A first(?) thread on 2008: McCain,Giuliani & the Republicans

ican711nm wrote:

Shortly after we invaded Afghanistan in 2001 to defeat al-Qaeda there, some al-Qaeda fled to Iraq, and al-Qaeda in Iraq began to grow rapidly. That rapid growth continued right up to our invasion of Iraq in 2003.

What Saddam Hussein did/thought or did not do/thought about al-Qaeda in Iraq prior to our invasion of Iraq, does not change the truth that al-Qaeda was in Iraq prior to our invasion of Iraq.

Untrue. There's no evidence that AQ grew 'rapidly' in Iraq.

Cycloptichorn

Cycloptichorn wrote:

ican711nm wrote:

Shortly after we invaded Afghanistan in 2001 to defeat al-Qaeda there, some al-Qaeda fled to Iraq, and al-Qaeda in Iraq began to grow rapidly. That rapid growth continued right up to our invasion of Iraq in 2003.

What Saddam Hussein did/thought or did not do/thought about al-Qaeda in Iraq prior to our invasion of Iraq, does not change the truth that al-Qaeda was in Iraq prior to our invasion of Iraq.

Untrue. There's no evidence that AQ grew 'rapidly' in Iraq.

Cycloptichorn

Yes, there is evidence that "AQ grew 'rapidly' in Iraq" after December 2001 and prior to our invasion of Iraq in March 2003. You know there is evidence that "AQ grew 'rapidly' in Iraq" prior to our invasion of Iraq, because I have repeatedly posted that evidence in response to your posts to the contrary. Also, you have frequently claimed al-Qaeda grew rapidly in Iraq after we invaded Iraq.

Congress's Joint Resolution Oct. 16, 2002
Public Law 107-243 107th Congress Joint Resolution (H.J. Res. 114) To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.
...
[10th]Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

[11 th]Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens;
…

Congressional Intelligence Report 09/08/2006
Postwar information indicates that the Intelligence Community accurately assessed that al-Qa'ida affiliate group Ansar al-Islam operated in Kurdish-controlled northeastern Iraq

ican711nm wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

ican711nm wrote:

Shortly after we invaded Afghanistan in 2001 to defeat al-Qaeda there, some al-Qaeda fled to Iraq, and al-Qaeda in Iraq began to grow rapidly. That rapid growth continued right up to our invasion of Iraq in 2003.

What Saddam Hussein did/thought or did not do/thought about al-Qaeda in Iraq prior to our invasion of Iraq, does not change the truth that al-Qaeda was in Iraq prior to our invasion of Iraq.

Untrue. There's no evidence that AQ grew 'rapidly' in Iraq.

Cycloptichorn

Yes, there is evidence that "AQ grew 'rapidly' in Iraq" after December 2001 and prior to our invasion of Iraq in March 2003. You know there is evidence that "AQ grew 'rapidly' in Iraq" prior to our invasion of Iraq, because I have repeatedly posted that evidence in response to your posts to the contrary. Also, you have frequently claimed al-Qaeda grew rapidly in Iraq after we invaded Iraq.

They grew AFTER, for sure. Not before.

What you have posted really shouldn't be called 'evidence,' but 'opinion.' The truth is that AQ in Iraq, prior to our invasion, never totaled more then a few hundred fighters. They supposedly trained 10 thousand in Africa, and at least that many in Afghanistan. The Iraq endeavor wasn't even a few percentage points of their total. Certainly not that much of a threat and not worth the cost we've paid for it.

Cycloptichorn

American Soldier, by General Tommy Franks, 7/1/2004
"10" Regan Books, An Imprint of HarperCollins Publishers

page 483:
"The air picture changed once more. Now the icons were streaming toward two ridges an a steep valley in far northeastern Iraq, right on the border with Iran. These were the camps of the Ansar al-Isla terrorists, where al Qaeda leader Abu Musab Zarqawi had trained disciples in the use of chemical and biological weapons. But this strike was more than just another [Tomahawk Land Attack Missile] bashing. Soon Special Forces and [Special Mission Unit] operators, leading Kurdish Peshmerga fighters, would be storming the camps, collecting evidence, taking prisoners, and killing all those who resisted."

page 519:
"[The Marines] also encountered several hundred foreign fighters from Egypt, the Sudan, Syria, and Lybia who were being trained by the regime in a camp south of Baghdad. Those foreign volunteers fought with suicidal ferocity, but they did not fight well. The Marines killed them all."

ican fails to keep up with any subsequent information on this issue; and lives with tired-old information that's been proven wrong.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

ican711nm wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

ican711nm wrote:

Shortly after we invaded Afghanistan in 2001 to defeat al-Qaeda there, some al-Qaeda fled to Iraq, and al-Qaeda in Iraq began to grow rapidly. That rapid growth continued right up to our invasion of Iraq in 2003.

What Saddam Hussein did/thought or did not do/thought about al-Qaeda in Iraq prior to our invasion of Iraq, does not change the truth that al-Qaeda was in Iraq prior to our invasion of Iraq.

Untrue. There's no evidence that AQ grew 'rapidly' in Iraq.

Cycloptichorn

Yes, there is evidence that "AQ grew 'rapidly' in Iraq" after December 2001 and prior to our invasion of Iraq in March 2003. You know there is evidence that "AQ grew 'rapidly' in Iraq" prior to our invasion of Iraq, because I have repeatedly posted that evidence in response to your posts to the contrary. Also, you have frequently claimed al-Qaeda grew rapidly in Iraq after we invaded Iraq.

They grew AFTER, for sure. Not before.

What you have posted really shouldn't be called 'evidence,' but 'opinion.' The truth is that AQ in Iraq, prior to our invasion, never totaled more then a few hundred fighters. They supposedly trained 10 thousand in Africa, and at least that many in Afghanistan. The Iraq endeavor wasn't even a few percentage points of their total. Certainly not that much of a threat and not worth the cost we've paid for it.

Cycloptichorn

What you posted is certainly not evidence. It is merely your opinion. Your opinion about what is or is not evidence is occassionally supported by you with links to media opinion, which is of course as unreliable as is your opinion.

Here follows the witness of a person who was there, of an expert who was there.

General Tommy Franks wrote:

American Soldier, by General Tommy Franks, 7/1/2004
"10" Regan Books, An Imprint of HarperCollins Publishers

page 483:
"The air picture changed once more. Now the icons were streaming toward two ridges an a steep valley in far northeastern Iraq, right on the border with Iran. These were the camps of the Ansar al-Isla terrorists, where al Qaeda leader Abu Musab Zarqawi had trained disciples in the use of chemical and biological weapons. But this strike was more than just another [Tomahawk Land Attack Missile] bashing. Soon Special Forces and [Special Mission Unit] operators, leading Kurdish Peshmerga fighters, would be storming the camps, collecting evidence, taking prisoners, and killing all those who resisted."

page 519:
"[The Marines] also encountered several hundred foreign fighters from Egypt, the Sudan, Syria, and Lybia who were being trained by the regime in a camp south of Baghdad. Those foreign volunteers fought with suicidal ferocity, but they did not fight well. The Marines killed them all."

On February 26, 1993 terrorists attacked the World Trade Center during the Clinton administration. The explosion caused 6 deaths, 1,042 injuries, and nearly $600 million in property damage. Bill Clinton never visited the World Trade Center sight after the attack, and during his weekly radio address, advised Americans to ""not over react.""

The attack was the first attack on US soil since the attack on Pearl Harbor, and was clearly an act of war. It was planned by a group of conspirators including Ramzi Yousef, Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, El Sayyid Nosair, Mahmud Abouhalima, Mohammad Salameh, Nidal Ayyad, Ahmad Ajaj, and Abdul Rahman Yasin. They received financing from al-Qaeda member Khaled Shaikh Mohammed, Yousef's uncle, who was the mastermind behind the 9-11 attacks.

Ramzi Yousef was later found with an Iraqi passport in Pakistan. According to phone records, Mohammad Salameh made 46 phone calls to Iraq after the attack. The FBI believed that Yousef was possibly an Iraqi intelligence agent who worked for Saddam. They believed that Saddam was likely behind the attack since the attack happened on the second anniversary of the end of the Gulf War, and the attack was his revenge for the war.

Abdul Rahman Yasin fled to Iraqafter the attack. He was the only member of the al Qaeda cell that detonated the 1993 World Trade Center bomb to remain at large in the Clinton years.

ican fails to keep up with any subsequent information on this issue; and lives with tired-old information that's been proven wrong.


A tragedy of his own making
David Corn
September 12, 2006 6:44 PM

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/david_corn/2006/09/a_tragedy_of_his_own_making.html

The fifth anniversary of 9/11 changed little - particularly how the president of the United States talks about the war in Iraq. George W. Bush used the occasion to deliver a primetime speech to the nation (and, I suppose, to the world) in which he once again tried to connect 9/11 to the war he initiated in Iraq. Bush, though, has been left without much of a case. The new book that I co-wrote with Newsweek's Michael Isikoff, offers many behind-the-scenes stories of how the White House misrepresented the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. Still, the president pushes on.

In the speech, he reiterated his claim that Saddam was a direct threat to the United States:


On September the 11th, we learned that America must confront threats before they reach our shores - whether those threats come from terrorist networks or terrorist states. I am often asked why we are in Iraq when Saddam Hussein was not responsible for the 9/11 attacks. The answer is that the regime of Saddam Hussein was a clear threat.


But what is the president's evidence for that? As our book notes, the final report of the Iraq Survey Group - the CIA-Defense Department unit that searched for WMDs in Iraq - concluded that Saddam's WMD capability "was essentially destroyed in 1991" and Saddam had no "plan for the revival of WMD." The book also quotes little-noticed congressional testimony that Vice Admiral Thomas Wilson, then head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, gave in March 2002. He noted that Iraq was not among the most pressing "near-term concerns" to U.S. interests and that as a military danger Iraq was "smaller and weaker" than during the Persian Gulf War. Wilson testified that Saddam possessed only "residual" amounts of weapons of mass destruction, not a growing arsenal. In an interview for the book, he told us, "I didn't really think [Saddam and Iraq] were an immediate threat on WMD."

And days ago, the Senate intelligence committee (which is run by Republicans) released a report that said there had been no operational ties between Baghdad and al-Qaida - and that Saddam had even rebuffed requests of assistance from al-Qaida.

Without WMDs, with no connections to al-Qaida, was Saddam so dangerous? He was, of course, a brutal tyrant and a problem for the global community. But three years after the invasion of Iraq, the question won't go away: what made him a direct threat to the United States? The president has no clear answer that's consistent with the known facts

It's Bush's inability to explain his invasion that poisons whatever he has to say about 9/11 and the serious challenge posed to the United States and other nations by global jihadism. He has turned 9/11 into the justification for a costly war that was based on unproven assertions and that has gone poorly (in part because of the lack of any responsible planning for the post-invasion period). In some ways, Bush's war in Iraq (an elective fiasco) has come to overshadow the horror of September 11. That is a tragedy of Bush's own making.

ican, The 9-11 study group said as much; no AQ connection.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html

The 9/11 commission report isn't worth the paper it was printed on, and has been found to be not only inaccurate but heavily influenced by the Republican hacks who sat on it. So I wouldn't put too much stock in what it says.

Cycloptichorn

Just as a matter of interest and to understand your question:
do you, mysteryman, believe that c.i. and Cyclo are the same persons? Or why did you quote Cyclo's post as something c.i. wrote?

Neither have other important assertions been retracted, including those by CIA Director George Tenet. As journalist Stephen Hayes reiterated earlier this month, Tenet, on October 7, 2002, wrote a letter to Congress, which asserted:

Our understanding of the relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda is evolving and is based on sources of varying reliability. Some of the information we have received comes from detainees, including some of high rank. We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda going back a decade. Credible information indicates that Iraq and Al Qaeda have discussed safe haven and reciprocal nonaggression. Since Operation Enduring Freedom, we have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of Al Qaeda members, including some that have been in Baghdad. We have credible reporting that Al Qaeda leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire W.M.D. capabilities. The reporting also stated that Iraq has provided training to Al Qaeda members in the areas of poisons and gases and making conventional bombs. Iraq's increasing support to extremist Palestinians coupled with growing indications of relationship with Al Qaeda suggest that Baghdad's links to terrorists will increase, even absent U.S. military action.
Tenet, as Hayes elaborated, has never backed away from these assessments, reaffirming them in testimony before the Senate Armed

...
Your post confirms what I said - several hundred. Not thousands, not Ten thousand, not a serious threat, not worth an invasion.

Cycloptichorn

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansar_al-Islam
...
At the beginning of the 2003 invasion of Iraq it [Ansar al-Islam] controlled about a dozen villages and a range of peaks in northern Iraq on the Iranian border
...
Ansar al-Islam was formed in December 2001
...
Ansar al-Islam comprised about 300 armed men, many of these veterans from the Afghan war
...
Ansar al-Islam is alleged to be connected to al-Qaeda
...

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch2.htm
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
The Commission closed on August 21, 2004. This site is archived.
...
2.4 BUILDING AN ORGANIZATION, DECLARING WAR ON THE UNITED STATES (1992-1996)
...
In February 1996, Sudanese officials began approaching officials from the United States and other governments, asking what actions of theirs might ease foreign pressure.
...
on May 19, 1996, Bin Ladin left Sudan-significantly weakened, despite his ambitions and organizational skills. He returned to Afghanistan.61

2.5 AL QAEDA'S RENEWAL IN AFGHANISTAN (1996-1998)

Bin Ladin flew on a leased aircraft from Khartoum to Jalalabad, with a refueling stopover in the United Arab Emirates.62 He was accompanied by family members and bodyguards, as well as by al Qaeda members who had been close associates since his organization's 1988 founding in Afghanistan. Dozens of additional militants arrived on later flights.63

ican, The 9-11 study group said as much; no AQ connection.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html

xingu wrote:

Another reason not to vote for McCain.

Another reason for you not to vote for him ... not like you needed another, is it? :wink:

McCain Endorsement Angers Catholic League President
By Michael D. Shear
HOUSTON -- The president of the Catholic League today blasted Sen. John McCain for accepting the endorsement of Texas evangelicalist John Hagee, calling the controversial pastor a bigot who has "waged an unrelenting war against the Catholic Church."

Hagee, who is known for his crusading support of Israel, backed McCain's presidential bid Wednesday, standing next to the senator at a hotel in San Antonio and calling McCain "a man of principle."

But Catholic League President Bill Donohue said in a statement today that Hagee has written extensively in negative ways about the Catholic Church, "calling it 'The Great Whore,' an 'apostate church,' the 'anti-Christ,' and a 'false cult system.'"

"Senator Obama has repudiated the endorsement of Louis Farrakhan, another bigot. McCain should follow suit and retract his embrace of Hagee," Donohue said.

The McCain campaign had no immediate comment on the statement.