On The Perils of Being No. 2 at ISIS

Originally published by ANewDomain.net:

Used to be “Al Qaeda’s number two” man was constantly getting killed, or reportedly getting killed, by the United States. Now the same pattern is repeating itself, but with the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) in the crosshairs. How will this affect the internal office politics of ISIS?


3 thoughts on “On The Perils of Being No. 2 at ISIS

  1. In the dumb-action-movie logic of American politics, if you kill the enemy leader then the war is supposed to be over. Claiming to have killed ISIS Numero Uno would lead to all kinds of subsequent arguments about the budget and whether we still need to be fighting, as they say, land wars in Asia. On the other hand, claiming to have killed ISIS #17 does not sound like much of an accomplishment.

    Killing ISIS Numero Dos is the most significant-sounding claim you can make, the most credit you can claim for yourself, without anybody you’re talking to checking your facts or expecting any real progress.

    • It’st he gift that keeps on giving! How many times did we kill the #2 Al Quaida guy?

  2. Does ANYBODY ever notice that the terrorist geneology of ISIS can be traced all the way back to Emmanuel Goldstein? In the prevailing dialogue, why would ISIS EVER give Zionland a three-day notice of attack?

    It’s getting to the point where they’re not even trying to be disingenuous anymore.

    Have we really been dumbed down THAT MUCH?