Article

2008-01-16 Israel-Palestine-Jordan

Israeli troops kill Islamic Jihad leader

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by tipper 2008-01-16 02:28|| || Front Page|| [10 views ] Top
File under: Islamic Jihad

#1 6070 the number of people killed

So we are to presume that's maybe 70 really bad guys with RPG's in their hands and 6000 innocent women and children.

What about the adorable puppies, cute kitties, fluffy bunnies and baby ducks? You mean, nobody's counting them?

Posted by Bobby 2008-01-16 06:11|| 2008-01-16 06:11|| Front Page Top

#2 Sounds like a successfull hunt. Nice work lads.

Posted by Broadhead6 2008-01-16 09:50|| 2008-01-16 09:50|| Front Page Top

#3 Too many fluffy bunnies to count 'em all, Bobby.

Posted by Steve White">Steve White 2008-01-16 13:46|| 2008-01-16 13:46|| Front Page Top

#4 lol! Ruthless inline.

Posted by Whomong Guelph4611 2008-01-16 13:49|| 2008-01-16 13:49|| Front Page Top

#5 I understand they're 80% illiterate, that explains it.(No number teaching in the Koran, makes it 100%)

Posted by Redneck Jim 2008-01-16 14:36|| 2008-01-16 14:36|| Front Page Top

#6 How big a fish is this guy? Iwould think it's a big hit if he was the head of the "un-official" wing of IJ, but how many have we gone through over the years? I think at least a dozen. I'm actually suprised how Walid is. I didn't think anyone that old hadn't been helizapped.

Posted by Charles 2008-01-16 17:25|| 2008-01-16 17:25|| Front Page Top

#7 maybe it was supposed to be 60-70 and they typo'ed the number???

/sarc

Posted by Abu do you love 2008-01-16 19:21|| 2008-01-16 19:21|| Front Page Top

#8 You guys ever discuss the bigger issues instead of blabbering on about this or that specific incident only to opine inanely about it?

One of the secrets to your success is lack of context. That plays so well with many. Just incidents and blabbering about them.

Ever post articles challenging the very idea that a WOT is even intelligible?

I mean, do you really believe there is a WOT? I don't think you do. Not the smart ones anyway. The smart ones are just playing along with that ridiculous characterization.

P.S. Check out this. A VERY badly played moment in the "WOT". But you guys knew that too didn't you?:

How The Pentagon Planted a False Hormuz Story

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=40801

Posted by wakeupbeautiful 2008-01-16 20:52|| 2008-01-16 20:52|| Front Page Top

#9 wakeupbeautiful, if you are so highly intelligent, how come you don't know how to use grammer properly?

Posted by Whomong Guelph4611 2008-01-16 21:28|| 2008-01-16 21:28|| Front Page Top

#10 wakeup is a regular pro-iranian ~~stooge~~ tool. supporting a regime that regularly employs terrorism due to its' lack of military capacity

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2008-01-16 21:42|| 2008-01-16 21:42|| Front Page Top

#11 I agree w/wakeupdead. The WOT is not intelligible it should be called the War on Islamic-facism. Terror is just the tactic, the teachings of islam having inherent facist leanings ought to be the target (or at least those that preach such). Anyways, since we owe you pussies for 1979 I could really care less if Hormuz was a staged event (FTR it wasn't but lets not have facts get in the way). If it means a chance to have Short Round meet the man I'm game for that gig.

Posted by Broadhead6 2008-01-16 22:13|| 2008-01-16 22:13|| Front Page Top

#12 You guys ever discuss the bigger issues instead of blabbering on about this or that specific incident only to opine inanely about it?

Yes, but not in a public forum. Some of us do 'big picture' stuff for a living.

I mean, do you really believe there is a WOT? I don't think you do. Not the smart ones anyway. The smart ones are just playing along with that ridiculous characterization.

Depends what you mean by 'smart'. If you mean 'cynical' or 'of the correct political persuasion' or 'safely ensconced in Toronto', well, then of course one wouldn't.

Frankly, the word 'Terror' is overused. It could be termed a War on Fascist Islamism. IMNSHO, it's a War of the 'Worlds'. It's been going on for generations, not necessarily two cohesive groups of opponents, and some have dropped out or changed (like the Soviets, for instance). One could almost term it as the After-Effects of the Cold War.

Then again, given your diatribes, it's likely you don't believe that existed either.

Posted by Pappy 2008-01-16 22:42|| 2008-01-16 22:42|| Front Page Top

23:32 Alaska Paul
23:20 RD
22:59 Pappy
22:58 Pappy
22:48 Pappy
22:42 Pappy
22:37 Broadhead6
22:27 JosephMendiola
22:27 g(r)omgoru
22:26 Rex Mundi
22:25 Besoeker
22:25 JosephMendiola
22:24 3dc
22:22 Pappy
22:15 Bright Pebbles
22:15 Barbara Skolaut
22:14 JosephMendiola
22:13 Broadhead6
22:08 JosephMendiola
21:59 JosephMendiola
21:57 Zhang Fei
21:53 Ptah
21:42 Frank G
21:33 JosephMendiola