1
   

al-Qaida / Iraqi link?

 
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 May, 2004 09:45 am
I said no such thing.

Our justification for staying in Iraq is to assure the people in Iraq get a fair and representative government.

I said that without the foreign aggressors and insurgency that our mission would almost be completed. We will establish a form of government the is good for the entire country, not just a portion of it. It's too bad Sistani can't take a lesson from the Kurds and get his section of the country under control. He wants to be a leader, but he isn't showing how he will lead very competently.

The Kurds on the other hand are loving life post-Saddam. They have been doing very well since his downfall.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 May, 2004 10:16 am
ok McG, shouldn't put words in your mouth... :wink:

But how do you establish "a fair and representative government" until you have extinguished the fighters and established lor norder?

but you did say this just now

Quote:
The Kurds on the other hand are loving life post-Saddam. They have been doing very well since his downfall.


I really hope thats true believe me. But why do we never see any news picture stories about happy Kurds doing their life loving things?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 May, 2004 10:30 am
This poll (pdf-file!)

US Public Beliefs on Iraq and the Presidential Elections April 2004

explains some posts here :wink:
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 May, 2004 10:35 am
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
ok McG, shouldn't put words in your mouth... :wink:

But how do you establish "a fair and representative government" until you have extinguished the fighters and established lor norder?

but you did say this just now

Quote:
The Kurds on the other hand are loving life post-Saddam. They have been doing very well since his downfall.


I really hope thats true believe me. But why do we never see any news picture stories about happy Kurds doing their life loving things?


Because that doesn't sell papers or garner high ratings.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 May, 2004 12:05 pm
PDiddie wrote:
(edited to reflect the suddenly calmer tone)


That's very funny, P.
0 Replies
 
mporter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 May, 2004 10:24 pm
I am amazed that the person who seems to know more of the truth about Americans doesn't even live in America. We can all learn a lot from Walter Hinteler.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 May, 2004 11:07 pm
mporter wrote:
I am amazed that the person who seems to know more of the truth about Americans doesn't even live in America. We can all learn a lot from Walter Hinteler.


Thanks for your kind remarks, mporter!

However, I neither know the truth nor really anything about the USA or America - I just use the available sources via the internet, a couple of university libraries ... and what I've learnt at school/studied at university.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 May, 2004 07:03 am
mporter wrote:
I am amazed that the person who seems to know more of the truth about Americans doesn't even live in America. We can all learn a lot from Walter Hinteler.


I am amazed that the person who seems to know more of the truth about Iraqis doesn't even live in Iraq. We can learn a lot from George Bush.
0 Replies
 
Tarantulas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 May, 2004 08:07 am
Quote:
Mr. Clarke's ire is largely directed at the Iraq war, but its preparation was left to others on the National Security Council. He left the White House almost a month before the war began. As for its justification, he acts as if there is none. He dismisses, as "raw," reports that show meetings between al Qaeda and the Mukhabarat, Iraq's intelligence service, going back to 1993. The documented meeting between the head of the Mukhabarat and bin Laden in Khartoum, Sudan, in 1996--a meeting that challenged all the CIA's assumptions about "secular" Iraq's distance from Islamist terrorism--should have set off alarm bells. It didn't.

There is other evidence of a connection between Iraq and al Qaeda that Mr. Clarke should have felt obliged to address. Just days before Mr. Clarke resigned, Secretary of State Colin Powell told the United Nations that bin Laden had met at least eight times with officers of Iraq's Special Security Organization. In 1998, an aide to Saddam's son Uday defected and repeatedly told reporters that Iraq funded al Qaeda. South of Baghdad, satellite photos pinpointed a Boeing 707 parked at a camp where terrorists learned to take over planes. When U.S. forces captured the camp, its commander confirmed that al Qaeda had trained there as early as 1997. Mr. Clarke does not take up any of this.

Link
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 May, 2004 08:17 am
Tarantulas wrote:
Quote:
... Just days before Mr. Clarke resigned, Secretary of State Colin Powell told the United Nations that bin Laden had met at least eight times with officers of Iraq's Special Security Organization. In 1998, an aide to Saddam's son Uday defected and repeatedly told reporters that Iraq funded al Qaeda. South of Baghdad, satellite photos pinpointed a Boeing 707 parked at a camp where terrorists learned to take over planes. When U.S. forces captured the camp, its commander confirmed that al Qaeda had trained there as early as 1997. Mr. Clarke does not take up any of this.

Link


Quote:
Thursday, February 6, 2003 Posted: 9:05 AM EST (1405 GMT)
UNITED NATIONS (CNN) -- U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell used electronic intercepts, satellite photographs and other intelligence sources Wednesday in an effort to convince skeptical members of the U.N. Security Council that Iraq is actively working to deceive U.N. weapons inspectors and was hiding large amounts of Weapons of Mass Destruction .

"I cannot tell you everything that we know," Powell said, with CIA Director George Tenet sitting behind him. "But what I can share with you, when combined with what all of us have learned over the years, is deeply troubling."
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 May, 2004 08:39 am
Just a little piece on the author Miniter quoted above, who publishes out of (surprise surprise) Regnery...
Quote:
0 Replies
 
mporter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 May, 2004 03:07 am
Of course, Mr. Blatham is correct. No one who knows of the sterling reputation of President Bill Clinton would believe such scurrilous lies. Anyway, President Clinton stopped the mouths of the scandal mongers who were complaining about the quite proper contribution made by certain Chinese gentlemen to Clinton's campaign. Clinton put a stop to their gossip by stating:

"I don't believe anyone can prove that I changed governmental policy just because of a campaign contribution"
0 Replies
 
mporter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 May, 2004 03:12 am
And those on the right who are quick to blame President Clinton for his alleged inaction against Saddam Hussein have probably blocked out his courageous strike at Baghdad on December 18, 1998 when he sent missles to strike at Baghdad.

President Clinton said. in a speech to the nation that evening:

quote

"Second, if Saddam can cripple the weapons inspection system and get away with it, he would conclude that the international community--led by the United States--has simply lost its will. He will surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction, and someday, make no mistake--he will use it again as he has in the past"

And to think that there are some who call Clinton soft on Terrorism!!!!
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 12/25/2024 at 12:29:33