic is missing.

reply to post by Manouche


Train explosions in Spain? In this case the Spanish people appeased. 9/11 the American people demand blood. Works either way.

reply to post by deltaboy


You won't get much sense out of ProtoplasmicTraveler. He's a condescending, Israel-obsessed fruit cake.

Good for a chuckle, though. A sinister, Zionist chuckle.

[evilchuckle1]

reply to post by deltaboy


Spaniards were strongly opposed to the war in Iraq from the beginning if that is what you are alluding to. I mean the people, not the rightist government of course.
It is speculated the PP had lost the elections because of the handling of the events, not the events in itself. Aznar tried to take advantage of the bombings by claiming that ETA were the authors because it was more favorable politically for his party. It quickly became apparent the governement was distorting the facts and lying and the people sanctionned it.
In polls, Spaniards were always massively against sending troops in Iraq. It's not the bombings that made them change their minds.

Originally posted by chips
reply to post by deltaboy

 

You won't get much sense out of ProtoplasmicTraveler. He's a condescending, Israel-obsessed fruit cake.

Good for a chuckle, though. A sinister, Zionist chuckle.

[evilchuckle1]

A "Israel-obsessed fruit cake" is much better/more original than the usual "anti-semite", "anti-Israel", "Jew hater", etc. crap that you're (we're) usually called!

On a serious note... I find ProtoplasmicTraveler to be neither condescending nor a fruit cake - just someone with a lot of knowledge and even more patience when it comes to supporting his arguments and responding to the shills (and non-shills) that he (we) deals with on a regular basis.

The world needs more people like him/her!


[edit on 13-1-2010 by SneakyB]

[edit on 13-1-2010 by SneakyB]