Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Connection Between Al Qaeda And Iraq  
User currently offlineRjpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (10 years 3 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 1229 times:

http://www.theweeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/152lndzv.asp

An interesting read....Especially for all of you who hold Bush and Clinton to different standards.

[Edited 2004-06-04 04:44:37]

19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJamesag96 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 2095 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (10 years 3 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1202 times:

Interesting read for sure.

Never could understand how people so blindly discounted the idea that they could be working together at some level.

How does it go? The enemy of my enemy is my friend?

J



Why Kate, You're not wearing a bustle. How lewd.
User currently offlineGoose From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 1840 posts, RR: 15
Reply 2, posted (10 years 3 months 2 days ago) and read 1188 times:

Iraq has had a pretty long connection to terrorism - but not necessarily al-Queda, but rather some other upstanding citizens (on the second link, the pertinent information is almost at the bottom....) ......  Big grin


"Talk to me, Goose..."
User currently offlineRjpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (10 years 3 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1164 times:

Hmm, I wonder why there hasn't been more discussion on this article. It raises some very interesting arguments that would shut down many A.net users vast conspiracies.

User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (10 years 3 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1161 times:

Never could understand how people so blindly discounted the idea that they could be working together at some level.

I never could understand, James, how so many blindly accepted the word of the President and his staff, that there WAS a connection, when for years, OBL had a huge hatred for Saddam Hussein, yet so many Americans bought it hook, line and sinker, without any proof. And there is no proof. As Bob Woodward said tonight on CNN, even the President doesn't believe there was collaberation between the two anymore.


User currently offlineRjpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (10 years 3 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1155 times:

Alpha 1, did you read the article posted above?

User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (10 years 3 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1148 times:

I read it. I'm not buying it. Need I say more?

One article will not convince me.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29795 posts, RR: 58
Reply 7, posted (10 years 3 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1147 times:

Does it matter, The war on Terror is bigger the Al-quinto.

And like it or not, Iraq was giving 20 grand to palistinians who blew themselves up, and was harboring Abu Abbas and Abu Nidal.




OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineJamesag96 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 2095 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (10 years 3 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1145 times:

I'll say it again for the reading comprehension challenged...

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

That idea alone could explain that on some level the two may have been working together. It isn't that far fetched, and shouldn't be too difficult for even mildly intelligent people to understand.

J



Why Kate, You're not wearing a bustle. How lewd.
User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (10 years 3 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1142 times:

Does it matter, The war on Terror is bigger the Al-quinto.

And like it or not, Iraq was giving 20 grand to palistinians who blew themselves up, and was harboring Abu Abbas and Abu Nidal.


Yes, but funny, L-188, none of that was mentioned BEFORE the war in Iraq. It was, 24/7, about WMD's, which we've yet to find, save one shell. Again, the post-facto changing of the reasons about the war, by those, beginning with the president, who are less-than-honest about the true nature of the alleged reason we went to war (hint-the U.S. got a UN resolution passed on the subject).

Bush has diverted billions of dollars, put 800 GI's in the grave, not to mention thousands of Iraq's, becuase he didn't keep his eye on the REAL war on terror, and not concentrating all our resources on Al Qaeda worldwide, and getting rid of OBL.

It isn't that far fetched, and shouldn't be too difficult for even mildly intelligent people to understand.

Perhaps it isn't far-fetched, James, but your wishful thinking doesn't make it fact, either.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29795 posts, RR: 58
Reply 10, posted (10 years 3 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1139 times:

Actually it was.

But the media didn't play it up.

The played up the WMD's, I partially blame the PR department at the White House too.

Some of the issues with Iraq they chose to emphasis are not the ones they should have gone with.

Of course this is comming from somebody who at the time thought that this should have been a second term war.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (10 years 3 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1136 times:

Actually it was.

But the media didn't play it up.


Bullshit. Bush, Cheney, Rice, Wolfitz, Powell, et al, were out daily, after 1441 was passed, until the war started, pushing the imminent danger of all these WMD's. Or was Powell's presentation at the UN just a sideshow for othe issues? Another great lie being foisted by "I'm not a Republican".

The fact is, L-188, WMD's were the only game in town, until the Administration found out they were taken for a ride, then started to change their tune. And you swallowed it that load like a cheap porn starlett doing a take to a bad porn movie.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29795 posts, RR: 58
Reply 12, posted (10 years 3 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1130 times:

Actually Alpha1, I was in favor of waiting till the second term for the war.

It would have solve several issues.

No election or reelection to worry about.
It would have placated the demmands of the world to allow the UN to again work ineffectively
We could still concentrate on the unfinished buisness in Afghanistan
We could have placed more resources in the desert
We could have planned a bit better
We might have been able to operate from two fronts, given more time to negotiate with Turkey.(I wonder how many GI's died over that)

And at the time, despite your apparent seasonal Alzheimers I proported waiting.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (10 years 3 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1129 times:

L-188, I wasn't even willing to wait till a second term. We would have 800 find young Americans alive today, and billions save, or spent on something more worthwhile, had Bush pused for a 2nd UN Resolution, authorizing a few thousand UN weapons inspectors, and found out the truth about this alleged WMD program before we went to war.

Had we given it one more year-till early this year, and found out the truth, we wouldn't be in this mess we're in today, would we? And, had Saddam actually been found to have these weapons, then he would have looked like the bad guy, in the eyes of the world, and the U.S. would not have looked like it thirsted for this war, which is what it looked liked when Bush told the UN to go fuck itself, and he started the war at the first possible moment he did.

But the fact is, Bush wasn't interested in the truth about WMD. He wanted this war, to even the score because Saddam tried to kill Daddy, and because he thought it would be quick and easy as his dad's war in '91 was, and would look good on his re-election resume.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29795 posts, RR: 58
Reply 14, posted (10 years 3 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1127 times:

The problem is that I don't believe that we would have found anything else out differently then we did.

The only reason why Iraq let Blix back in in 2002 is that the US started to mass forces on the border for the invasion. If they where never deployed there nothing would have changed.

So the deployment to Kuwait was still needed, just to get the UN back in was needed. But the jump off at that time was not.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 26
Reply 15, posted (10 years 3 months 20 hours ago) and read 1113 times:

((ignoring Alpha1 and L-188 generic political tirades))

When I read the article, it makes me mad when I see our government knew so much information about the terrorists, and didn't do anything to capture or kill them. This isn't a problem with Bush or Clinton, its a problem with the CIA and FBI. There are some serious problems in those two organizations if they know the whereabouts and information, but don't do anything to act upon that information.

Why do you think George Tenet recently resigned? Personal reasons? I think its because there's been so many fuckups in the CIA that he's had enough at the top.



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29795 posts, RR: 58
Reply 16, posted (10 years 3 months 19 hours ago) and read 1108 times:

Well Tbar220,

One of the things that changed after 9/11 is that terrorism, and Benny in particular began to be viewed as a military problem.

Before Terrorism in the US was generally viewed as a law enforcement issue.


That is a pretty fundamental shift in thinking



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineLehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 21
Reply 17, posted (10 years 3 months 19 hours ago) and read 1109 times:

In a way I thought that Tenet resigned as a fall-guy for the "fuck-ups"; I do not think anyone was pressuring him to boot, just it may be his personal reason to leave before the real political mud-slinging begins.

Still, it kinda puts another damper on the Admin. Bush won't let Rumsfeld go cuz he's needed, wasn't Tenet needed too? Guy's got experience in things the next guy doesn't, he should have stayed. What's up with that?



The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13195 posts, RR: 77
Reply 18, posted (10 years 3 months 16 hours ago) and read 1091 times:

Saddam didn't worry about offing his own family if they stepped out of line, so the idea of having any links (save for a few has-beens in retirement) with external terrorist groups is laughable, the cash he sent to HAMAS was purely to raise his stock in the Arab street.

Co-operating with OBL, while keeping a very divided nation under an iron fist?
I don't think so, then there was OBL's denouncing of Saddam, who was a secular ruler remember.

Judging by the rather twisted logic of some in here, Saddam sending cash to HAMAS and keeping a couple of aging terrorists (both of whom's network were defunct) in homes, being a reason to attack Iraq, then presumably in the 70's and 80's the UK would have quite within their rights to send a Vulcan bomber across the Atlantic to drop some high explosive on the H.Q. of NORAID.


User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (10 years 3 months 16 hours ago) and read 1091 times:

The problem is that I don't believe that we would have found anything else out differently then we did.

EXACTLY! And we would have been spared this politically-driven war! But it's a "problem" with you because you, and a whole bunch of right-wing nuts WNATED this war, no matter what the outcome on WMD's was. Cheney, Wolfwitz, Perle, Rice, etc, WANTED this war, and convinced Bush it was a good thing, be damned the facts on th weapons he said it was about!

Score one for me. You don't care about the truth-you wanted this war.

The only reason why Iraq let Blix back in in 2002 is that the US started to mass forces on the border for the invasion. If they where never deployed there nothing would have changed.

Fine, then you leave those forces in the region in case Saddam did anything stupid, but he didn't did he? WE were the ones that were the aggressors here, not anyone else. WE pushed for this war, when it was obvious that inspections didn't have anywhere near enough time to be effective, or to find squat.

We should have left troops there, given inspections a lot more time. Then, had Saddam lashed out, or we had found weapons, we could have fully justified the war to the world, and, more than likely, avoided the rift we caused with our allies and with the UN. And, more than likely, in such a case, Turkey would have allowed us to use their bases for an invasion.

But when we went in at the first moment, instead of giving inspections and diplomacy a decent shot, WE looked like the thugs, we looked like the ones thirsty for a war (which, of course, the Administration was, of that there's no doubt).

Not only has this war become a military problem, the way we started it was a political and diplomatic clusterfuck, and so damaged our reputation in the world, it could take years (after another President takes over, becuase it will NEVER be restored under Bush) for us to fix the damage.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Al Qaeda And Allied Group To Target France posted Sun Sep 17 2006 21:22:02 by AerospaceFan
Al Qaeda And Anthrax: A Match? posted Wed Jun 21 2006 17:19:38 by Mrmeangenes
Al-Qaeda And The Taliban Are A Bunch Of Nuts posted Sat Dec 8 2001 20:55:31 by Baconcorde
Clark: Connection Between Iraq And Al Qaeda posted Mon Jan 12 2004 21:04:02 by B757300
Iraq And Al Qaeda Connected posted Mon Jul 3 2006 15:52:54 by Usnseallt82
Did Bush Use Iraq-draw Al-Qaeda Out Of Afghanistan posted Wed Aug 18 2004 06:59:18 by DCAYOW
9/11 Staff: No Al Qaeda Cooperation With Iraq posted Wed Jun 16 2004 16:05:14 by Sabena 690
18,000 Al Qaeda Fighters And Growing! posted Wed May 26 2004 07:38:42 by Tubbyboeing
U.S. Holding 19 Al Qaeda Suspects In Iraq posted Sat Sep 27 2003 01:35:00 by B757300
Terrorism In Iraq? Blame Al-Qaeda! posted Sat Aug 30 2003 17:14:17 by Schoenorama