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.
#1 Ansar al-Sharia (Army of Sharia) has claimed responsibility as of a few hours ago.
Ansar al-Sharia is thought to be mainly comprised of former Al Q in the Arabian Peninsular (AQAP_ units who have 're-branded' subsequent to the elimination of some of AQAP's leadership.
Posted by Lord Garth 2012-05-21 09:34||
#2 Al Qaeda by a different spelling, just to keep the infidels confused.
Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2012-05-21 10:32||
#3 I think the terror business has reached a tipping point. All of those fledgling jihadists AQ was cultivating for their business are out there on their own and AQ doesn't have the leadership in place to hold the reins.
It is ironic, killing off the AQ leadership may actually make terrorism harder to control as it is now completely fragmented with splinter groups and lone wolfs out there plotting. All of those AQ websites that taught bomb making are still there and though no longer maintained, still have enough information to make a junior jihadi a walking weapon.
Posted by Bill Clinton 2012-05-21 10:39||
#4 Decentralized execution is a reality, but in the end, I believe "all terrorism is state sponsored" or at a minimum, permitted.
Like the The SS-Übungslager at Dachau, modern day terrorists have countries of origin and training centers. Identify the countries of origin and their training centers. Hold the sponsors or facilitators responsible or destroy them!
The law enforcement approach of hunting down individuals or "eaches" ignores ideological realities and harkens back to the failed "body count" methodologies of the past. Go after the hives, not the heads.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-05-21 11:05||
These mini Al Qaedas may get funding from individual Saudis, Kuwaitis, Egyptians, etc. but they, the mini AQs, are in fact enemies of the Saudi, Kuwaiti, etc. govt.
In some sense, the 'hive' of the mini AQs, is the Koran, the Sunna, the Hadith, the Tafsir, etc.
Posted by Lord Garth 2012-05-21 11:29||
Posted by ryuge 2012-05-21 13:24||
#7 I concur Lord Garth. I only wish we could escape the ideological denial and properly take them to task. Pick one, ...any one, and create an example.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-05-21 14:10||
#8 Pardon my naivete, but I'm trying to understand the logistics involved in one bomber with a suicide vest killing 90+ in one fell swoop. Even in a tightly packed formation I can't picture enough explosive power and projectiles (ball bearings, etc.) in one vest capable of inflicting this much lethality without some secondary detonations or some sort of single height advantage for the bomber to replicate an airburst...
This is just a layperson's observation, but I'd appreciate if someone in-the-know can testify to a single suicide bomber vest really containing enough lethality to kill 90+ in a single detonation and still be portable and concealable to wear under a uniform.
Posted by Dar 2012-05-21 14:58||
#9 Does he get 72 virgins???
Posted by M.leona 2012-05-21 17:08||
#10 Not at all naive, it is a good question.
Military grade or commercial explosives (non-home make explosives or HME), have a devasting amount of destructive power. Belted or "vested" charges of Plastic Composition-4 commonly referred to as C4, contain SEMTEX, PETN, and/or RDX. When "belted" and linked in series plastic explosives create a blast that turns the suicide bomber's body and anyone close to him.... bones, and everything else into deadly shrapnel. The vests can be packed with ball bearings or other penetrating objects as well. The fuel tanks of vehicles within the blast radius can also create secondary hazards, as can flying glass from shop windows. Hardened building, shops and offices tend to channelize the blast down streets and sidewalks creating an inferno of destruction. More info here.
Posted by Besoeker 2012-05-21 17:14||
#11 Decentralized execution is a reality, but in the end, I believe "all terrorism is state sponsored" or at a minimum, permitted.
I think it's hard to argue that the Saudi royals are sponsoring terrorists who want to rule Saudi Arabia (and indeed, all of Arabia) in their place. Note that Sayyid Qutb was an Egyptian. The imams with world-conquering ideologies have generally not been Saudi. That's not to say that Saudi citizens don't have these views - only that they are not tolerated by the Saudi royals, any more than Khomeini was tolerated by the Shah. Because imams with these ideologies don't just want to preach - they want to rule in place of whatever sovereigns are in power.
Posted by Zhang Fei 2012-05-21 19:58||