9
   

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

 
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Feb, 2008 05:54 pm
ican wrote :

Quote:
We are making so little progress in Iraq that it justifies us staying there as long as necessary for the Iraqis to succeed in defending themselves without our help.


plese , somebody wake me up !
is that what ican really wrote : "We are making so little progress in Iraq " or am i having a nightmare ?
hbg
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Feb, 2008 06:01 pm
hbg, You're not having a nightmare; ican is the nightmare.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Feb, 2008 06:13 pm
thanks c.i. - i'm beginning to feel better :wink:
i thought the men in the white coats were going to come and get me .
hbg
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Feb, 2008 08:34 pm
revel wrote:
Two of those article were about suicide bombs in pakistan and Afghanistan; illustrating the fruitlessness of staying in one country fighting so called AQ while in other countries AQ is growing and getting stronger. We will not win this fight with Muslim extremist with only the military no matter how long we stay in Iraq or how many bombs we drop. For every Muslim/extremist we kill more just pop up in their place. We need to get the heart of the problems that ordinary Muslims have which causes them to turn to the extremist or else the US is going to be fighting Muslims forever. They are not going to just throw up their hands and crawl on their knees in humbleness even if we keep killing them for a hundred years. They need to be able to save face and have a reason to stop fighting.

It is simple really for AQ to save face and have a reason to stop fighting. All AQ has to do is cease killing Iraqi and Afghanistani moderate Muslims and concentrate on killing Americans instead. Then moderate Muslims of both countries will begin to publically demand that we Americans leave. We will in fact leave then, because we will no longer have any reason to stay and risk being killed. The moderate Muslims will under those circumstances be able to defend themselves without our help, and we, to avoid further casualties of our own, will be eager to leave ASAP.

So why hasn't AQ adopted that change in tactics? The reason is really obvious. The AQ mass murder moderate Muslims for reasons other than saving face or driving out we Americans. AQ mass murderers moderate Muslims, because it is AQ's objective to conquer and rule the Moderate Muslims anyway they think they can. If we were to leave before AQ is exterminated in Iraq and Afghanistan, the AQ in Pakistan would pour into Afghanistan and Iraq, join with the AQ in those countries, and complete their self-imposed objective of conquering and ruling the populations of those countries.

The primary evidence--besides all the AQ declarations that state their objective is first conquering the middle east--is the AQ effort to conquer Pakistan even though the American military is not in Pakistan.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Feb, 2008 08:45 pm
hamburger wrote:
ican wrote :

Quote:
We are making so little progress in Iraq that it justifies us staying there as long as necessary for the Iraqis to succeed in defending themselves without our help.


plese , somebody wake me up !
is that what ican really wrote : "We are making so little progress in Iraq " or am i having a nightmare ?
hbg

If we were making much greater progress, we could safely leave sooner!

Hamburger, I think the world will devolve into a horrible mess if we do not stay until we make enough progress, however long that takes. You think all will be better if we were to leave before we have made enough progress. I think that is what is called an irreconcilable difference.

You may ask again what is enough progress? Enough progress is to get to the point in both Afghanistan and Iraq where the moderate Muslims can protect themselves without our help.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Feb, 2008 09:08 pm
ican :
you may not have seen what i posted under pakistan ; so i hope it's in order to re-post it here .
the main problem seems to be pakistan - particularly the area bordering afghanistan .
canadian army commanders in afghanistan have for quite some time pointed out that insurgents freely cross between afganistan and pakistan .
they attack NATO troops and afghan troops in afghanistan and quickly withdraw across the border into pakistan .
i'm sure you know that pakistan's president has made it quite clear that he will NOT tolerate nato troops crossing into pakistan .
intelligence reports from pakistan have pointed out repeatedly that musharraf is aware of the situation but chooses to ignore and even co-operate with the taliban rather than go after them .
what's going on in iraq is imo not as important as what's going on in pakistan . pakistan will supply as many new taliban recruits as are needed in iraq - the "supply" seems to be unlimited .
but don't take my word for it , read what retired admiral Michael McConnell, the U.S. director of national intelligence said before the U.S. congress recently .
hbg



Quote:
Pakistan A 'Hotbed' For Terror

Lawless tribal belt is al-Qaeda training ground

Peter Goodspeed, National Post
Published: Friday, February 15, 2008


For centuries the wild Pakistani tribal area -- stretching 1,000 kilometres along the Afghan border -- has been lawless, violent and remote. Now, it is rapidly becoming a central front in the U.S.-led war on terror.

The harsh mountainous territory, which Pakistan doesn't control and is off limits to U.S. troops, has become a breeding ground for jihad and the chief training centre for al-Qaeda.

Just days before Pakistanis vote in a crucial election, their country is being threatened by a new generation of radicalized Islamist insurgents who have allied themselves with international terrorists.

Fighters in the tribal areas have been blamed for carrying out more than 60 suicide attacks in Pakistan in the last year, including the Dec. 27 assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto. But fears are growing another high-profile attack could ignite the sort of chaos Islamic radicals thrive on.

But as al-Qaeda and the Taliban dispatch suicide bombers from the tribal belt to attack Pakistani security personnel and politicians, there are increasing indications Pakistan has become a safe haven for al-Qaeda and the ideological heartland for Islamist terrorists worldwide.

According to top U.S. security officials, South Waziristan, on the border with Afghanistan, is the new headquarters for al-Qaeda's global operations and forms the centre of a web of terror plots and assassination attempts that reaches into Europe and the United States.


In testimony before Congress last week, retired admiral Michael McConnell, the U.S. director of national intelligence, stressed al-Qaeda has "regenerated its core operational capabilities needed to conduct attacks."

"Al-Qaeda has been able to retain a safe haven in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA) that provides the organization many of the advantages it once derived from its base across the border in Afghanistan, albeit on a smaller and less secure scale," he said.

"The FATA serves as a staging area for al-Qaeda's attacks in support of the Taliban in Afghanistan as well as a location for training new terrorist operatives, for attacks in Pakistan, the Middle East, Africa, Europe and the United States.

"The next attack on the United States will most likely be launched by al-Qaeda operating in the 'under-governed regions' of Pakistan," he added

Judging from online videos and local reports from Pakistan, a study published yesterday in the CTC Sentinel, a publication of the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point, estimates "al-Qaeda is running as many as 29 training camps in the [FATA] region that are less elaborate than those found in Afghanistan in the 1990s."

But those camps funnel new recruits or "Lions of Islam" into the fight against NATO forces, including Canadians, in Afghanistan, and train potential terrorists from overseas to launch attacks.

Unlike the large military-style camps al-Qaeda used in Afghanistan before the 9/11 attacks, the new training in Pakistan's tribal areas is being done in small groups and is specially tailored to prepare Western recruits for attacks.

On Monday, the German news magazine Der Spiegel reported that officials in Germany's federal police believe four men in their 20s are being trained in Pakistan to conduct terror attacks in Germany.

Also on Monday, David Miliband, the British Foreign Secretary, while encouraging NATO to redouble its efforts in Afghanistan, noted that 70% of all terrorist incidents in Britain had their origins in Pakistan.

In the last six months, Danish, German and Spanish officials have all broken up alleged terror plots that are linked to Waziristan.

Last month in Barcelona, police claimed to have broken up a plot to attack Spain's transit system and in four neighbouring countries.

"In my opinion, the jihadi threat from Pakistan is the biggest emerging threat we are facing in Europe," said Judge Baltasar Garzon, Spain's top anti-terrorism magistrate.

"Pakistan is an ideological and training hotbed for jihadists, and they are being exported here."

Copyright © 2007 CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest MediaWorks Publications, Inc.. All rights reserved.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Feb, 2008 09:25 pm
Hamburger, I previously read your post. I didn't post anything in disagreement with that. In fact what I posted was in agreement with that. Namely if we run, AQ in Pakistan will pour into Afghanistan and Iraq, join up with AQ there, and subsequently conquer both countries. Your point may well be that the AQ in Pakistan are already pouring in. Yes they are. However, if we leave now, a far greater number of AQ will pour into Afghanistan and Iraq.

Additionally, I think it obvious that once AQ conquers Afghanistan and Iraq, it will then turn its attention to conquering Pakistan. Better we Americans not leave until the Iraqi and Afghanistani people can defend themselves without our help.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 08:47 am
ican711nm wrote:
revel wrote:
Two of those article were about suicide bombs in pakistan and Afghanistan; illustrating the fruitlessness of staying in one country fighting so called AQ while in other countries AQ is growing and getting stronger. We will not win this fight with Muslim extremist with only the military no matter how long we stay in Iraq or how many bombs we drop. For every Muslim/extremist we kill more just pop up in their place. We need to get the heart of the problems that ordinary Muslims have which causes them to turn to the extremist or else the US is going to be fighting Muslims forever. They are not going to just throw up their hands and crawl on their knees in humbleness even if we keep killing them for a hundred years. They need to be able to save face and have a reason to stop fighting.

It is simple really for AQ to save face and have a reason to stop fighting. All AQ has to do is cease killing Iraqi and Afghanistani moderate Muslims and concentrate on killing Americans instead. Then moderate Muslims of both countries will begin to publically demand that we Americans leave. We will in fact leave then, because we will no longer have any reason to stay and risk being killed. The moderate Muslims will under those circumstances be able to defend themselves without our help, and we, to avoid further casualties of our own, will be eager to leave ASAP.

So why hasn't AQ adopted that change in tactics? The reason is really obvious. The AQ mass murder moderate Muslims for reasons other than saving face or driving out we Americans. AQ mass murderers moderate Muslims, because it is AQ's objective to conquer and rule the Moderate Muslims anyway they think they can. If we were to leave before AQ is exterminated in Iraq and Afghanistan, the AQ in Pakistan would pour into Afghanistan and Iraq, join with the AQ in those countries, and complete their self-imposed objective of conquering and ruling the populations of those countries.

The primary evidence--besides all the AQ declarations that state their objective is first conquering the middle east--is the AQ effort to conquer Pakistan even though the American military is not in Pakistan.


It does not matter the reason why militant Muslims kill civillians. My point was that if we get at the source of the problems; then less moderate muslims would become militant Muslims who kill civillians. The number of terrorist has grown instead of decreased since the trouble of Gitmo and the unjustified invasion of Iraq and the actions of our military in the Iraqi prisons and the contractors in Iraq.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0925/dailyUpdate.html
Quote:
A classified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) contends that the war in Iraq has increased Islamic radicalism, and has made the terror threat around the world worse. Based on information from US government officials who had seen the document and spoke on condition of anyonymity, The New York Times reports that the NIE document, titled "Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States," says the war plays a much more direct role in the spread of Islamic radicalism around the world than has previously been indicated by the White House, or in a recent report by the US House intelligence committee.




Ican; we can go round and round and we have because we have basic fundamental idealogical differences that cannot be reconciled. This is a problem for most of the division of the right and left of the US and the right and the rest of the world.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 08:59 am
As just an interesting read as it offers another perspective to the problem of terrorism.

Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms while Countering Terrorism.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 11:49 am
Why is it that some people are blind to simple concepts of human nature? When our president authorizes torture of prisoners, we lose all the people who once supported our form of democracy. GEEESH!
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 12:56 pm
ican wrote :

Quote:
Additionally, I think it obvious that once AQ conquers Afghanistan and Iraq, it will then turn its attention to conquering Pakistan.


hbg quoted :

Quote:
In testimony before Congress last week, retired admiral Michael McConnell, the U.S. director of national intelligence, stressed al-Qaeda has "regenerated its core operational capabilities needed to conduct attacks."

"Al-Qaeda has been able to retain a safe haven in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA) that provides the organization many of the advantages it once derived from its base across the border in Afghanistan, albeit on a smaller and less secure scale," he said.


they don't have to turn their attention to pakistan ; that's where they are coming from - THE BORDER AREA (FATA) IS THEIR SAFE HAVEN !

[it's like a leaking roof . when it's raining , the rain - AQ - comes right into the living room - IRAQ . so plenty of pails will be put out to try and catch the rain - AQ . when it stops raining , the ceiling will be patched and everyone says that the problem has been fixed .
when it starts raining again , the rain - AQ - will appear again in the living room to everyones' surprise .
unless the roof gets fixed , the rain - AQ - will come back .
the argument will be made that it will cost a lot more money to fix the roof then putting out the pails .
unfortunately at some point the trusses and the whole roof will start to rot and fall down on the people in the living room - IT'LL BE TIME TO MOVE OUT AT THAT TIME.]
sorry to be just a bit pessimistic .
hbg
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 01:57 pm
ican is the one who doesn't understand the situation in Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan. Everything he says is contrary to the long-term benefit of both our country and theirs. We've already been in Iraq for over five years, and all we're accomplishing now is to put the suicide bombers into a nap mode until they find targets they choose. No military can control suicide bombers; that's a fact. We're losing more than we're gaining by our presence in Iraq. Some people just can't see the wall.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 01:57 pm
ican is the one who doesn't understand the situation in Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan. Everything he says is contrary to the long-term benefit of both our country and theirs. We've already been in Iraq for over five years, and all we're accomplishing now is to put the suicide bombers into a nap mode until they find targets they choose. No military can control suicide bombers; that's a fact. We're losing more than we're gaining by our presence in Iraq. Some people just can't see the wall. Exclamation
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 06:34 pm
on occasion i like to look back at recent , very recent history ,
such as the year 2004 .

this is from AMERICA.ORG :

Quote:
06 October 2004

Afghans Will Not Be Subject to Taliban, Says Armitage

Deputy Secretary tells German television warlords are weakening


The United States has dedicated itself to the proposition that the Afghan people will never again suffer under the rule of the Taliban, and is building up the country's police and military to help prevent that possibility, said Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage.

In his October 6 interview with ARD German Public Television, Armitage said the ultimate goal is to allow Afghans to take charge of their own security.

"We've taken the lead in training the Afghan National Army. We've got about 12,000 of them trained now. We're going to accelerate that. We've got 30,000 policemen trained," he said.

The deputy secretary also said that power is becoming more concentrated in the central government in Kabul, as opposed to Afghan warlords, thanks to the disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration program (DDR) led by the United Nations and Japan.

The pace of DDR "has really picked up of late," he said. "Ismail Khan has been defanged, if you will, and much of his heavy equipment is in cantonment right now," Armitage said, and noted the same is true of General Dostum and Attah Mohammed, a powerful regional leader. "So I think we're well on the way," he summarized.

Armitage added that whoever wins the October 9 presidential election "will be empowered by the people of Afghanistan to take further measures against warlords.

He also acknowledged that the United States and the United Kingdom need to "step up our efforts" against narcotics production in the country, which he said is hurting everyone in the world. He also said the Afghan government needs to be very much involved in the solution to the problem.

Turning to Iran's nuclear program, Armitage said the Bush administration has supported the efforts of European Union leaders to "try to the bring the Iranians to a more common sense position. "

"We'll be looking for the November [International Atomic Energy Agency] board meeting, and unless Iran is able to be transparent and clear and live up to her obligations, then we'll want to move to the Security Council," he said.

Following is the transcript of Armitage's interview with ARD:

(begin transcript)


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman
For Immediate Release
October 6, 2004
2004/1078






full interview :
AFGHANISTAN 2004


and this is what afghanistan looks like today :


Quote:
Dozens die in latest Afghan bomb

A bomb blast in southern Afghanistan has killed at least 35 civilians. Many people were injured, including three Nato soldiers, officials say.
The blast, apparently targeting Canadian troops in a Nato convoy, took place in Spin Boldak town in Kandahar province, near the Pakistani border.

A bomber in Kandahar city on Sunday killed more than 100 people - the country's bloodiest attack since 2001.

Nato troops in Afghanistan have been battling a resurgent Taleban militia.

Fifteen international troops have been killed in Afghanistan this year, most of them from the US.

Some 40,000 soldiers from Nato countries are deployed in the country, where their tasks include aiding reconstruction, tackling opium cultivation and battling the Taleban.

Taleban blamed

Monday's attack in Spin Boldak targeted a convoy of Canadian troops serving under Nato.


According to Asadullah Khalid, the governor of Kandahar province, three Canadian troops were hurt in the attack.

"The suicide attacker detonated near a Canadian military convoy," the governor of Kandahar province, Asadullah Khalid, said.

He said 35 civilians were killed and 27 civilians were hurt.


The bomb also badly damaged a military vehicle and set fire to several shops in the area, a local police official said.

The nearby border had been closed, as part of a series of security measures for Pakistani elections on Monday.

According to the Associated Press news agency, the crossing was briefly opened to take some of those hurt in the blast to a hospital in the Pakistani town of Chaman nearby.



Earlier on Monday, funerals were held in Kandahar for the victims of Sunday's suicide attack.


Quote:
MAJOR TALEBAN ATTACKS

29 Dec 2007: 16 policemen killed in Kandahar
6 Nov 2007: At least 70 die in attack on sugar factory in Baghlan province
29 Sep 2007: At least 30 soldiers killed in bus attack in Kabul
16 Jan 2006: At least 24 people killed in two attacks in Kandahar






Weeping relatives buried the dead, many of them in graves dug next to each other.

Sunday's bombing - believed to be the bloodiest since the overthrow of the Taleban in 2001 - hit a crowd watching a dogfight near the city.

The dead included a local police chief who also led a tribal militia opposed to the Taleban.

Officials blamed the Islamist Taleban guerrillas but they have denied responsibility.

Spreading influence

The Taleban claim to have influence across most of the country and have extended their area of control from their traditional heartland in the south.

They have a significant presence around Kandahar from where they carry out suicide attacks and roadside bomb blasts.

The militants are also known to operate freely in Wardak province, neighbouring the capital Kabul.

Last year, violence in Afghanistan reached its highest levels since the Taleban were forced from power in 2001, analysts say.


Quote:
just listening to a CBC reporter from afghanistan , he said that this year has already started with some bloody attacks by the taleban .
hbg


Last November, a suicide bombing in the northern Baghlan province killed 79 people - mostly school pupils - in what was until then the bloodiest bombing since the Taleban were ousted in 2001.


Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/south_asia/7250501.stm

Published: 2008/02/18 12:29:15 GMT


YES , THE WARLORDS MUST BE WEAKENING !
(see beginning of post)

source :
AFGHANISTAN 2008
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Feb, 2008 08:05 pm
revel wrote:

...
It does not matter the reason why militant Muslims kill civillians. My point was that if we get at the source of the problems; then less moderate muslims would become militant Muslims who kill civillians. The number of terrorist has grown instead of decreased since the trouble of Gitmo and the unjustified invasion of Iraq and the actions of our military in the Iraqi prisons and the contractors in Iraq.

...

Of course it matters "why militant Muslims kill civillians." The answer to that question will lead us to "the source of the problems" causing Muslims to become militant Muslims and kill moderate Muslims.

"The number of terrorists has grown instead of decreased since" since the Russians invaded Afghanistan in 1979; since the Russians began pulling out of Afghanistan in 1989; since AQ was created in Afghanistan in 1989; since AQ completed its departure from Afghanistan for Sudan in 1990; since Clinton was first elected President in 1992; since AQ left Sudan and re-entered Afghanistan in 1996; since Bush was first elected president in 2000; since AQ destroyed the WTC in September 2001; since the USA invaded Afghanistan in October 2001; since AQ fled Afghanistan for Iraq and Pakistan in December 2001; since the USA invaded Iraq in March 2003; since the Democrats were elected to the majority of both houses of Congress in November 2006; ... and ... oh, yes ... since the earth has orbited the sun almost 29 times.

Probably water boarding in Gitmo, the behavior of some USA military and some USA contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan, are minor factors in the growth of AQ.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Feb, 2008 11:51 am
It is not a question of barbaric politics .
Those who uphold American way of life will land( after death) in Afganisthan
Forget about Iraq or Cuba
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Feb, 2008 09:50 am
Ican; I am through talking to you about AQ; you ignore reports which don't back up your rheteric therefore it is a waste of time trying to reason with you.

Going on:

Iraqi cleric threatens to end cease-fire

Quote:
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Feb, 2008 12:15 pm
revel wrote:
Ican; I am through talking to you about AQ; you ignore reports which don't back up your rheteric therefore it is a waste of time trying to reason with you.
...

I read those reports you post or to which you provide links, and apparently believe are valid. I have repeatedly posted here reports that provide strong evidence that the reports you offer are irrelevant and/or invalid. The problem is you reject repeated truth, which you apparently find boring and do not refute, for new fantasy, which you do not defend. Worse you criticize me for not doing likewise.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Feb, 2008 12:58 pm
Let's see: ican = FOX news and other biased GOP rags, while revel = government sources, NYT, Washington Post, BBC, and some of the most prolific writers of our times.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Feb, 2008 01:46 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Let's see: ican = FOX news and other biased GOP rags, while revel = government sources, NYT, Washington Post, BBC, and some of the most prolific writers of our times.

I access them all: biased liberal rags as well as biased conservative rags; biased GOP rags as well as biased Democrat rags. However, mostly I access scientific and government sources. Some of these are rags and some are cloths.
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 0.12 seconds on 10/06/2024 at 05:18:10