9
   

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

 
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Mar, 2008 05:11 pm
McTag wrote:
Dream world? He's in a nightmare world of denial.

Ican, instead of writing more repetitious, self-serving and erroneous garbage, read Robert Fisk's article and reflect on it awhile:

http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=90730&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=5190

I read this opinion piece. Fisk makes it clear why he thinks things are horrible and failing in Iraq.

We have at least two alternatives if his opinion is valid:
1. Flee Iraq and await the consequences;
2. Stay in Iraq until we learn how to win and succeed there.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Mar, 2008 06:54 pm
ican, Iraq already won! They made our country bankrupt; all Bush is doing now is putting sand on the coffin.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Mar, 2008 07:01 pm
Are any American easy-chair intellectuals
wish to book holiday outside Bagdad?
If yes i will join
awaiting
Rama
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Mar, 2008 09:46 am
Suicide bomb kills 13 Iraqi soldiers
By RYAN LENZ, Associated Press Writer
Sun Mar 23, 7:16 AM ET



BAGHDAD - A suicide car bomber killed at least 13 Iraqi soldiers and wounded dozens more people in Iraq's north on Sunday. Meanwhile, the U.S.-protected Green Zone in Baghdad came under fire from either mortars or rockets, and a round that fell short injured two bystanders.


The Easter Sunday attacks underscored the fragility of Iraq's security, despite a decline in violence over the past year. They also came as the U.S. military death toll in Iraq nears 4,000.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sun 23 Mar, 2008 06:56 pm
Quote:


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080323/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Mar, 2008 09:25 am
http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/ww/news/2008/03/24/iraqfallen_big.jpg

Video

4000 KIA

I can't remember the exact number of people of who died on 9/11 but I believe we have passed that in number of soldiers who have died in Iraq.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Mar, 2008 09:54 am
revel wrote:
http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/ww/news/2008/03/24/iraqfallen_big.jpg

Video

4000 KIA

I can't remember the exact number of people of who died on 9/11 but I believe we have passed that in number of soldiers who have died in Iraq.


Some people still hasn't absorbed that simple fact. Not only have we lost more in Iraq, but the soldiers with injuries will continue to cost in many ways besides the dollar cost.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Mar, 2008 05:59 pm
C I
It is not a question of how much it costs but ethical one.
.
As an intellectual who had travelled far and wide you know my English which is a foreign language like German..

I used to read all the responses you are a jewell in A2K like a handful of few.

My repentance is not so much regret for the evil I had faced.
Rama
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Mar, 2008 06:48 pm
What are the consequences of our leaving Iraq by the end of 2008?

What are the consequences of our remaining in Iraq until the Iraq government is able to protect the Iraqi people from mass murder?
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Mar, 2008 06:57 pm
Ican the consequences of our leaving could very well mean more deaths for Iraqis and perhaps civil war. Yet the alternative is to stay in large force forever and we simply can not sustain that effort or we will leave ourselves at risk in other quaters plus keep putting us further and further in debt. That is simply reality. I am betting Bush knows this but also knows he can just put this burden on the next president without him having to admit we can not solve all the problems of Iraq of which we created by invading it in the first place for no reason.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Mar, 2008 07:39 pm
revel wrote:
Ican the consequences of our leaving could very well mean more deaths for Iraqis and perhaps civil war. Yet the alternative is to stay in large force forever and we simply can not sustain that effort or we will leave ourselves at risk in other quaters plus keep putting us further and further in debt. That is simply reality. I am betting Bush knows this but also knows he can just put this burden on the next president without him having to admit we can not solve all the problems of Iraq of which we created by invading it in the first place for no reason.

It is simply reality that our leaving Iraq before the Iraq government is able to protect the Iraqi peopl has additional consequences over and above "more deaths for Iraqis and perhaps civil war."

It is simply reality that among those additional consequences are more mass murders of people in America, perhaps crippling or even suspending our government's ability to protect Americans against mass murder.

19 suicidal mass murderers mass murdered almost 3,000 people in America.

190 suicidal mass murderers could mass murder almost 30,000 people in America.

1,900 suicidal mass murderers could mass murder almost 300,000 people in America.

19,000 suicidal mass murderers could mass murder almost 3,000,000 people in America.

190,000 ...


That many suicidal mass murderers may have already entered America. That many suicidal mass murderers would currently have little difficulty entering America from Mexico.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Mar, 2008 07:50 pm
I had posted long back.
The surviving civilians in Iraq should chase away the unwarrnted criminals from their country.
They had endured enough oredeal under the criminal contagerous bedfellow of the counterpart.


let the criminals seek shelter in China or India or Russia if not africa.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Mar, 2008 06:47 am
Iraqi troops, militias clash in Basra

Quote:


The Battle of Baghdad

The above is too long to leave but for anyone wanting an honest look at where we are and how we come to be here in Iraq (situation wise) this is a pretty good article.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Mar, 2008 09:47 am
revel, What the neocons fail to admit is the simple fact that Iraq is in a civil war - thats lasted for over one thousand years.

They want the Bush puppet regime to bring democracy to a country thats been in a war-mode for most of their lives - not just since 2003.

These flareups will continue irregardless of what Maliki does; that's guaranteed.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Mar, 2008 01:28 pm
Quote:
Saddam's Terror Links: New evidence from Iraq's files.
March 24, 2008; Page A14 Wall Street Journal

Five years on, few Iraq myths are as persistent as the notion that the Bush Administration invented a connection between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda. Yet a new Pentagon report suggests that Iraq's links to world-wide terror networks, including al Qaeda, were far more extensive than previously understood.

Naturally, it's getting little or no attention. Press accounts have been misleading or outright distortions, while the Bush Administration seems indifferent. Even John McCain has let the study's revelations float by. But that doesn't make the facts any less notable or true.

The redacted version of "Saddam and Terrorism" is the most definitive public assessment to date from the Harmony program, the trove of "exploitable" documents, audio and video records, and computer files captured in Iraq. On the basis of about 600,000 items, the report lays out Saddam's willingness to use terrorism against American and other international targets, as well as his larger state sponsorship of terror, which included harboring, training and equipping jihadis throughout the Middle East.

"The rise of Islamic fundamentalism in the region gave Saddam the opportunity to make terrorism, one of the few tools remaining in Saddam's 'coercion' toolbox, not only cost effective but a formal instrument of state power," the authors conclude. Throughout the 1990s, the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) cooperated with Hamas; the Palestine Liberation Front, which maintained a Baghdad office; Force 17, Yasser Arafat's private army; and others. The IIS gave commando training for members of Egyptian Islamic Jihad, the organization that assassinated Anwar Sadat and whose "emir" was Ayman al-Zawahiri, who became Osama bin Laden's second-in-command when the group merged with al Qaeda in 1998.

At the very least the report should dispel the notion that outwardly "secular" Saddam would never consort with religious types like al Qaeda. A pan-Arab nationalist, Saddam viewed radical Islamists as potential allies, and they likewise. According to a 1993 memo, Saddam decided to "form a group to start hunting Americans present on Arab soil; especially Somalia," where al Qaeda was then working with warlords against U.S. humanitarian forces. Saddam also trained Sudanese fighters in Iraq.

The Pentagon report cites this as "a tactical example" of their cooperation. When Saddam "was ordering action in Somalia aimed at the American presence, Osama bin Laden was doing the same thing." Saddam took an interest in "far-flung terrorist groups . . . to locate any organization whose services he might use in the future." The Harmony documents "reveal that the regime was willing to co-opt or support organizations it knew to be part of al Qaeda -- as long as that organization's near-term goals supported Saddam's long-term version."

For 20 years, such "support" included using Fedayeen Saddam training camps to school terrorists, especially Palestinians but also non-Iraqis "directly associated" with al Qaeda, continuing up to the fall of Baghdad. Saddam also provided financial support and weapons, amounting to "a state-directed program of significant scale." In July 2001, the regime began patronizing a terror cartel in Bahrain calling itself the Army of Muhammad, which, according to an Iraqi memo, "is under the wings of bin Laden."

It's true that the Pentagon report found no "smoking gun," i.e., a direct connection on a joint Iraq-al Qaeda operation. Supposedly this vindicates the view that Iraq's liberation was launched on false premises. But the Administration was always cautious, with Colin Powell alleging merely a "sinister nexus" in his 2003 U.N. speech. If anything, sinister is an understatement. The main Iraq intelligence failure was over WMD, but the report indicates that the CIA also underestimated Saddam's ties to global terror cartels.

The Administration has always maintained that Iraq is just one front in the war on terror; and the report offers "evidence of logistical preparation for terrorist operations in other nations, including those in the West." In 2002, an IIS memo explained to Saddam that Iraqi embassies were stockpiling weapons, while many of the terrorists trained in Fedayeen camps were dispatched to London with counterfeit documents, where they circulated throughout Europe.

Around the same time, the IIS began to manufacture better improvised explosive devices "designed to be used in civilian areas," and the regime bureaucratized suicide operations, with local Baath Party leaders competing to provide recruits for Saddam as part of a "Martyrdom Project."

All of these are inconvenient facts for those who want to assert that somehow Saddam could have been easily contained and presented no threat to the U.S. The Harmony files buttress the case that the decision to oust Saddam was the right one -- which makes it all the more puzzling that the Bush Administration is mum. It isn't the first time the White House has ceded the Iraq debate to its opponents.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Mar, 2008 01:32 pm
Barbaric behaviour thy name is BUSH's benighn behaviour..
V R fed up .
Pack your box with your bible and leave us alone USA
Rama Fuchs
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Mar, 2008 01:37 pm
"Five years into the Iraq War -- the latest in America's campaign of perpetual combat in which few profit and countless others suffer -- is a time to reflect on the tragic consequences of the military-industrial-congressional complex, in a global economy teetering on the brink, and an upcoming presidential election whose outcome promises more of the same cloaked in change. When will we break out of propaganda's spell to the realization that we are not a peaceable nation generously spreading democracy for the good of the world, and recognize that all human beings are entitled to respect and dignity, and not to be treated as dispensable collateral standing between us and their commodities? "
http://www.swans.com/library/art14/jeb189.html
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Mar, 2008 03:12 pm
The horrendous causers of horror that make the "countless others suffer," are the recruiters, trainers, and equipers of the suicidal mass murderers of non-murderers in Iraq.

If we leave before the Iraq government can protect Iraqis against these horrendous causers of horror, we will see countless increases in Iraqi suffering.
0 Replies
 
Ramafuchs
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Mar, 2008 04:00 pm
I wish not to be an American
obviously beccause after my death I iwill be in Hell or USA
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Mar, 2008 05:35 am
Ican; Saddam supported terrorist groups and sanctuary and aid to terrorist groups but there was no direct link between the former Iraqi dictator and al-Qaida.

He carried out these operations against groups he considered against his regime but there was no 'direct operational link' with al-Qaida. Which was the main argument along with weapons of mass destruction used before going into the war.

In fact Bush said ""The same people that attacked us on September the 11th is a crowd that is now bombing people, killing innocent men, women and children, many of whom are Muslims,"

Read the following; it includes many of the same instances of Saddam and terrorist groups as the article you posted does.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/29959.html

In this report on page 9 it says Saddam distrusted everyone but his sons and close relatives.

http://www.jfcom.mil/newslink/storyarchive/2006/ipp.pdf

So while I understand he conducted and supported some islamic jihads and other terrorist groups at times; he did not have direct operational links with al-queda because he would be afraid those strong organized groups would turn on him.

So there was no distorting in the news media of this report; just merely a truer perception than the author of your article of the report.
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 10/05/2024 at 07:18:07