THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

...
You are unable to describe what "success" means, because the Bush regime has never articulated it from the very beginning until now; it was WMDs, next was get rid of Saddam, then finally bring democracy to the Middle East. What the Bush regime has said was we'll leave when they ask us to leave. They didn't say anything about accomplishing any goals if the Iraqi government asks us to leave.

You're about as confused as this administration.

We are fighting a war. These are the reasons why:

(1) We Americans probably face a sizeable risk of being murdered by Terrorist Malignancy, if we decide to limit the defense of ourselves against Terrorist Malignancy to only here in America;
http://www.mideastweb.org/osambinladen1.htm

(2) The state of Afghanistan harbored (i.e., allowed sanctuary to) al-Qaeda Terrorist Malignancy from May 1996 to October 2001, when the USA invaded Afghanistan seeking to end their sanctuary in Afghanistan;
www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm

(3) The state of Iraq harbored (i.e., allowed sanctuary to) al-Qaeda Terrorist Malignancy from December 2001 to March 2003, when the USA invaded Iraq to end their sanctuary in Iraq;
www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm

(4) Tuesday night, September 11, 2001, the President broadcast to the nation:
www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.

(5) Friday, September 14, 2001
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/terroristattack/joint-resolution_9-14.html
The President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

(6) Thursday, September 20, 2001, President Bush addressed the nation before a joint session of Congress:
www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
Tonight we are a country awakened to danger. Our enemy is a radical network of terrorists, and every government that supports them.

(7) Wednesday, October 16, 2002, Congress passed a joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq and gave two primary and sufficient reasons for doing so, that were subsequently verified by the USA military:

www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf
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;

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

Once more: The Iraqi government and the Bush regime has no control over the civil war, and it's up to the Iraqi people to rid their country of al Qaeda, and to end their civil war.

ican, In your case, success and asking us to leave before terrorism is beat are mutually exclusive. You just can't have it both ways.

...

ican:
According to me, we invaded Iraq BECAUSE WE THOUGHT WE HAD A VERY GOOD CHANCE OF WINNING AND SUCCEEDING "to combat a very specific threat: terrorism in the form of Al Qaeda."

This is a big-fat outright lie!

Bush invaded Iraq because he said Saddam was a threat to the US security with his WMDs and their connection to al Qaida. Both proved to be lies.[/color]

We are fighting a war. These are the reasons why:

(1) We Americans probably face a sizeable risk of being murdered by Terrorist Malignancy, if we decide to limit the defense of ourselves against Terrorist Malignancy to only here in America;
http://www.mideastweb.org/osambinladen1.htm

(2) The state of Afghanistan harbored (i.e., allowed sanctuary to) al-Qaeda Terrorist Malignancy from May 1996 to October 2001, when the USA invaded Afghanistan seeking to end their sanctuary in Afghanistan;
www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm

(3) The state of Iraq harbored (i.e., allowed sanctuary to) al-Qaeda Terrorist Malignancy from December 2001 to March 2003, when the USA invaded Iraq to end their sanctuary in Iraq;
www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm

(4) Tuesday night, September 11, 2001, the President broadcast to the nation:
www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.

(5) Friday, September 14, 2001
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/terroristattack/joint-resolution_9-14.html
The President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

(6) Thursday, September 20, 2001, President Bush addressed the nation before a joint session of Congress:
www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
Tonight we are a country awakened to danger. Our enemy is a radical network of terrorists, and every government that supports them.

(7) Wednesday, October 16, 2002, Congress passed a joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq and gave two primary and sufficient reasons for doing so, that were subsequently verified by the USA military:

www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf
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;

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

(4) Tuesday night, September 11, 2001, the President broadcast to the nation:
www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.

(7) Wednesday, October 16, 2002, Congress passed a joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq and gave two primary and sufficient reasons for doing so, that were subsequently verified by the USA military:

www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf
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;

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

The false WMD reason touted by the Bush administration in no way superseeds these often repeated, valid and sufficient reasons given by the Bush administration and Congress for invading Iraq:

Quote:

(4) Tuesday night, September 11, 2001, the President broadcast to the nation:
www.9-11commission.gov/report/index.htm
We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.

Quote:

(7) Wednesday, October 16, 2002, Congress passed a joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq and gave two primary and sufficient reasons for doing so, that were subsequently verified by the USA military:

www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf
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;

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

Right! But, here's the rub: if you believe that those reasons were perfectly valid then, you believe that they are perfectly valid today.

Thus my contention - if you honestly think that we had to invade Iraq due to the reasons you listed, you would agree that we can't leave just b/c they ask us to. Saddam asked us not to invade in the first place; there's no difference whatsoever between the two situations.

Cycloptichorn

...Saddam asked us not to invade in the first place; there's no difference whatsoever between the two situations. ...

Archbishop speaks of Iraq damage

The Iraq conflict has wreaked "terrible damage" on the region - far more than has been acknowledged, the Archbishop of Canterbury has said.
Dr Rowan Williams said "urgent attention" was needed to stabilise the country. His comments followed a visit to Syria to meet Iraqi refugees.

The Foreign Office said it backed the Iraqi government's security efforts.

A survey published in September 2007 suggested that up to 1.2m people might have died because of the Iraq conflict.

Speaking following his visit, Dr Williams also said he regards any further "deliberate destabilisation" of the region - such as action against Syria and Iran - as "criminal, ignorant...and potentially murderous folly".

Referring to US political advisers, he added that "we do hear talk from some quarters of action against Syria, or against Iran".

"I can't understand what planet such persons are living on when you see the conditions that are already there. The region is still a tinderbox," Dr Williams said.

Earlier, the archbishop said "events of the last few years have done terrible damage in the whole of this region".

He said many people "do not see the cost in human terms of the war which was unleashed".

Dr Williams concluded: "Security that will enable these people to return to Iraq depends on a settlement for the whole of that country guaranteeing the liberty and dignity of every minority."

Following the archbishop's comments, the Foreign Office said it continued to support the Iraqi government "in aiming to bring support to the country", adding that "there are signs this is having some effects".

A spokesman said: "The American surge has had its effect and we have noticed there has been a reduction in violence in Basra at the moment.

Iraqi refugees

"Our support of the Iraqi government will continue. Their security forces are getting better and better. We will keep that support going by mentoring and continuing to train them."

About half a million refugees have fled Iraq for Syria since the conflict began in 2003.

Dr Williams said many of the people he had met told him they left the war-torn country because their families had been kidnapped, executed or told they would be killed unless they paid ransoms.

The archbishop added that the refugees had told him their circumstances were desperate and unsustainable, with no hope either of a safe return to Iraq or of citizenship in Syria or elsewhere.

Turkish troops killed a PKK [Kurdish Workers Party] guerrilla in eastern Anatolia early on Sunday, then ran into an ambush in which PKK fighters killed 13 Turkish troops. The PKK is being given safe harbor in Iraqi Kurdistan by authorities there, much to Ankara's frustration. This major firefight, the most serious in years between PKK and the Turkish military in years, will put pressure on the Turkish government to engage in hot pursuit of the Kurdish guerrillas into Iraq where they are hiding out. The PKK is considered a terrorist organization by the United States, but the US military has done nothing to stop it from attacking a NATO ally (Turkey). The US also coddles the Mojahedin-e Khalq [MEK] terrorist group in Diyala province, which Saddam used against Iran, and which is probably the source for some of the wilder charges the US military makes against Iran.

It is one of the great ironies that in the wake of September 11 and the illegal war on Iraq, the Bush administration has ended up de facto giving safe harbor to two major terrorist groups in the Middle East.

From Juan Cole;

Quote:

Turkish troops killed a PKK [Kurdish Workers Party] guerrilla in eastern Anatolia early on Sunday, then ran into an ambush in which PKK fighters killed 13 Turkish troops. The PKK is being given safe harbor in Iraqi Kurdistan by authorities there, much to Ankara's frustration. This major firefight, the most serious in years between PKK and the Turkish military in years, will put pressure on the Turkish government to engage in hot pursuit of the Kurdish guerrillas into Iraq where they are hiding out. The PKK is considered a terrorist organization by the United States, but the US military has done nothing to stop it from attacking a NATO ally (Turkey). The US also coddles the Mojahedin-e Khalq [MEK] terrorist group in Diyala province, which Saddam used against Iran, and which is probably the source for some of the wilder charges the US military makes against Iran.

It is one of the great ironies that in the wake of September 11 and the illegal war on Iraq, the Bush administration has ended up de facto giving safe harbor to two major terrorist groups in the Middle East.

Report says war on terror is fueling al Qaeda
Mon Oct 8, 2007 8:50am EDT
By Kate Kelland

LONDON (Reuters) - Six years after the September 11 attacks in the United States, the "war on terror" is failing and instead fueling an increase in support for extremist Islamist movements, a British think-tank said on Monday.

A report by the Oxford Research Group (ORG) said a "fundamental re-think is required" if the global terrorist network is to be rendered ineffective.

"If the al Qaeda movement is to be countered, then the roots of its support must be understood and systematically undercut," said Paul Rogers, the report's author and professor of global peace studies at Bradford University in northern England.

"Combined with conventional policing and security measures, al Qaeda can be contained and minimized but this will require a change in policy at every level."

He described the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq as a "disastrous mistake" which had helped establish a "most valued jihadist combat training zone" for al Qaeda supporters.

The report -- Alternatives to the War on Terror -- recommended the immediate withdrawal of all foreign troops from Iraq coupled with intensive diplomatic engagement in the region, including with Iran and Syria.

In Afghanistan, Rogers also called for an immediate scaling down of military activities, an injection of more civil aid and negotiations with militia groups aimed at bringing them into the political process.

If such measures were adopted it would still take "at least 10 years to make up for the mistakes made since 9/11."

"Failure to make the necessary changes could result in the war on terror lasting decades," the report added.

Rogers also warned of a drift toward conflict with Iran.

"Going to war with Iran", he said, "will make matters far worse, playing directly into the hands of extreme elements and adding greatly to the violence across the region. Whatever the problems with Iran, war should be avoided at all costs."