PDA

View Full Version : Number Two "Al-Qaeda of Iraq" Man Shot Dead by US Troops



Nickdfresh
09-27-2005, 08:31 AM
Zarqawi's No. 2 shot dead in Baghdad operation

By Luke Baker
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The second-in-command of al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Azzam, was shot dead in Baghdad this week, the U.S. military said on Tuesday, dealing a potentially powerful blow to the group at the heart of Iraq's insurgency.

U.S. and Iraqi forces tracked Azzam, a right-hand man to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the most-wanted man in Iraq, to a high-rise Baghdad apartment building where he was shot early on Sunday, U.S. military spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Steve Boylan said.

"We had a tip from an Iraqi citizen that led us to him," Boylan said. "We've been tracking him for a while."

The death may mark progress against militants but attacks continued unabated. A suicide bomber blew himself up among a crowd of Iraqi police recruits north of Baghdad on Tuesday, killing at least 10 and wounding around 30, police said.

Azzam is believed to have commanded day-to-day operations in Baghdad and other cities, while also financing attacks and the passage of militants into Iraq from neighboring countries. He was also a religious adviser to Zarqawi, Boylan said.

Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari was expected to give more details at a news conference scheduled for 1100 GMT.

It is not known what nationality Azzam was, or whether he was alone when killed. The U.S. military said he had claimed responsibility in the past for killing a member of Iraq's former Governing Council, and the governor of the city of Mosul.

His death follows the capture or killing of several associates of Zarqawi's in recent months, including a driver and several junior commanders, that have led U.S. forces to believe they may be closing in on Zarqawi himself.

Zarqawi, a Jordanian, is allied to Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda network. His group has claimed many of the deadliest attacks in Iraq, and recently pledged "all-out war" against Iraq's majority Shi'ite population, an effort to provoke civil war and drive the country further into chaos.

U.S. and Iraqi officials have warned of more violence in the run-up to a referendum on a new constitution on October 15, when voters are expected to say "Yes" to a document drawn up by the Shi'ite- and Kurdish-led government over Sunni Arab objections.

Washington has offered a $25 million bounty for Zarqawi, who is believed to be hiding out in western Iraq.

Boylan said he was not sure how much intelligence was gathered at the site where Azzam was shot, but said either way the operation was a blow to the operations of al Qaeda in Iraq.

"This shows that we are actively going after the network. We've taken down the number two in the network and that is going to have an impact," he said. "And whoever replaces him as number two, we will go after him as well."

Sheikh Abdullah Abu Azzam was also known as the Emir of Anbar, the province west of Baghdad that has been the heartland of the Sunni Arab insurgency. A $50,000 reward was on offer for information leading to his death or capture.

BAQUBA BOMBER

While the U.S. military was upbeat about Azzam's killing, the capture or death of suspected militant commanders has not always led to a decline in attacks in the past.

In Baquba, 65 kms (40 miles) north of Baghdad, a suicide bomber strapped with explosives mingled among a crowd of hundreds of police recruits in the center of town and blew himself up, killing at least 10 and wounding 26.

Police said the death toll was expected to rise.

The bomber approached the police station on foot, dressed in black and making no attempt to conceal his suicide vest, Specialist Jeff Young of the U.S. military told Reuters.

Young, speaking from the U.S.-Iraqi Joint Coordination Center in Diyala province, said the police station normally recruited trainees twice a month. The recruits usually formed a long queue on a busy road in the town.

Iraqi police and army recruits are a frequent target of guerrillas determined to destroy U.S. and Iraqi government attempts to build up security forces to tackle the insurgency.

There were other attacks around the country. In Baghdad, gunmen fired on a convoy of Iraqi police vehicles taking detainees to Abu Ghraib prison, killing two and wounding 12, among them police and detainees, the Interior Ministry said.

Attacks have been building in the run up to the constitution referendum, which threatens to divide the country along sectarian lines, with Sunni Arabs strongly opposed to many elements in the document, and Shi'ites and Kurds lined up on the other side of the debate.

Tensions are also expected to be running high come October 15 since the referendum falls just four days before Saddam Hussein is due to go on trial for crimes against humanity in connection with the death of around 150 Shi'ite men in a village north of Baghdad following a failed assassination in 1982.

(Additional reporting by Waleed Ibrahim, Mussab al-Khairalla, Sebastian Alison and Mohammed Ramahi in Baghdad and Faris al-Mehdawi in Baquba)
09/27/05 06:00

http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/default.jsp

© Copyright Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved. The information contained In this news report may not be published, broadcast or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of Reuters Ltd.

Nickdfresh
09-27-2005, 08:39 AM
Regardless of what I think of this war, I hope it was painful for the cunt...

BigBadBrian
09-27-2005, 08:46 AM
How can an imaginary terrorist that many think is already dead have a number two? ;)

Hardrock69
09-27-2005, 09:49 AM
Well, I agree with the sentiment, but it said number 2 in Iraq, so I guess that makes him No.3?

:confused:

Nickdfresh
09-27-2005, 10:29 AM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
How can an imaginary terrorist that many think is already dead have a number two? ;)

You can post to FORD directly you know...

Phil theStalker
09-27-2005, 12:06 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Regardless of what I think of this war, I hope it was painful for the cunt... Hey Nick,

They kill these guys MULITPLE times.

Remember "Chemical Ali"?

They killed him 3 or 4 times.


:spank:

FORD
09-27-2005, 12:07 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
How can an imaginary terrorist that many think is already dead have a number two? ;)

Since every "Al Qaeda terraist" they claim to kill or capture is either "#2" or "#3", it's obvious that they can make up whatever story they want, knowing that sheep like yourself will never question the holes in the story.

There may very well have been some guy named Assam who was involved with Iraqis opposed to the occupation. But that doesn't mean he was the sidekick of a computer generated composite sketch with more legs than an octopus and more lives than a cat.

Phil theStalker
09-27-2005, 12:16 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Since every "Al Qaeda terraist" they claim to kill or capture is either "#2" or "#3", it's obvious that they can make up whatever story they want, knowing that sheep like yourself will never question the holes in the story.

There may very well have been some guy named Assam who was involved with Iraqis opposed to the occupation. But that doesn't mean he was the sidekick of a computer generated composite sketch with more legs than an octopus and more lives than a cat.
Yeh, that's like saying there was somebody named Smith involved with American opposed to the occupation by the Redcoats.

It's PROFOUND how individuals in both of these two groups thought it was their country at the same fucking time.

Exactly like what's going on t2oday in American and Iraq.

The more things seem t2o change the more they stay the fucking same.:cool:


:spank:

Phil theStalker
09-27-2005, 12:34 PM
Who's country is it?

We're aboot t2o find out definitively.

No tie.

Globalism is a system to make profits regardless of human rights (just LOOK at Red China).


Nationalism is a system to protect rights not corporate international (global) profits.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/china/story/0,7369,1568622,00.html <----Sept. 13, 2005!
(Do you want profits and jobs at all costs?)

When it comes to the human race, are you a globalist or a nationalist?


Now you know.

Globalism is spreading.

What are YOU going t2o do about tit?

Bef4ore it eats you and/or your childrens, childrens, childrens children.

A race of builder slaves building the rockets to go out into wealth and the bounty of the solar system first, and then the universe beyond, being ruled by a global corporate elite and bankers.

Yep, what a brave new werld we have here.

Sounds like the same old Rockefeller and turn of the last century trusts and monopolies applied to the whole human race FOREVER.

That's all.


:spank:


DAVID ROCKEFELLER
Happy Halloween

Phil theStalker
09-27-2005, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by Phil theStalker
A race of builder slaves building the rockets to go out into wealth and the bounty of the solar system first, and then the universe beyond, being ruled by a global corporate elite and bankers.
Didn't we have this bef4ore with the pharohs and their priests?

It didn't werk.

Someboody tell dat t2o king David.

And those 'red shield' clowns, t2oo.


:spank:

Phil theStalker
09-27-2005, 12:42 PM
Yeh.


:spank:

ODShowtime
09-27-2005, 09:07 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
How can an imaginary terrorist that many think is already dead have a number two? ;)

who told you he was number 2? ;)

Big Train
09-28-2005, 01:48 AM
I'll take any number out of a hat and be fine with it...

Hardrock69
09-28-2005, 02:23 AM
As long as the asshole is dead who cares what number he is...one less terrist

Cathedral
09-28-2005, 11:33 AM
Incidentally, there will always be a number one, two, three etc.

Why you ask?
because for every one that gets killed or captured, they are replaced by another.

Don't get hung up on the numbers here, unless it is the number one because the point is, there is "one" less islamic asshole that can wage an attack on inocent unsuspecting people.

This is a victory, though small, it's still a victory for the world population.

Cathedral
09-28-2005, 11:46 AM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Regardless of what I think of this war, I hope it was painful for the cunt...

Oh c'mon Nick, just jump into the water already, lol.
You can support the war in the name of the Iraqi's without supporting this Administrations agenda.

That's what i do. I've been clear on why i support it since the beginning and if a Democrat wins in '08 they will surely clean up whatever mess Bush leaves behind.

Think about the future, and think about a free Iraq long after Bush has gone.
He's just a means to an end that i feel should have come a long time ago.

FORD
09-28-2005, 03:08 PM
Originally posted by Cathedral


Think about the future, and think about a free Iraq long after Bush has gone.
He's just a means to an end that i feel should have come a long time ago.

Do you REALLY believe that Iraq is going to be a "democracy"??

It's obvious what direction things are going over there, and I warned of exactly this before the invasion started.

Iraq is similar to what Yugoslavia was, with three different nationalitites forced into an artificial country, created by someone else. Yugoslavia was a construction of the Soviet Union, Iraq was a construction of the British Empire, for the convenience of oil companies.

And just as the Iron Curtain kept the Serbs, Croats, Bosnians, etc at bay, so did Saddam Hussein keep the Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites in their own corners.

Brutal dictatorships, perhaps, but stable ones. And especially in the case of Iraq, a secular dictatorship that was not about to fall into the hands of Islamic extremism.

So now you can either continue to force one country, with one group in charge and the other two hating them for it, which will bring civil war.

Or you can split it into three countries. Which will strengthen Iran, who will annex the Shia territory (officially or otherwise). Meanwhile the Kurds will decide that their newly independent state needs to be a bit bigger and try to take part of Turkey. And the middle part, under the Sunnis, might just put the Baathists back in power.

When all is said and done, it will be obvious that Saddam Hussein, contained to the middle 1/3 of his own country, just might have been the least problematic option after all.

Warham
09-28-2005, 04:18 PM
As long as it's stable, who cares how brutal it is, right?

:rolleyes:

Cathedral
09-28-2005, 04:54 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Do you REALLY believe that Iraq is going to be a "democracy"??

It's obvious what direction things are going over there, and I warned of exactly this before the invasion started.

Iraq is similar to what Yugoslavia was, with three different nationalitites forced into an artificial country, created by someone else. Yugoslavia was a construction of the Soviet Union, Iraq was a construction of the British Empire, for the convenience of oil companies.

And just as the Iron Curtain kept the Serbs, Croats, Bosnians, etc at bay, so did Saddam Hussein keep the Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites in their own corners.

Brutal dictatorships, perhaps, but stable ones. And especially in the case of Iraq, a secular dictatorship that was not about to fall into the hands of Islamic extremism.

So now you can either continue to force one country, with one group in charge and the other two hating them for it, which will bring civil war.

Or you can split it into three countries. Which will strengthen Iran, who will annex the Shia territory (officially or otherwise). Meanwhile the Kurds will decide that their newly independent state needs to be a bit bigger and try to take part of Turkey. And the middle part, under the Sunnis, might just put the Baathists back in power.

When all is said and done, it will be obvious that Saddam Hussein, contained to the middle 1/3 of his own country, just might have been the least problematic option after all.

I remain optomistic about it.
Ford, the number one reason the citizens of brutal dictatorships hate the US is because the US has the power to end their tyranny but rarely ever has.

Instead, the US makes deals with them, just like Osama and Hussein in the 80's. just like communist China today....you get the picture i'm sure.
I feel as though we as a nation are somewhat responsible for the horrors so many people experience in those countries since we have the power to do something about it, but do nothing.

Unfortunately, I also feel i live in a dream world because greed will always over ride the moral good in this God foresaken world.

So, i'm optomistic that something good will come from all of this.
When our troops speak of the good thy are doing over there, this is basically the framework of what they believe they are fighting for.

It's for these reasons that i don't like the way dissenters protest this war. The protesting is fine, it's the methods i am against.

Maybe i'm wrong, but i do believe in the Iraqi's and i hope they take the ball and score.
And if it doesn't stick and the place falls back under tyranny, at least they had a chance.
Bush's policy will only be relevent for 3 more years, we should be thinking beyond that where Iraq is concerned...and take our fucking country back from the Corporations in the meantime.

Tom DeLay is about to get his if we're lucky, and that's a step in the right direction.
But there are more people that need to be held responsible for their crimes....we just need the proof to get those balls rolling too, and get them out of Washington.

ODShowtime
09-29-2005, 08:01 AM
Originally posted by Warham
As long as it's stable, who cares how brutal it is, right?

:rolleyes:

The brutality of a regime has never influenced our decisions in the past. You shouldn't roll at eyes at someone when you don't know what you're talking about. :rolleyes:

BigBadBrian
09-29-2005, 08:18 AM
Originally posted by ODShowtime
The brutality of a regime has never influenced our decisions in the past. You shouldn't roll at eyes at someone when you don't know what you're talking about. :rolleyes:

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Warham
09-29-2005, 08:22 AM
hehe

Nickdfresh
09-29-2005, 11:32 AM
Originally posted by Cathedral
Oh c'mon Nick, just jump into the water already, lol.
You can support the war in the name of the Iraqi's without supporting this Administrations agenda.

That's what i do. I've been clear on why i support it since the beginning and if a Democrat wins in '08 they will surely clean up whatever mess Bush leaves behind.

Think about the future, and think about a free Iraq long after Bush has gone.
He's just a means to an end that i feel should have come a long time ago.

I dunno' CAT...I think we're taking sides in a civil war whose flames are being stoked by some al Qaeda of Iraq stooges there to take advantage of the mayhem created by the invasion. It almost seems to be an ever increasingly replay of VIETNAM, with us supporting the more spineless of the factions as we are pursuing a policy of "SHIITIZATION" of the conflict...

ODShowtime
09-29-2005, 08:22 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Go ahead and name me one military action we've taken with the express purpose of liberating people. At least in the last 100 years. I'll check back in a couple weeks and see how you're doing.



:rolleyes: