Correct, ican! Your reference A was published 9/20/2004 or 19 months after the US invaded Iraq; B was delivered 1/5/2003 or 43 days before our invasion of Iraq, id est your reference A proceeds your reference B--B, A, ergo your reference A perused the same fallacious "intelligence" that your reference B did. It's purpose was to investigate US intelligence failures, Powell's speech included.
It is difficult for me to believe that you truly believe this argument of yours is valid. Surely you understand that the order in which I list my references has only to do with the order of the various segments of my argument. Surely you understand the order of my references has nothing to do with any alleged dependencies among these references. Surely you understand that the purpose of reference A does not subtract from its validity.
The most is could conclude about an Iraq/Al Qaeda link is that Iraq tolerated Ansar al Islam in the isolated area it did not control, and that Iraq may even have helped them.
Please pay close attention to my actual argument this time. Again you have misinterpreted my argument. Please review it thoroughly before your next response. My argument is independent of whether or not there was an Iraq/Al Qaeda link prior to the US invasion of Iraq.
Your reference F summarizes your reference A, ican, or what EXACTLY are you referencing from your reference F?
I will assume this is your hypothesis if you supply some evidence to support it. I will assume this is your speculation if you supply your reason for believing it. I will assume this is your fantasy if you say so. I will assume this is your sham if you do none of the preceeding.
By the way, among other things reference F (also references A and D) claims that some of the inhabitants of northeastern Iraq were members of al Qaeda.
Your reference B's demonstrated incompetence and demagoguery renders said reference unreliable and discredited.
I will assume this is your hypothesis if you supply some evidence to support it. I will assume this is your speculation if you supply your reason for believing it. I will assume this is your fantasy if you say so. I will assume this is your sham if you do none of the preceeding.
The phrase "Iraq could not gain control --especially, when requested to do so by the US." is speculation on your part based on an unreliable source of information, namely, Powell's UN speech.
You mis-stated what I actually wrote. For your own sake go back and read it again. I wrote that the government of Iraq refused to attempt to remove the terrorist bases from Iraq.
My contention that the rest of your contention about extradition of "AQ leadership" and or the lack thereof is merely speculation on your part is based on the fact that you rely on demonstrably discredited and unreliable information, and your own flights of fancy in interpreting said discredited and unreliable information.
I will assume this is your hypothesis if you supply some evidence to support it. I will assume this is your speculation if you supply your reason for believing it. I will assume this is your fantasy if you say so. I will assume this is your sham if you do none of the preceeding.
President Bush's announcement to the nation is not evidence that Iraq harbored terrorists who have declared war on us, ican.
True! Rather it's evidence of Bush's true objective in invading Iraq. References A, D, and F constitute evidence "that Iraq harbored terrorists who have declared war on us."
That Al Qaeda terrorist bases are necessary for the successful perpetration by al Qaeda terrorists of al Qaeda terrorism is not evidence that Iraq harbored terrorists who have declared war on us, ican.
True! Rather it's evidence of Bush's true objective in invading Iraq. References A, D, and F constitute evidence "that Iraq harbored terrorists who have declared war on us."
That the US must remove those governments that persist in knowingly providing sanctuary for al Qaeda terrorist bases is not evidence that Iraq harbored terrorists who have declared war on us, ican.
True! Rather it's evidence of Bush's true objective in invading Iraq. References A, D, and F constitute evidence "that Iraq harbored terrorists who have declared war on us."
That the terrorist training bases in Iraq were re-established in 2001 after the Kurds had defeated them a couple of years earlier is not evidence that Iraq harbored terrorists who have declared war on us, ican. Those terrorist training bases were in an area beyond the control of Iraq.
It is self-evident that those bases were also beyond the control of the Kurd's else they would not have been re-established in 2001 after the Kurds previously defeated them in the late 1990s. It is also self-evident that these bases were actually under the control of al Qaeda.
That we invaded Iraq in March 2003 without obtaining UN approval and removed Iraq's tyrannical government, because that government refused to attempt to remove the terrorist bases from Iraq is mere speculation on your part, ican. You do not know whether that government refused to attempt to remove the terrorist bases from Iraq, or if that government had the very wherewithal to do so. You do not know the credibility of the claim that the US even approached that government to perform the aforementioned.
I will assume this is your hypothesis about what I know or don't know, if you supply some evidence to support it. I will assume this is your speculation if you supply your reason for believing it. I will assume this is your fantasy if you say so. I will assume this is your sham if you do none of the preceeding.
We invaded Iraq in March 2003 without obtaining UN approval and removed Iraq's tyrannical government, because that government refused to attempt to remove the terrorist bases from an isolated area that Iraq did not control. That is utterly stupid.
False! Not controlling is not synonymous with (i.e., not logically equivalent to) cannot obtain control. To think otherwise is "utterly stupid."
That we are attempting to secure a democratic government of the Iraq people’s own design in Iraq primarily because such a government is presumed less likely to permit the re-establishment of terrorist bases there is not evidence that Iraq harbored terrorists who have declared war on us, ican.
True! Rather it's evidence of Bush's true objective in invading Iraq. References A, D, and F constitute evidence "that Iraq harbored terrorists who have declared war on us."
That you think that only after this enormously difficult work is completed successfully, will the US again possess sufficient means to seriously consider invasions to remove any other tyrannical governments that refuse to attempt to remove terrorist bases from their countries is not evidence that Iraq harbored terrorists who have declared war on us, ican.
True! Rather it's merely my opinion--my speculation based on my understanding of current US capabilities and resources--that the US will not invade any other countries that permit al Qaeda bases to be located within their country until the democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq evolve to that point where they are sufficiently secure without our capabilities and resources. References A, D, and F constitute evidence "that Iraq harbored terrorists who have declared war on us."
As for your references, once again, ican:
Your reference A perused the same fallacious "intelligence" that your reference B did, ican. Your reference A was published 9/20/2004 or 19 months after the US invaded Iraq; B was delivered 1/5/2003 or 43 days before our invasion of Iraq. Your reference A proceeds your reference B. Your reference A perused the same fallacious "intelligence" that your reference B did.
Again! I will assume this is your hypothesis about what I know or don't know, if you supply some evidence to support it. I will assume this is your speculation if you supply your reason for believing it. I will assume this is your fantasy if you say so. I will assume this is your sham if you do none of the preceeding.
Your reference B has been discredited, and been shown to be at best a display of gross incompetence, and at worst an example of willful, instigative demagoguery. Your reference B's demonstrated incompetence and demagoguery renders said reference and unreliable and discredited.
Again! I will assume this is your hypothesis about what I know or don't know, if you supply some evidence to support it. I will assume this is your speculation if you supply your reason for believing it. I will assume this is your fantasy if you say so. I will assume this is your sham if you do none of the preceeding.
Your reference D confirmed the existence of Ansar al Islam camps in northern Iraq. It does not confirm the contention that Iraq harbored those camps. Those camps were beyond the control of Iraq, and under the control of the Kurds in that area.
Again! My argument does not claim Iraq harbored those camps. I wrote that the government of Iraq refused to attempt to remove the terrorist bases from Iraq.
Your reference F merely summarizes your reference A, or what EXACTLY are you referencing from your reference F?
By the way, among other things reference F (also references A and D) claims that some of the inhabitants of northeastern Iraq were members of al Qaeda.
1. President Bush announced to the nation, Tuesday night, 9/11/2001, that our war was not only with the terrorists who have declared war on us, it is also with those governments that “harbor” terrorists. President Bush announced to the nation, to Congress and to the rest of the world, Thursday night, 9/20/2001, that our war was not only with the terrorists who have declared war on us, it is also with those governments that “support” terrorists. [Reference A]
2. Al Qaeda terrorist bases are necessary for the successful perpetration by al Qaeda terrorists of al Qaeda terrorism. [Reference A]
3. The US must remove those governments that persist in knowingly providing sanctuary for al Qaeda terrorist bases. [Reference A]
4. On 9/11/2001 there were terrorist training bases in both Afghanistan and Iraq. The terrorist training bases in Afghanistan were established in 1988 after the Russians abandoned their war in Afghanistan. The terrorist training bases in Iraq were re-established in 2001 after the Kurds had defeated them a couple of years earlier. [References A, B, C, D, F]
5. We invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 without obtaining UN approval and removed Afghanistan's tyrannical government, because that government refused to attempt to remove the terrorist bases from Afghanistan. [Reference A]
6. We invaded Iraq in March 2003 without obtaining UN approval and removed Iraq's tyrannical government, because that government refused to attempt to remove the terrorist bases from Iraq. [References A, B, D, E, F]
7. We are attempting to secure a democratic government of the Afghanistan people’s own design in Afghanistan primarily because such a government is presumed less likely to permit the re-establishment of terrorist bases there. [Reference A]
8. We are attempting to secure a democratic government of the Iraq people’s own design in Iraq primarily because such a government is presumed less likely to permit the re-establishment of terrorist bases there. [Reference A]
9. I think that only after this enormously difficult work is completed successfully, will the US again possess sufficient means to seriously consider invasions to remove any other tyrannical governments that refuse to attempt to remove terrorist bases from their countries.
References:
A. 9-11 Commission, 9/20/2004
www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
B. Secretary of State, Colin Powell’s speech to UN, “sinister nexus,” 2/5/2003:
NEW LINK:
http://www.state.gov/secretary/former/powell/remarks/2003/17300.htm
C. “The Encyclopedia Britannica, Iraq”
www.britannica.com
D. "American Soldier," by General Tommy Franks, 7/1/2004
“10” Regan Books, An Imprint of HarperCollins Publishers
E. Charles Duelfer's Report, 30 September 2004
www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/Comp_Report_Key_Findings.pdf
F. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org
