9
   

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

 
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2007 10:17 am
hamburger wrote:

...
in a strange twist , the relations between the new russia and the new germany are quite cordial .

and it seems that the relations between the united states and vietnam are quite cordial too - judging from what president bush has said and looking at the trade between the countries .

perhaps reletions between the united states and iraq could also become quite cordial after the u.s. troops leave - so why drag the whole thing out ?

i seem to recall that it was said if vietnam would fall to the communists , the western world would no longer be safe from communism either .

so what is the true status now ?
hbg( just wondering)

We defeated the communist USSR another way.

Germany's stated primary objective in Russia was to conquer Russia. Russia's stated primary objective in Russia was to defeat the Nazis in Russia. Russia prevailed in Russia.

America's stated primary objective in Vietnam was to defeat the Vietcong and North Vietnamese in South Vietnam. The Vietcong's and North Vietnamese's stated primary objective in South Vietnam was to conquer South Vietnam. The Vietcong and North Vietnamese in South Vietnam prevailed in South Vietnam.

America's stated primary objective in Iraq is to defeat the al-Qaeda in Iraq. Al-Qaeda in Iraq's stated primary objective in Iraq is to establish a permanent sanctuary for itself in Iraq from which it could train for and launch many more future terrorist attacks, like those it launched in 2001 in America on US airliners, the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Who shall prevail in Iraq?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2007 10:24 am
Quote:

America's stated primary objective in Iraq is to defeat the al-Qaeda in Iraq. Al-Qaeda in Iraq's stated primary objective in Iraq is to establish a permanent sanctuary for itself in Iraq from which it could train for and launch many more future terrorist attacks, like those it launched in 2001 in America on US airliners, the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Who shall prevail in Iraq?


I do think that it's worth mentioning that this was not our primary objective in Iraq, but finding Saddam's WMD arsenal. And, in fact, our secondary objective was to 'bring democracy' to the region. You are describing the tertiary objective.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2007 11:23 am
Ican wrote:
Quote:
THIS REPORT YOU POSTED REFERS TO TERRORIST ATTACKS WORLDWIDE IN 2006 FOR WHICH LESS THAN HALF RESULTED IN FATALITIES.

Nevertheless, terrorist attacks went up rather than down in 2006. A pretty good indicator of the non-effectness of the Iraq war having on the desire to committ terrorist attacks.

Nothing is said here about TERRORIST ATTACKS WORLDWIDE IN 2007. Nothing is said here about the effectiveness of US Iraq anti-terrorist operations in 2007.

I expect it is because they don't have report for 2007 prepared yet as the year is not even over.

Now that you know the "boogyman response" and the "'follow us home' response" what do you know that refutes these responses?


The following is an interesting article which ties into this discussion.


Iraq 101: Aftermath - Long-Term Thinking


http://www.motherjones.com/news/featurex/2007/03/fatal_jihadist_attacks.gif









Quote:
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2007 01:03 pm
mysteryman wrote:


Lets totally isolate the ME from the rest of the world,and then let them live in the 7th century if they want.



.


What makes you think that they want to live in the 7th C? They're as materialistic as you are.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2007 01:06 pm
Iraq is like Vietnam insofar as the govt lied about the reasons why we were going to war and then stubbornly persisted in the pursuit of war. Listen to or read the timeline of Vietnam: the only difference between Vietnam and Iraq are the names.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2007 01:12 pm
plainoldme wrote:
mysteryman wrote:


Lets totally isolate the ME from the rest of the world,and then let them live in the 7th century if they want.



.


What makes you think that they want to live in the 7th C? They're as materialistic as you are.


What makes you think they dont?
The Islamic fundamentalists seem to want to return to the days of the caliphate,they want to keep their women as virtual slaves,and they want to eliminate other religions.

So,if they dont want to return to the 7th C,exactly what C do they want to live in?
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2007 02:09 pm
ican wrote :

Quote:
America's stated primary objective in Vietnam was to defeat the Vietcong and North Vietnamese in South Vietnam. The Vietcong's and North Vietnamese's stated primary objective in South Vietnam was to conquer South Vietnam. The Vietcong and North Vietnamese in South Vietnam prevailed in South Vietnam.


...and the predicted spread of communism throughout the world never happened .
as i said , relations between the united-states and vietnam are quite cordial now and president bush seems full of praise for vietnam - you might recall the speech he gave .

so does that tell us that the united-states was wrong/foolish to become entangled in vietnam ?

many , many lives would have been spared if the united-states would have taken a non-aggressive stance towards the vietnamese .

the vietnam war seems to have achieved nothing except to this day make one section of americans accuse the other of having become entangled in an un-necessary war , while the other section assuses the others of having given up too easily .
just can't think of any benefits it has brought the united states and the rest of the world , but perhaps i've missed something ?
hbg
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2007 06:09 pm
hamburger wrote:
ican wrote :

Quote:
America's stated primary objective in Vietnam was to defeat the Vietcong and North Vietnamese in South Vietnam. The Vietcong's and North Vietnamese's stated primary objective in South Vietnam was to conquer South Vietnam. The Vietcong and North Vietnamese in South Vietnam prevailed in South Vietnam.


...and the predicted spread of communism throughout the world never happened .

That predicted spread of communism throughout the world never happened, because the USSR collapsed before it could make that, its stated primary objective, happen.

as i said , relations between the united-states and vietnam are quite cordial now and president bush seems full of praise for vietnam - you might recall the speech he gave .

so does that tell us that the united-states was wrong/foolish to become entangled in vietnam ?

YES!

many , many lives would have been spared if the united-states would have taken a non-aggressive stance towards the vietnamese.

YES!

the vietnam war seems to have achieved nothing except to this day make one section of americans accuse the other of having become entangled in an un-necessary war , while the other section assuses the others of having given up too easily .

YES!

just can't think of any benefits it has brought the united states and the rest of the world , but perhaps i've missed something ?

YES! I can't think of any such benefits either.

hbg


The Nazi Germans stated that their primary objective was to spread Naziism throughout the world. I think stopping them brought benefits to the United States and the rest of the world.

The North Vietnamese and the Vietcong never stated that their primary objective in South (or North Vietnam) was to spread communism throughout the world.

Al-Qaeda has repeatedly stated that its primary objective is to spread its version of Islam throughout the world. I think stopping them will bring benefits to the United States and the rest of the world.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2007 06:32 pm
revel wrote:
Ican wrote:
Quote:
THIS REPORT YOU POSTED REFERS TO TERRORIST ATTACKS WORLDWIDE IN 2006 FOR WHICH LESS THAN HALF RESULTED IN FATALITIES.


Nevertheless, terrorist attacks went up rather than down in 2006. A pretty good indicator of the non-effectness of the Iraq war having on the desire to committ terrorist attacks.

ican711nm wrote:
Nothing is said here about TERRORIST ATTACKS WORLDWIDE IN 2007. Nothing is said here about the effectiveness of US Iraq anti-terrorist operations in 2007.


I expect it is because they don't have report for 2007 prepared yet as the year is not even over.

That is beside the point. The point is we do not now know whether or not the current US strategy in Iraq for reducing civilian (i.e., non-murderer) casualties will work. If it is beginning to work, abandoning the current strategy before it accomplishes its goal would be stupid.


ican711nm wrote:
Now that you know the "boogyman response" and the "'follow us home' response" what do you know that refutes these responses?


...

Iraq 101: Aftermath - Long-Term Thinking

The graph from the link you supplied appears to indicate terrorist attacks were less in 2006 than in 2005!

Please explain.


...
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2007 07:08 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:

America's stated primary objective in Iraq is to defeat the al-Qaeda in Iraq. Al-Qaeda in Iraq's stated primary objective in Iraq is to establish a permanent sanctuary for itself in Iraq from which it could train for and launch many more future terrorist attacks, like those it launched in 2001 in America on US airliners, the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Who shall prevail in Iraq?


I do think that it's worth mentioning that this was not our primary objective in Iraq, but finding Saddam's WMD arsenal. And, in fact, our secondary objective was to 'bring democracy' to the region. You are describing the tertiary objective.

Cycloptichorn

Yes it was our primary objective. The fact that additional objectives were also stated by Bush et al is irrelevant.

The reasons given in the following quotes for invading Iraq and Afghanistan are the stated, primary valid and sufficient reasons, regardless of whether or not the other reasons Bush et al gave are valid and sufficient.

Congress wrote:

Congress's Joint Resolution September 14, 2001
emphasis added
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
...
(a) IN GENERAL- That 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.


Congress wrote:

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;

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

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. "

Senate Select Committee wrote:

Congressional Intelligence Report 09/08/2006
REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE
Conclusion 6. Postwar information indicates that the Intelligence Community accurately assessed that al-Qa'ida affiliate group Ansar al-Islam operated in Kurdish-controlled northeastern Iraq, an area that Baghdad had not controlled since 1991.

Wikipedia wrote:

ANSAR AL-ISLAM[/URL
Ansar al-Islam (Supporters or Partisans of Islam) is a Kurdish Sunni Islamist group, promoting a radical interpretation of Islam and holy war. At the beginning of the [b]2003[/b] invasion of Iraq it controlled about a dozen villages and a range of peaks in northern Iraq on the Iranian border. It has used tactics such as suicide bombers in its conflicts with the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and other Kurdish groups.

Ansar al-Islam was formed in December 2001 as a merger of Jund al-Islam (Soldiers of Islam), led by Abu Abdallah al-Shafi'i, and a splinter group from the Islamic Movement in Kurdistan led by Mullah Krekar. Krekar became the leader of the merged Ansar al-Islam, which opposed an agreement made between IMK and the dominant Kurdish group in the area, Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK).

Ansar al-Islam fortified a number of villages along the Iranian border, with Iranian artillery support. [1]
Ansar al-Islam quickly initiated a number of attacks on the peshmerga (armed forces) of the PUK, on one occasion massacring 53 prisoners and beheading them. Several assassination attempts on leading PUK-politicians were also made with carbombs and snipers.

Ansar al-Islam comprised about 300 armed men, many of these veterans from the Afghan war, and a proportion being neither Kurd nor Arab. Ansar al-Islam is alleged to be connected to al-Qaeda, and provided an entry point for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and other Afghan veterans to enter Iraq.[/b][/color]

UN wrote:
UN CHARTER Article 51
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.


ican711nm wrote:
QUESTION
Is al-Qaeda an international confederation of terrorist organizations?

ANSWER
Yes!


emphasis added
9/11 Commission wrote:

9/11 Commission Report

2 THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW TERRORISM

2.1 A DECLARATION OF WAR
In February 1998, the 40-year-old Saudi exile Usama Bin Ladin and a fugitive Egyptian physician, Ayman al Zawahiri, arranged from their Afghan headquarters for an Arabic newspaper in London to publish what they termed a fatwa issued in the name of a "World Islamic Front." A fatwa is normally an interpretation of Islamic law by a respected Islamic authority, but neither Bin Ladin, Zawahiri, nor the three others who signed this statement were scholars of Islamic law. Claiming that America had declared war against God and his messenger, they called for the murder of any American, anywhere on earth, as the "individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it."1

Three months later, when interviewed in Afghanistan by ABC-TV, Bin Ladin enlarged on these themes.2 He claimed it was more important for Muslims to kill Americans than to kill other infidels. "It is far better for anyone to kill a single American soldier than to squander his efforts on other activities," he said. Asked whether he approved of terrorism and of attacks on civilians, he replied: "We believe that the worst thieves in the world today and the worst terrorists are the Americans. Nothing could stop you except perhaps retaliation in kind. We do not have to differentiate between military or civilian. As far as we are concerned, they are all targets."
...
Plans to attack the United States were developed with unwavering single-mindedness throughout the 1990s. Bin Ladin saw himself as called "to follow in the footsteps of the Messenger and to communicate his message to all nations,"5 and to serve as the rallying point and organizer of a new kind of war to destroy America and bring the world to Islam.
...
9/11 Commission Report
2.3 THE RISE OF BIN LADIN AND AL QAEDA (1988-1992)
...
Bin Ladin understood better than most of the volunteers the extent to which the continuation and eventual success of the jihad in Afghanistan depended on an increasingly complex, almost worldwide organization. This organization included a financial support network that came to be known as the "Golden Chain," put together mainly by financiers in Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf states. Donations flowed through charities or other nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Bin Ladin and the "Afghan Arabs" drew largely on funds raised by this network, whose agents roamed world markets to buy arms and supplies for the mujahideen, or "holy warriors."21
...
Bin Ladin now had a vision of himself as head of an international jihad confederation. In Sudan, he established an "Islamic Army Shura" that was to serve as the coordinating body for the consortium of terrorist groups with which he was forging alliances. It was composed of his own al Qaeda Shura together with leaders or representatives of terrorist organizations that were still independent. In building this Islamic army, he enlisted groups from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Oman, Algeria, Libya, Tunisia, Morocco, Somalia, and Eritrea. Al Qaeda also established cooperative but less formal relationships with other extremist groups from these same countries; from the African states of Chad, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, and Uganda; and from the Southeast Asian states of Burma, Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia. Bin Ladin maintained connections in the Bosnian conflict as well.37 The groundwork for a true global terrorist network was being laid.
...
Bin Ladin seemed willing to include in the confederation terrorists from almost every corner of the Muslim world. His vision mirrored that of Sudan's Islamist leader, Turabi, who convened a series of meetings under the label Popular Arab and Islamic Conference around the time of Bin Ladin's arrival in that country. Delegations of violent Islamist extremists came from all the groups represented in Bin Ladin's Islamic Army Shura. Representatives also came from organizations such as the Palestine Liberation Organization, Hamas, and Hezbollah.51
...
9/11 Commission Report
2.5 AL QAEDA'S RENEWAL IN AFGHANISTAN (1996-1998)
...
The Taliban seemed to open the doors to all who wanted to come to Afghanistan to train in the camps. The alliance with the Taliban provided al Qaeda a sanctuary in which to train and indoctrinate fighters and terrorists, import weapons, forge ties with other jihad groups and leaders, and plot and staff terrorist schemes. While Bin Ladin maintained his own al Qaeda guesthouses and camps for vetting and training recruits, he also provided support to and benefited from the broad infrastructure of such facilities in Afghanistan made available to the global network of Islamist movements. U.S. intelligence estimates put the total number of fighters who underwent instruction in Bin Ladin-supported camps in Afghanistan from 1996 through 9/11 at 10,000 to 20,000.78
...
Now effectively merged with Zawahiri's Egyptian Islamic Jihad,82 al Qaeda promised to become the general headquarters for international terrorism, without the need for the Islamic Army Shura. Bin Ladin was prepared to pick up where he had left off in Sudan. He was ready to strike at "the head of the snake."
...
On February 23, 1998, Bin Ladin issued his public fatwa. The language had been in negotiation for some time, as part of the merger under way between Bin Ladin's organization and Zawahiri's Egyptian Islamic Jihad. Less than a month after the publication of the fatwa, the teams that were to carry out the embassy attacks were being pulled together in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam. The timing and content of their instructions indicate that the decision to launch the attacks had been made by the time the fatwa was issued.88
...
9/11 Commission Report
The attack on the U.S. embassy in Nairobi destroyed the embassy and killed 12 Americans and 201 others, almost all Kenyans. About 5,000 people were injured. The attack on the U.S. embassy in Dar es Salaam killed 11 more people, none of them Americans. Interviewed later about the deaths of the Africans, Bin Ladin answered that "when it becomes apparent that it would be impossible to repel these Americans without assaulting them, even if this involved the killing of Muslims, this is permissible under Islam." Asked if he had indeed masterminded these bombings, Bin Ladin said that the World Islamic Front for jihad against "Jews and Crusaders" had issued a "crystal clear" fatwa. If the instigation for jihad against the Jews and the Americans to liberate the holy places "is considered a crime," he said, "let history be a witness that I am a criminal."93
...
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
The Commission closed on August 21, 2004. This site is archived.

ican711nm wrote:
QUESTION
Is al-Qaeda an international confederation of terrorist organizations?

ANSWER
Yes!


al-Zawahiri wrote:
www.dni.gov/release_letter_101105.html
Summary of Letter from al-Zawahiri to al-Zarqawi July 9, 2005.
The war in Iraq is central to al Qa'ida's global jihad.
The war will not end with an American departure.
The strategic vision is one of inevitable conflict with a call by al-Zawahiri for political action equal to military action.
More than half the struggle is taking place "in the battlefield of the media."
Popular support must be maintained at least until jihadist rule has been established.

firstcoastnews wrote:

Shiite sacred mosque explosion in Samarra
[Search argument "Samarra Mosque explosion."]
...
In Baghdad, National Security Adviser Mouwafak al-Rubaie blamed religious zealots such as the al-Qaida terror network, telling Al-Arabiya television that the attack was an attempt "to pull Iraq toward civil war."

The country's most revered Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, sent instructions to his followers forbidding attacks on Sunni mosques, especially the major ones in Baghdad. He called for seven days of mourning, his aides said.
...
President Jalal Talabani condemned the attack and called for restraint, saying the attack was designed to sabotage talks on a government of national unity following the Dec. 15 parliamentary election.


CNN wrote:

Capture of al-Qaeda mastermind of Golden Mosque explosion
[Search argument "Al-Qaeda responsible for Samarra Mosque Explosion."]
...
Abu Qudama operated under terrorist cell leader Haitham al-Badri.

Al-Badri was "a known terrorist," a member of Ansar al-Sunna before he joined terror group al Qaeda in Iraq, al-Rubaie said.

However, Iraqi authorities "were not aware of his being the mastermind behind the golden mosque explosion" until Abu Qudama's arrest, al-Rubaie said.
"The sole reason behind his action was to drive a wedge between the Shiites and Sunnis and to ignite and trigger a sectarian war in this country," al-Rubaie said, referring to al-Badri.
…

ican711nm wrote:
THE MASS MURDERERS OF IRAQI NON-MURDERERS ARE THE ONES WHO CAUSED THE 23,482 DEATHS OF IRAQI NON-MURDERERS IN 2006.

usatoday wrote:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-11-10-iraq_x.htm?csp=34
Al-Qaeda in Iraq taunts Bush, claims it's winning war
Updated 11/10/2006 2:33 PM

BAGHDAD (AP) -- A recording Friday attributed to the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq mocked U.S. President George W. Bush as a coward whose conduct of the war had been rejected by U.S. voters, challenging him to keep American troops in the country to face more bloodshed.
"We haven't had enough of your blood yet," terror chieftain Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, identified as the speaker on the tape, said as he claimed to have 12,000 fighters under his command who "have vowed to die for God's sake."

The Egyptian said his fighters would not rest until they blew up the White House and occupied Jerusalem.

It was impossible to verify the authenticity of the 20-minute recording, posted on a website used by Islamic militants.

Al-Muhajir, also known as Abu Ayyub al-Masri, boasted that al-Qaeda in Iraq was moving toward victory faster than expected because of Bush's mistakes.
...

yahoo wrote:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/iraq_dc
Dozens of al Qaeda killed in Anbar: Iraq police By Waleed Ibrahim and Ibon Villelabeitia
Thu Mar 1, 3:17 PM ET [2007]
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraqi security forces killed dozens of al Qaeda militants who attacked a village in western Anbar province on Wednesday, during fierce clashes that lasted much of the day, police officials said on Thursday.

Sunni tribal leaders are involved in a growing power struggle with Sunni al Qaeda for control of Anbar, a vast desert province that is the heart of the Sunni Arab insurgency in Iraq.

In Baghdad, U.S. and Iraqi troops are engaged in a security crackdown to stop bloodshed between Shi'ites and Sunni Arabs.

U.S. and Iraqi military officials said troops would soon launch aggressive operations to seize weapons and hunt gunmen in the Shi'ite militia bastion of Sadr City, signaling resolve to press ahead with the plan even in sensitive areas.

Dozens of loud explosions that sounded like mortar bombs rocked southern Baghdad in quick succession on Thursday evening, Reuters witnesses said.

Iraqi military spokesman Brigadier Qassim Moussawi said the blasts were part of the new security offensive, Iraqiya state television reported, without giving details. A U.S. military spokeswoman said she had no information on the explosions.

Interior Ministry spokesman Abdul Karim Khalaf said foreign Arabs and Afghans were among some 80 militants killed and 50 captured in the clashes in Amiriyat al Falluja, an Anbar village where local tribes had opposed al Qaeda.

A police official in the area, Ahmed al-Falluji, put the number of militants killed at 70, with three police officers killed. There was no immediate verification of the numbers.

A U.S. military spokesman in the nearby city of Falluja, Major Jeff Pool, said U.S. forces were not involved in the battle but had received reports from Iraqi police that it lasted most of Wednesday. He could not confirm the number killed.

Another police source in Falluja put the figure at dozens.

"Because it was so many killed we can't give an exact number for the death toll," the police source told Reuters.

Witnesses said dozens of al Qaeda members attacked the village, prompting residents to flee and seek help from Iraqi security forces, who sent in police and soldiers.

CNN wrote:

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/11/10/iraq.main/
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- A purported audio recording by the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq vows to step up the group's fight against the United States, saying, "We haven't had enough of your blood yet."

The recording was posted Friday on an Islamist Web site and the speaker is identified as Abu Hamza al-Muhajer, successor to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Al-Muhajer is also known as Abu Ayyub al-Masri.

"Come down to the battlefield, you coward," the speaker says on the recording, which CNN cannot independently confirm as the voice of al-Muhajer.

Calling President Bush a "lame duck" the speaker tells Bush not to "run away as your lame defense secretary ran away," referring to Donald Rumsfeld, who resigned Wednesday.

Critics of the U.S.-led war in Iraq have placed much of the blame for its problems on Rumsfeld. The war's growing unpopularity contributed to toppling the majority Republican Party in both chambers of Congress in Tuesday's election. (Watch Rumsfeld acknowledge what's going wrong -- 2:23)

Much of the Iraqi insurgency has been blamed on al Qaeda in Iraq, whose former chief al-Zarqawi was killed in a U.S.-led airstrike in June.

The speaker on the tape vows that al Qaeda in Iraq will not stop its jihad "until we sit under the olive trees in Rumiya after we blow up the wicked house known as the White House." He says the first phase of the jihad is now over, and that the next phase -- building an Islamic nation -- has begun.

"The victory day has come faster than we expected," he says. "Here is the Islamic nation in Iraq victorious against the tyrant. The enemy is incapable of fighting on and has no choice but to run away."

The speaker claims his al Qaeda army has 12,000 soldiers -- with 10,000 more waiting in the wings to join them.
...

CBS wrote:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/15/iraq/main2479937.shtml
BAGHDAD, Iraq, Feb. 15, 2007
(CBS/AP) The leader of al Qaeda in Iraq was wounded and an aide was killed Thursday in a clash with Iraqi forces north of Baghdad, the Interior Ministry spokesman said.

The clash occurred near Balad, a major U.S. base about 50 miles north of the capital, Brig. Gen Abdul-Karim Khalaf said.

Khalaf said al Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Ayyub al-Masri was wounded and his aide, identified as Abu Abdullah al-Majemaai, was killed.

Khalaf declined to say how Iraqi forces knew al-Masri had been injured, and there was no report on the incident from U.S. authorities. Deputy Interior Minister Maj. Gen. Hussein Ali Kamal said he had no information about such a clash or that al-Masri had been involved.

Al-Masri took over the leadership of al Qaeda in Iraq after its charismatic leader, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, was killed in a U.S. air strike last June in Diyala province northeast of Baghdad.

Meanwhile U.S. and Iraqi forces pushed deeper into Sunni militant strongholds in Baghdad -- where cars rigged with explosives greeted their advance -- while British-led teams in southern Iraq used shipping containers to block suspected weapon smuggling routes from Iran.

The series of car bomb blasts, which killed at least seven civilians, touched all corners of Baghdad. But they did little to disrupt a wide-ranging security sweep seeking to weaken militia groups' ability to fight U.S.-allied forces -- and each other.

The attacks, however, pointed to the critical struggle to gain the upper hand on Baghdad's streets. The Pentagon hopes its current campaign of arrests and arms seizures will convince average Iraqis that militiamen are losing ground.

It will take a lot of convincing.

Iraqis, such as Sunnis living on Haifa Street in central Baghdad, still live in mortal fear, reports CBS News chief foreign correspondent Lara Logan.

"Right now it is very difficult with the enemy that is around here in this area -- it is a real hostile area" says Lt. Juan Cantu, whose Crazyhorse Troop is guarding Haifa Street. "These people are scared just to go outside their front door"

Terrorism wrote:

http://terrorism.about.com/od/groupsleader1/p/AlQaedainIraq.htm
Al Qaeda in Iraq -- A profile of Sunni jihadist organization Al Qaeda in Iraq
From Amy Zalman, Ph.D.,
Name: Al Qaeda in Iraq

"Al Qaeda in Iraq is a shortening of the organization's original name Tanzim Qaidat Al Jihad fi Bilad Al Rafidin: Organization of Qaidat Al Jihad in the Land of Two Rivers. Iraq is called the land between two rivers, the Euphrates and the Tigris.

There has been considerable speculation about the name of the organization and how it was arrived at.

According to Egyptian journalist Abd Al Rahim Ali, the name "Qaida Al Jihad" is interesting because it reveals the roots of the joint organization formed in 2001 when Al Qaida head Osama bin Laden and Al Jihad of Egypt head Ayman Al Zawahiri joined forces to create "Qaida Al Jihad."

In the view of the U.S. State Department the name is "understood to mean the base of organized jihadist operations in Iraq" (The word "al qaeda" means "base"). This name was given by Jordanian born Abd al Musab Al Zarqawi, who assumed leadership in late 2004, after pledging allegiance to bin Laden.

mnf-iraq wrote:

Iraq Army captures al-Qaeda
IA Captures Al Qaeda In Iraq Cell Leader, Recovers Weapons Cache

BAGHDAD -- Soldiers of the 5th Iraqi Army Division captured a suspected Al Qaeda in
Iraq cell leader during operations Feb. 15 in Muqdadiyah. The suspect is believed
responsible for coordinating and carrying out several improvised explosive device and
rocket attacks targeting Iraqi civilians and Iraqi Security Forces in the area.

During the operation, several munitions caches were recovered by Iraqi Forces.

Munitions confiscated included 12 152mm artillery projectiles, ten 130mm artillery
projectiles, five 105mm artillery projectiles, ten 120mm mortar rounds, 15 82mm mortar
rounds, ten 60mm mortar rounds, 23 anti-tank mines, explosives and detonation cord.

The operation was planned and conducted by 5th IA Division forces. Coalition
Forces accompanied the Iraqi force in an advisory role. Operations caused minimal
damage and there were no Iraqi civilian, Iraqi forces or Coalition Forces casualties.

The operation is another example of the increasing capability of Iraqi Forces to
combat violent elements operating within Iraq and Iraqi Forces ability to provide for the
safety and security of citizens within Muqdadiyah.

weeklystandard wrote:

attacks on al-Qaeda in Iraq
Daily Iraq Report for February 27, 2007
Less than two weeks after the official announcement of the Baghdad security plan, "reporting of sectarian murders is at the lowest level in almost a year," and "170 suspected insurgents have been arrested and 63 weapons caches of various sizes have been seized," reports Stars and Stripes. Bomb attacks have decreased by 20 percent.

Over the past 24 hours, Iraqi and Coalition forces have pressed raids against al Qaeda in Iraq targets. Yesterday, U.S. forces captured 15 al Qaeda, including an emir (equivalent to a battalion commander in the U.S. military), during raids in Baghdad, Ramadi, Mahmudiyah, and Samarra. The Iraqi Army detained 6 insurgents near Baqubah. Today, 11 al Qaeda, including an emir, were captured during raids in Baghdad, Mosul and Ramadi.

One reason for the decrease in sectarian attacks is the pressure being placed on the Mahdi Army. While Muqtada al-Sadr is hiding in Iran, Iraqi and Coalition forces continue to dismantle his Mahdi Army. U.S. and Iraqi troops conducted raids throughout Sadr City, Muqtada's stronghold in Baghdad, and 16 Mahdi fighters were detained. The rumor in Baghdad is that Sadr himself is "doing some very deadly housecleaning," as "Mahdi Army members have been disappearing or turning up dead in the Sadr City, Kadhimiya, and Baladiyat areas of the capital." But Iraqi and Coalition forces have been conducting a shadow war against Sadr since last summer, maintaining the fiction that only "rogue elements of the Mahdi Army" are being targeted.

Two major attacks have occurred in the past 24 hours. The most significant was an explosion yesterday at the Ministry of Public Works, which nearly killed Adel Abdul Mahdi, one of Iraq's two vice presidents, as well as Riad Ghraib, the minister of public works. Twelve were killed and 42 wounded after a bomb placed in the ceiling of a ministry conference room exploded. Mahdi and Ghraib were both "lightly wounded" in the explosion, and were treated for "scratches" at a U.S. military hospital. An American intelligence source informs us that al Qaeda and Sadr are the prime suspects. Today, an IED attack outside of a Ramadi mosque killed 15 civilians and wounded 9, including women and children. Al Qaeda recently targeted a mosque in Habbaniyah, and assassinated an imam that spoke out against al-Qaeda.

The evidence that Iran is supplying weapons and explosives to insurgents and militias continues to mount. Iraqi newspapers are now reporting on this development, and are blaming Iran for fueling the violence in Baghdad. A significant find linking weapons and explosives back to Iran was discovered by the U.S. Army in the violent Diyala province. The cache included Iranian made C-4 explosives and mortars. "The explosives were found alongside enough bomb-making materials to build 150 EFPs [Explosively Formed Projectiles] capable of penetrating heavily armored vehicles, according to the expert, Maj. Martin Weber." This latest find follows an MNF-Iraq briefing that provided further evidence of Iranian munitions and support being supplied to insurgents and militias, as well as evidence that Austrian Steyr HS50 sniper rifles purchased by Iran had found their way into Iraq.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2007 08:36 pm
What does Harry Reid really think...

Not news: Harry Reid says, "I agree with General Petraeus, he's the man on the ground there." News: General Petraeus says, "Iraq is improving" and Reid says, "I don't believe him." Fark: It was the same interview.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0704/23/sitroom.02.html
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Apr, 2007 02:46 pm
IRAN AND U.S. AT SAME MEETING TO DISCUSS IRAQ SECURITY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
of course , there has been a lot of sabre rattling on both sides ...
but is it possible that iran and the u.s. will come to an understanding , to a softening of harsh talk ?
let's hope so - perhaps the killing and maiming can be reduced - even though the last sentence in the report spells out the bloody reality !
hbg

the BBC reports :
Quote:
Iran to attend key Iraq meeting
Iran says it will attend a key meeting on Iraq's security situation.
A delegation headed by Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki will attend the conference later this week in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who is also due to attend, hinted that she could meet Mr Mottaki.

But she said any "encounter" would be a chance to discuss Iraq's security situation, and not specific US-Iranian relations.

"This is not a (conference) about the United States and Iran," she told ABC's This Week program.

"This is a meeting about Iraq and about what Iraq's neighbours and interested parties can do to help stabilize the situation in Iraq," she said.

On Saturday, a car bomb killed 55 people in Karbala, Iraq, home to two of Shia Islam's holiest shrines.

The blast is the second major attack in Karbala this month. Sunni militants are suspected of carrying out the attacks.

Iran has close ties with Shias in Iraq, and has been accused by the United States of arming and training Shia militants for sectarian conflict with Sunnis.

'No strings'

Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari welcomed the prospect of talks between Iran and the US.


"I think it's important, it would be a major breakthrough and any reduction in tensions will positively impact the situation in Iraq," he said.

"We don't want Iraq to be a battleground for settling scores on other agendas at our cost. Really, this has been harming us, damaging us a lot."

News that Iran would attend the conference came as Iran's top security envoy Ali Larijani arrived in Baghdad.

The BBC's Frances Harrison, in Tehran, says that Iran had been reluctant to go to the conference because attendance would mean engaging with the United States, which is still holding five Iranians captive in Baghdad.

One Iraqi diplomat described this as a critical time for Iran, a possible turning point in its deteriorating relations with the outside world.

Continuing crackdown

The conference would give Iran a chance to show good faith over Iraq, and also offer an opportunity to mend relations with Washington, our correspondent says.

It comes as US-led forces continue a security crackdown in Iraq.

Overnight the US carried out what it has called a massive effort to disrupt the networks of al-Qaeda in the country.

The US said 72 suspected militants had been detained in raids west and north of Baghdad, in the provinces of Anbar and Salahuddin.

In one raid, near the town of Karmah, the Americans said troops had uncovered 20 large barrels of nitric acid and other bomb-making materials.

In Baghdad, the US military fired an artillery barrage on Sunday morning targeting what reports say were insurgent positions in the south of the city.

The series of loud blasts was heard throughout Baghdad and lasted for about a quarter of an hour.





source :
IRAN TO ATTEND IRAQI SECURITY CONFERENCE
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Apr, 2007 08:19 am
Rice interview with Wolf Blitzer But the idea that the President had made up his mind when he came to office that he was going to go to war against Iraq is just flat wrong.


Two years before 9/11, candidate Bush was already talking privately about attacking Iraq, according to his former ghost writer

Arab American Publisher Says Bush Told Him in May 2000 He Planned to "Take Out" Iraq

Treasury Paul O'Neill wrote in his memoirs of the very first Bush cabinet meeting:

Quote:
"The hour almost up, Bush had assignments for everyone ... Rumsfeld and [Joint Chiefs chair Gen. H. Hugh] Shelton, he said, 'should examine our military options.' That included rebuilding the military coalition from the 1991 Gulf War, examining 'how it might look' to use U.S. ground forces in the north and the south of Iraq ... Ten days in, and it was about Iraq."


"The intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy, ... and there was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action."

"If it looks like a duck..."you know the rest
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Apr, 2007 08:41 am
Failure To Understand Cousin Marriage Blinds Policy Makers
Failure To Understand Cousin Marriage Blinds Policy Makers On Iraq
By Randall Parker
2006 December 28

Writing for the Christian Science Monitor Anne Bobroff-Hajal joins the too short list of writers who appreciate the problem that consanguineous (cousin) marriage poses for the US intervention in Iraq.

All too often, the US carries out foreign policy with little comprehension of the societies it confronts. This can lead to unintended - often destructive - results.

One central element of the Iraqi social fabric that most Americans know little about is its astonishing rate of cousin marriage. Indeed, half of all marriages in Iraq are between first or second cousins. Among countries with recorded figures, only Pakistan and Nigeria rate as high. For an eye-opening perspective about rates of consanguinity (roughly equivalent to cousin marriage) around the world, click on the "Global Prevalence" map at www.consang.net.

But who cares who marries whom in a country we invade? Why talk to anthropologists who study that arcane subject? Only those who live in modern, individualistic societies could be so oblivious. Cousin marriage, especially the unique form practiced in the Middle East, creates clans of fierce internal cohesiveness and loyalty. So in addition to sectarian violence in Iraq, the US may also be facing a greater intensity of inter-clan violence than it saw in Vietnam or the ferocious Lebanese civil war.

She gets it right about Westerners being oblivious. Middle Eastern societies are fundamentally different. Bonds created by marriage practices make them different. Western small family units and atomized individuals can feel loyalty toward a whole nation. Leftists who imagine themselves as more enlightened even want us to shift our loyalties toward the whole world (which is a few steps beyond the biological limits of how the human mind works). But the Iraqis have very strong loyalties which are far more local, loyalties that make Western style societies and governments unachievable by Iraqis or other Arab societies.

Here's a sentence that covers a lot of ground:

The US can't deal with a problem it doesn't recognize, let alone understand.

That does not just apply to Iraq. How about education and immigration? Left wing intellectuals have decided to deny and ignore human nature when facts about human nature suggest limits on what can be achieved through social engineering. Even though the Soviet Union has collapsed and New Soviet Man was a tragic failure the desire to radically rearrange social orders and habits has lived on. The Iraq debacle is a result of both liberal and neoconservative beliefs that a New Liberal Man could be created in Mesopotamia.

Anthropologist Stanley Kurtz has described Middle East clans as "governments in miniature" that provide the services and social aid that Americans routinely receive from their national, state, and local governments. No one in a region without stable, fair government can survive outside a strong, unified, respected clan.

Kurtz knew well before the war that Middle Eastern family structures posed a huge obstacle to efforts to create proper nation-states in the Middle East. See my post Consanguinity prevents Middle Eastern political development. Journalist Charles Glass who was held hostage (and escaped) in Beirut during the Lebanon civil war wrote a book whose title captures the essence of what Middle Eastern governments are like: Tribes With Flags. We can not change Middle Eastern political behaviors unless we stop the practice of cousin marriage. Well, that's a very tall order for social engineers and would take generations to accomplish. But our policy makers are either ignorant of this or find the facts too inconvenient to acknowledge.

Bobroff-Hajal has even read Steve Sailer's Cousin Marriage Conundrum essay for which I've included a link here:

The flip side of favoring relatives is that, as Steven Sailer observed in The American Conservative in 2003, it leaves fewer resources "with which to be fair toward non-kin. So nepotistic corruption is rampant in countries such as Iraq."

How many of the deaths in Iraq are caused by clans attacking other clans?

I have been struck since early on in the Iraq war by how little Americans know about the groups the US so vaguely labels "insurgents." US ignorance is now further camouflaged by the label "chaos." I wonder whether, if US citizens took the time to "know thy enemy," they would learn that there are many forms of logic in the layers of Iraq's so-called chaos. I wonder if the almost daily discovery of 40, 50, or even 60 Iraqi bodies, kidnapped and tortured before being murdered, are clans battling one another.

Yes, some of the violence is inter-clan violence. Here are some examples:

Remember in October 2006 when Sadr's militia rushed into Amarah? At first glance the press reports gave the impression that the fight was a Mahdi Army challenge to the government. But the Amarah fighting was a tribal clash.

BAGHDAD, Oct. 20 -- Members of the Mahdi Army, a powerful Shiite militia headed by firebrand cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, briefly took over the southern Iraqi city of Amarah and battled with the local Shiite police before withdrawing on Friday, in a bloody feud that illustrated deepening rifts within Iraq's largest sect and the growing turmoil in the south.

As many as 25 people, including 10 policemen, were killed in street fighting and mortar attacks that raged in Amarah, a predominantly Shiite city about 190 miles southeast of Baghdad, from midday Thursday until about 2 p.m. Friday. The militia attacked the headquarters and two stations of the city police department, which is reportedly aligned with the Badr Brigades, an arm of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, a powerful Shiite religious party.

Each side blamed the other in a cycle of retaliatory clashes with tribal overtones.


In Baghdad, a spokesman for the Interior Ministry, Brig. Abdul Karim Khalaf Kinany, said the clashes were not driven by intra-Shiite conflict, but by tribal differences.

"The clashes in Amarah were not between the police and the Mahdi Army," he said. "Police had in fact interfered to settle a tribal dispute between the tribe of the police officer, the head of the intelligence division . . . and the tribesmen of the suspects who were arrested by the police on suspicion of carrying out the assassination."


What percentage of the deaths in Iraq are due to inter-tribal violence?

No need for a criminal justice system with prisons when killers can be forced by tribes to pay for the lives they take,

A little later, Sheik Fawzi Kaabi entered. Everyone in the room stood. "Take your rest," Aidani said afterward.

Kaabi, a stout man in a head scarf checkered white and black, is 46, but said he should be 460: "Every year has become 10 years because of the problems." Kaabi, called "the judge" by a friend, had come to mediate another dispute.

Men from Aidani's tribe had killed three people from the Abadi, a neighboring tribe, although the circumstances were in dispute. A death these days costs between 20 million and 25 million Iraqi dinars, or $13,300 to $16,600. Each person in the tribe is expected to contribute, effectively an insurance policy. But Aidani was resisting, pleading his case that the neighboring tribe had refused to pay blood money earlier.

"We're on standby," the sheik warned, with the mildest bluster.

He said no more. Everyone understood it meant sending his armed men to settle it another way.

"It's like a serial," the sheik said after Kaabi left. "It never has an ending."

This is not remotely like America. But the neocons fantasized Iraq would rapidly Westernize as soon as Saddam fell. What fools.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Apr, 2007 12:06 pm
BBB :
your article on "cousin marriage" is an excellent one .
looking at european royalty shows much the same kind of intermerriage .
i understand one of the reasons was often that when there was wealth in the family , it was cosidered "good business" to keep the wealth in the family rather than have some "wastrel" get his hands on the money .
hbg
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Apr, 2007 02:21 pm
Hamburger
hamburger wrote:
BBB :
your article on "cousin marriage" is an excellent one .
looking at european royalty shows much the same kind of intermerriage .
i understand one of the reasons was often that when there was wealth in the family , it was cosidered "good business" to keep the wealth in the family rather than have some "wastrel" get his hands on the money .
hbg
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Tue 1 May, 2007 04:47 pm
mysteryman wrote:



What makes you think they dont?
The Islamic fundamentalists seem to want to return to the days of the caliphate,they want to keep their women as virtual slaves,and they want to eliminate other religions.

So,if they dont want to return to the 7th C,exactly what C do they want to live in?


They want electricity and weapons and worldly goods. As for women as virtual slaves, hey, that's a condition that has come and gone in many places at many times. The condition of western women worsened after the Age of Enlightenment and again post-WWII.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 May, 2007 09:09 am
Why There Was No Exit Plan
Why There Was No Exit Plan
By Lewis Seiler and Dan Hamburg
The San Francisco Chronicle
Monday 30 April 2007

There are people in Washington ... who never intend to withdraw military forces from Iraq and they're looking for 10, 20, 50 years in the future ... the reason that we went into Iraq was to establish a permanent military base in the Gulf region, and I have never heard any of our leaders say that they would commit themselves to the Iraqi people that 10 years from now there will be no military bases of the United States in Iraq.

---former President Jimmy Carter, Feb. 3, 2006


For all the talk about timetables and benchmarks, one might think that the United States will end the military occupation of Iraq within the lifetimes of the readers of this opinion editorial. Think again.

There is to be no withdrawal from Iraq, just as there has been no withdrawal from hundreds of places around the world that are outposts of the American empire. As UC San Diego professor emeritus Chalmers Johnson put it, "One of the reasons we had no exit plan from Iraq is that we didn't intend to leave."

The United States maintains 737 military bases in 130 countries across the globe. They exist for the purpose of defending the economic interests of the United States, what is euphemistically called "national security." In order to secure favorable access to Iraq's vast reserves of light crude, the United States is spending billions on the construction of at least five large permanent military bases throughout that country.

A new Iraq oil law, largely written by the Coalition Provisional Authority, is planned for ratification by June. This law cedes control of Iraq's oil to western powers for 30 years. There is major opposition to the proposed law within Iraq, especially among the country's five trade union federations that represent hundreds of thousands of oil workers. The United States is working hard to surmount this opposition by appealing directly to the al-Maliki government in Iraq.

The attack upon, and subsequent occupation of, Iraq can be seen as a direct result of the 2001 National Energy Policy Development Group (better known as vice president Cheney's energy task force) that was comprised largely of oil and energy company executives. This task force - the proceedings of which have been kept secret by the administration on the grounds of "executive privilege" - recommended that the U.S. government support initiatives in Middle Eastern countries "to open up areas of their energy sector to foreign investment." As Antonio Juhasz, an analyst with Oil Change International wrote last month in the New York Times, "One invasion and a great deal of political engineering by the Bush administration later, this is exactly what the proposed Iraq oil law would achieve."

The people of the United States have indicated, in the national election last November and in countless polls, that they no longer support the Bush administration's war. The Scooter Libby trial revealed that top administration officials, including the vice president, "cherry-picked" and distorted intelligence in order to sell a "pre-emptive" war to a spooked public. The squandering of hundreds of billions of dollars, some billions of which, according to Seymour Hersh writing in the New Yorker, is being siphoned into "black-ops" programs being run out of Cheney's office (a stunning redux of Iran-Contra carried out by many of the same actors), has also strained the patience and credulity of the American people.

Another betrayal is the "contracting out" of "war-related activities" to corporations such as Halliburton, Bechtel, Chemonics and Blackwater. Halliburton, Vice President Cheney's previous employer, calls itself an "energy services company" but has tentacles reaching into nearly every aspect of the war (originally dubbed Operation Iraqi Liberation until some bright bulb among the Bushies realized that "OIL" might not be the best handle for this venture). Halliburton has also profited handsomely from no-bid government contracts awarded in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, the construction at the national embarrassment known as "Gitmo," and most recently, from the fiasco at Walter Reed Army Hospital in Washington, D.C.

Unfortunately, all this corruption, mayhem and death are good for some (or it wouldn't go on).

The U.S. military budget, larger than the military budgets of the rest of the world's nations combined, continues skyward, even without all the "supplementals" passed regularly by Congress to fight the "war on terror."

The question we must ask as citizens is this: Is the United States a democratic republic or an empire? History demonstrates that it's not possible to be both.
---------------------------------------------

Lewis Seiler is president of Voice of the Environment. Dan Hamburg, a former US representative, is executive director.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 May, 2007 02:37 pm
Re: Why There Was No Exit Plan
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
Why There Was No Exit Plan
By Lewis Seiler and Dan Hamburg
The San Francisco Chronicle
Monday 30 April 2007

There are people in Washington ... who never intend to withdraw military forces from Iraq and they're looking for 10, 20, 50 years in the future ... the reason that we went into Iraq was to establish a permanent military base in the Gulf region, and I have never heard any of our leaders say that they would commit themselves to the Iraqi people that 10 years from now there will be no military bases of the United States in Iraq.

---former President Jimmy Carter, Feb. 3, 2006


...

Jimmy Carter is a fool.
The things Jimmy Carter claims about America are foolish.
Anyone who believes Jimmy Carter is a fool.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 May, 2007 03:17 pm
Re: Why There Was No Exit Plan
ican711nm wrote:
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
Why There Was No Exit Plan
By Lewis Seiler and Dan Hamburg
The San Francisco Chronicle
Monday 30 April 2007

There are people in Washington ... who never intend to withdraw military forces from Iraq and they're looking for 10, 20, 50 years in the future ... the reason that we went into Iraq was to establish a permanent military base in the Gulf region, and I have never heard any of our leaders say that they would commit themselves to the Iraqi people that 10 years from now there will be no military bases of the United States in Iraq.

---former President Jimmy Carter, Feb. 3, 2006


...

Jimmy Carter is a fool.
The things Jimmy Carter claims about America are foolish.
Anyone who believes Jimmy Carter is a fool.


ICan Wrote:
Quote:
Some who lack evidence or logic to rebut an argument, villify the arguer.


Cycloptichorn
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
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 07/22/2025 at 08:59:39