“The man is suspected of planning and directing terrorist operations that included the Jan. 5 attack at Manda Bay Airfield in Kenya that claimed the life of Spc. Henry ‘Mitch’ Mayfield Jr., 23, and two military contractors.”
Why are U.S. troops at Manda Bay Airfield? Are we stopping jihad activity in East Africa? If so, we’re not doing a very good job of it. These troops should come home, and new strategies should be formulated to contain the jihad threat.
“U.S. airstrike kills terrorist linked to death of Alabama-based soldier,” by Leada Gore, al.com, February 26, 2020:
A U.S. airstrike in Somalia killed the terrorist leader involved in a January attack that claimed the life of an Alabama-based soldier.
U.S. Africa Command said in a statement the Feb. 22 precision airstrikes near Saakow, Somalia killed the unnamed leader and his wife Both were known members of al-Shabaab, a terrorist group.
The man is suspected of planning and directing terrorist operations that included the Jan. 5 attack at Manda Bay Airfield in Kenya that claimed the life of Spc. Henry “Mitch” Mayfield Jr., 23, and two military contractors.
A resident of Illinois, Mayfield was stationed at Fort Rucker in Alabama where he was a member of the 1st Battalion, 58th Aviation Regiment, 164th Theater Airfield Operations Group.
“Since January 5, U.S. Africa Command and our partners have pursued those responsible for the attack on U.S. and Kenyan forces at Manda Bay,” said U.S. Army Gen. Stephen Townsend, commander, U.S. Africa Command. “This strike demonstrates that we will continue to relentlessly pursue those responsible for Manda Bay and those wishing to do harm to Americans and our African partners.”…
somehistory says
The next news article on this will be all about i omar and her condemnation of the killings of two terrorists in her home country…to which she is welcome to go.
Will she wait for tomorrow to spout her feelings or will she tweet tonight? Perhaps she knew these two personally and will say what great people they were, what heroes, etc.
gravenimage says
Likely so… I hope sane people just ignore this stealth JIhadist.
Old Fat Bald Socially Inept Ron says
al-Shabaab members get All-Sha-BOOMed?
Trick_or_Treat says
…al kebabed!
Savvy Kafir says
We should not have ANY boots on the ground in ANY Muslim countries, except for maybe a few stealthy special forces guys locating targets for airstrikes.
Our jihadi enemies should be bombed into submission, without wasting the lives of American or European soldiers in those god-forsaken lands.
Martin says
I agree. US drones strikes are far better than American boots on the ground in foreign lands, especially ungrateful Muslim lands. And NO “refugees” accepted, we can help them there.
elee says
I beg to differ. First, I dont think Kenya is considered a Muslim country just yet. Second I believe boots on the ground—-or at least drone bases—are the only way of protecting the innocent in any Third World countries, Muslim or otherwise. Oh and please note that Turkish bases have cropped up in Qatar and Somalia with boots on the ground at each. Ad note that, as a matter of history, the Indian Ocean was the site of multiple naval engagements long ago between two superpowers, Portugal and the Ottoman Empire, and that, but for Portugese blood and treasure, the worlds Muslim problem would be much worse in our time.
mortimer says
Simplistic solutions don’t work in a very complex world. Many countries want the military help. America and her NATO allies are the only group with the high ethical standards needed for military peace-keeping.
elee says
Given the brutal simplicity of Islam we dont need a paralysis of analysis. Stop the genocides first, enforce some human rights, incapacitate the evil. If Britain and France managed this for a couple of crucial centuries surely the best minds of NATO should at least try. The alternative is reading about Muslim massacres elsewhere until they come for us. IMHO and all…..if we dont act, simplistic solutions will work just fine for the Muslims.
gravenimage says
I disagree that only Western nations have the right to defend against Jihad.
Old Fat Bald Socially Inept Ron says
or any Muslim boots on the ground on any of ??‘s military bases.
If we had learned this after Fort Hood we could’ve prevented Pensacola’s recent Jihad attack.
What’s the definition of Insanity again, I believe we’ve forgotten.
gravenimage says
Grimly true, Ron.
Mary says
I read an article about the Turks shooting down Syrian planes. Can the west let them do away with each other, and then send the ones here over there to resettle?
gravenimage says
US airstrike takes out Muslim leader who masterminded murder of US soldier at Kenya airfield
………………
*Good*.
Trick_or_Treat says
??? Commendations again President Trump. You are doing far more about the pestilence of islam that’s infesting this world than that islamic apologist Obama ever did, or ever would. Hoping and praying none of these deplorable trash ever hold the reigns of US Government again.
Tricia Stuercke says
AMEN!
From your lips to God’s Ears!
Wellington says
A good thing because the only good Muslim terrorist is a dead Muslim terrorist.
But the greater problem remains, i.e., the West has not yet identified ALL OF ISLAM as the problem.
There is no good Islam. There are many Muslims who are not ready to enforce all the heinous dictates of Islam (e.g., death for apostasy) but this adds up to a lot of nothing. Such Muslims are useless. And ideology is key—and Islam’s ideology is a recipe for, let’s see here, the destruction of: 1) freedom; 2) equality under the law on this earth; 3) women’s rights; 4) a Golden Rule for all; 5) the life of the mind; 6) happiness.
Islam is dismal and of no benefit to mankind in any way whatsoever. Whatever good it contains (very little in my estimation) can be found elsewhere and yet it has much rot that is deuce difficult to find most anywhere else. So why should it be kept around at all?
Delenda est Islam. The only course.
Trick_or_Treat says
“There are many muslims who are not ready to enforce the heinous dictates of islam”
Oh, most of them are more than ready underneath their exterior wrapper, make no mistake about it, just give them the right conditions and oppertunity and they will kill you quicker than it takes to say ‘ali f**kin’ akbah’. Until then it remains a case of:
A ‘radical’ muslim is one that wants to bahead you – a ‘moderate’ muslim is one that wants a radical muslim to behead you in the meantime.
Chistopher Watson says
In the late 60s and early 70s, when I was young, we looked forward to going to the stars and a glorious future for the whole of mankind, being led by far-seeing leaders who would lead us to a technological wonderland. Where are we? Mired in confusion, invaded by millions of sub-human morons who want to take us to the 7th century, led by leaders who don’t know what they are doing.
Wellington says
Trick_or_Treat: I don’t know what the percentage is but I do think that many Muslims don’t even know that much about their religion (the same as with many who adhere to other religions). You used the word “most” and I have to wonder about that. That would mean at least 51%. Would, for example, at least 51% actually kill someone who said he left Islam for another religion? Well, you could be right but I stand behind my original statement that many Muslims are not themselves ready to enforce many of Islam’s directives, but in a way this doesn’t matter because the entire religion is rotten and ideology is what is key and not the fact that many adherents of an ideology aren’t ready to fully implement its dictates.
gravenimage says
Wellington, 51% of Muslims in the United States openly say they’d like to see Shari’ah imposed here. I find that pretty alarming.
Wellington says
It is alarming, grvenimage, but we’re talking here about those Muslims who would actually ACT (“enforce” is the word I originally used) upon Islam’s many heinous dictates and not just support the fetid minority who would. Big difference.
gravenimage says
True, Wellington.
PainesGhost says
Doesn’t require 51% to be problematic. Their behavior has been charted as a percentage of population, and it takes an amazingly small percentage of muslims in an otherwise free society to cause issues.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/3245412/posts
You let them reach 5% and you have problems that you probably can no longer resolve, short of retroactively banning muslims and deporting every last one. Which of course is not only politically impossible, but would trigger intense
elee says
Those many Muslims who are not ready to enforce all the heinous dictates of Islam—where do you think the pious jidhadis would be without the support and concealment these millions of Muslims provide them? Oh and consider…….Muslims lived at peace with their Christian and Yazidis for centuries in the Levant, then ISIS showed up and they denounced their neighbours. You cannot ever know when they will revert, consider San Bernardino for example. Every Muslim is a sleeper.
gravenimage says
While it was even worse under the Islamic State, Christians and Yezidis have been persecuted and murdered by Muslims in the region for centuries. Even before ISIS showed up on the scene, the end of Christians in Iraq and much of the rest of the region had been long predicted.
Wellington says
I don’t know that “every Muslim is a sleeper” but I do think it best to proceed on this assumption. No down side. And supporting those who kill is not the same as doing the actual killing. I have made this point many times by way of saying that so-called moderate Muslims are the most clueless, gutless and useless group of people on the planet.
LR says
“Every Muslim is a sleeper”…
Well, that is where I disagree.
There have been Muslims that have saved innocents lives. A Sufi leader under the protection of his mosque helped save some Jews during WW2. And during the Paris Deli attack, it was a young Muslim who helped hide some of the Jews in the freezer.
During a horrifying slaughter of Jews in Iraq by Muslims, it was also some of their Muslim neighbors who saved those they could.
There are those who have helped save American soldiers lives too, so I certainly think it’s important to give credit where credit is due.
I thought one of the things our founding father’s fought for was to have a country where we deal with the individual, and not automatically lump everyone from one group altogether.
gravenimage says
Some Muslims have ignored the horrific diktats of their religion, but sadly we cannot count on that happening.
Aussie Infidel says
Well said Wellington, I’m sure you speak for most of us on JW.
1. The only good Muslim terrorist is a dead one.
2. The ‘moderates’ are inconsequential because they have no power to influence anything – at least not in any Muslim country. And in the West, the useful idiots in politics, the bureaucracy and academia wouldn’t believe them.
3. There are no freedoms or rights for anyone but Muslims.
4. Islam is a destructive ideology. The only time they are happy is when they are blowing something up.
The Muslim nations would not accept the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and devised their own Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam. But the CDHRI is in accord with the Sharia, and is the very antithesis of the UDHR.
Islam has no place in a civilized society.
elee says
+1 Aussie Infidel!
Wellington says
I like your summation, Aussie Infidel.
Dachlan says
Send Ilhan Omar to Somalia to help Alshabab. She is a disease in USA community. Eliminate her before everything out of control.
Tricia Stuercke says
Dachlan, agreed & elaborated on: How about ALL of “Little Mogadishu”, Minnesota, 1st & foremost Keith Ellison, who’s shocking election as MN Attorney General has him perfectly positioned to PROTECT Omar & ALL Stealth Jihadi’s of their increasingly-successful Hijrah!
The Somali Population of Little Mogadishu has produced by far the MOST “Returning Jihadis”, as in the 1 “refugee group” with the highest number of “young Muslim males” returning to the country they fled to JOIN what they supposedly left in great fear!
As they’ve been here 10+ yrs now, most are sons of fathers KILLED by Al Shabab, who they now wish to join! As they say:
Can’t make this spit up!
Infidel says
No. But on the question of troops, the US has troops in 150 out of the 190 countries that there are in the world. There is no justification for having such a footprint 29 years after the Cold War ended. Time to bring the bulk of them home, and have a limited presence only in Latin America (which we need to stabilize so that all their people don’t decide to follow Hondurans and come here) and the Indo-Pacific rim to contain China.
But there’s no reason to have troops in regions like Africa, Middle East, Europe or anywhere else. Put all of them in the US and line them up along the Mexican border until the wall is completed
underbed cat says
American troops have been needed in Dutch some German settled South Africa to protect the farmers and provide protection to stop the massive killing of Dutch farmers who changed bad soil to good that provided food for themselves and neighbors and citizens that have been striped of their 400 year old country and land purchase due to Mandela…and the new radical heirs of power who desire all south AfricanDutch out or dead. Killing the farmers and their families in a gruesome way that provided food and jobs, passing laws to confiscate all land and property, and leave them powerless and or deceased. Anyone who viewed the documentary of Farmland will understand. It was difficult to watch as I remembered America’s push remove protection and demand a replacement government that was to share, but that may have never been the intention of Mendela or those who gained power after his death. I see very little news on what is happening.
gravenimage says
Yes–this mostly is not being covered in the West.
Reziac says
To my understanding, the main reason we have handfuls of troops (about 3000 each, per what I’ve heard) in places like Chad, Mali, and Kenya is to keep a firsthand eye on the violent Islamic incursion; there’s no expectation that our guys on the ground can make any real difference there, nor any intention of getting more involved. But there’s no good intelligence substitute for eyes in place.
And of course once in a while one of our guys gets killed. But that’s probably better than having to rely on local reports of uncertain origin, and not be aware when something is about to blow up (worse than usual). If we had troops in South Africa, maybe there’d be more awareness of what’s going on there (Islam is also working on a takeover of that region; the question is whether China will beat them to it).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/where-does-the-u-s-have-troops-in-africa-and-why/
mortimer says
Robert Spencer wrote: “Are we stopping jihad activity in East Africa? If so, we’re not doing a very good job of it.”
The obvious ‘no’ answer to this question begs an explanation. Jihad is an IDEOLOGY and the US and no other country but communist China is (to my incomplete knowledge) using COUNTER-IDEOLOGY to counter jihadism.
Western nations must join together with experts in JIHADISM (such as Robert Spencer and Koranic textual scholars) to design a curriculum to deprogram Muslims right out of Islam. This curriculum should be printed and distributed free of charge to Muslims around the world and placed on the internet in print and video formats.
Jihadism is an INTRINSIC part of Islam and can only be removed from the minds of Muslims by taking them right out of Islam.
gravenimage says
Mortimer–with all respect–your claim that Robert Spencer is an advocate of “deprogramming” Muslims–let alone that he is presenting himself as someone who is an expert in this–is *quite* mistaken. Instead–as you know–Robert Spencer regularly points out how “deradicalizing” programs do not work.
mortimer says
Quote: “US airstrike takes out Muslim leader”
Next, the US should find and kill Abu Bakr Shekau, the slave-trader leader of Boko Haram.
Larry says
Yes, Wellington, Islam delenda est. And as Eisenhower put it before D-Day, “I don’t like it, but there it is.”