80 AL Qaeda Captured Inside Iraq

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Was this mentioned and discussed on this forum ?

Looks as though there may be a better explanation for the chaos in Iraq besides the Howard Dean fans saying "It's Bush's fault because he's dumb".

http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/5642.htm

September 12, 2003 -- WASHINGTON - U.S. military forces in northern Iraq captured 80 foreign fighters from several Arab countries on suspicion that they are part of a new al Qaeda offensive against American troops, officials said yesterday.
Pentagon officials said the suspected terrorists were nabbed by the Army's 101st Airborne Division and the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment between Mosul and the Syrian border.

Military officials said the foreign fighters came from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Sudan and Syria, and were carrying machine guns and rifles, as well as $75,000 in Iraqi dinars.

 

[arcticpenguin]

A source and a link, please.

 

[Upchurch]

Looks as though there may be a better explanation for the chaos in Iraq besides the Howard Dean fans saying "It's Bush's fault because he's dumb".

Right. "It's Bush's fault because he stirred up even more trouble for the US that we'll be dealing with for the next few decades, probably." (i.e. a new al Qaeda offensive against American troops)

Now they have a whole bunch of new recruits and a local target. Most of the support or sympathy in the middle east had in the middle east is long gone now, wouldn't you say?

Whatever...

 

[Tmy]

Kind of ironic that there are now more AlQueda in Iraq after Saddam was tossed out of power.

 

[Nie Trink Wasser]

A source and a link, please.

woops. http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/5642.htm

Kind of ironic that there are now more AlQueda in Iraq after Saddam was tossed out of power.

I'm quite sure there wouldn't have been an accurate AlQueda headcount while Saddam was still in power.

 

[Suddenly]

Was this mentioned and discussed on this forum ?

Looks as though there may be a better explanation for the chaos in Iraq besides the Howard Dean fans saying "It's Bush's fault because he's dumb".

He pokes hole in boat
Water rushes in quickly
Then blame the water?

 

[American]

Oh they don't count.

Gas centrifuge buried in a scientist's back yard? That doesn't count either.


How would a democrat do things differently than Bush? By doing it all the same, but BETTER! And the UN woulda come with us. Wouldn't have been this rush to war that we had, but we'd have been in and out sooner. Congress didn't vote to allow force-- they voted to allow the THREAT of force. See there's a difference. The President tricked John Kerry. We'd definitly have more troops there, because our military is so incapable.


Anyway...... more US troops = more targets = more US casualties = bad for Bush = good for democrats.

Worst case scenerio- 50,000,000 Iraqis are now free, a new mid-east front is open on terrorists, and our military has gained invaluable intelligence and experience for future operations.

All of this makes democrats VERY angry. Pre-mature heart attacks are up 50% inside the Washington beltway- all liberals!

 

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Re: Re: 80 AL Qaeda Captured Inside Iraq

Right. "It's Bush's fault because he stirred up even more trouble for the US that we'll be dealing with for the next few decades, probably." (i.e. a new al Qaeda offensive against American troops)

yeah. Bush is such a barstard for stirring up trouble and ruining the planet. It has nothing to do with Islamic extremists blowing up skyscrapers and crowds of people under the financial blanket of Saddam's dictatorship, becauase after all they're just defending themselves against the great Satan (so that easily excuses it).

Now they have a whole bunch of new recruits and a local target. Most of the support or sympathy in the middle east had in the middle east is long gone now, wouldn't you say?

Whatever... [/B]

I'd say that people like you will constantly repeat what you're programmed to say about support for us in the Middle East is gone, because it helps you get your goons elected and helps cover up the holes in your arguments against the war and anything related to Bush.

Political pandering is more important to you than solving any real problem. I've figured that out about you Upchurch (notice I didnt call you Booger).

 

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Re: Re: 80 AL Qaeda Captured Inside Iraq

He pokes hole in boat
Water rushes in quickly
Then blame the water?

yeah. We should have left Saddam in power. That way there wouldnt be any Al Queda in Iraq.

 

[Upchurch]

Re: Re: Re: 80 AL Qaeda Captured Inside Iraq

yeah. Bush is such a barstard for stirring up trouble and ruining the planet. It has nothing to do with Islamic extremists blowing up skyscrapers and crowds of people under the financial blanket of Saddam's dictatorship, becauase after all they're just defending themselves against the great Satan (so that easily excuses it).

What's your source that Saddam and/or Iraq was involved with the Islamic extremists before we invaded, and especially before 9/11?

 

[Leif Roar]

woops. http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/5642.htm



I'm quite sure there wouldn't have been an accurate AlQueda headcount while Saddam was still in power.

Hmm. The article didn't really give any explanation of why these people were thought to be related to al Quaeda rather than any other mujahideen group.

The blanket description of Ansar al-Islam as "al Quaeda's Iraq wing" is also rather questionable - whatever link there is between al Quaeda and Ansar al-Islam has not really been established as far as I know. The statement that Ansal al-Islam was "providing safe havens for the al Qaeda fighters on the ground" seems strange in this context, as the Ansar al-Islam is not located where the foreign fighters were arrested.

 

[shemp]

I see words like "suspicion" and "suspect" in this story, but no firm proof that they are al-Qaeda. Please provide proof if and when it becomes available.

 

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Re: Re: Re: Re: 80 AL Qaeda Captured Inside Iraq

What's your source that Saddam and/or Iraq was involved with the Islamic extremists before we invaded, and especially before 9/11?

here is what I said :

It has nothing to do with Islamic extremists blowing up skyscrapers and crowds of people under the financial blanket of Saddam's dictatorship, becauase after all they're just defending themselves against the great Satan (so that easily excuses it).

here are only 3 sources :

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_560030.html?menu=

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,48822,00.html

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/03/25/1017004766310.html


after gaining knowledge such as this about Saddam's funding, one would truly have to fight hard to convince themselves that Saddam took no part in funding professional terror groups, ESPECIALLY as they are now pouring in to ruin chances for peace in the area.

 

[Nie Trink Wasser]

I see words like "suspicion" and "suspect" in this story, but no firm proof that they are al-Qaeda. Please provide proof if and when it becomes available.

for now, let's see this group as a terror group.

fudging yourselves over whether or not it is technically al-qaeda seems a typical way to confuse what is happening.

 

[shemp]

for now, let's see this group as a terror group.

fudging yourselves over whether or not it is technically al-qaeda seems a typical way to confuse what is happening.

You make a claim, I ask for proof, you obfuscate. A typical day around here.

 

[Nie Trink Wasser]

You make a claim, I ask for proof, you obfuscate. A typical day around here.

I posted a news story, you dolt.

notice the headline ? notice the source ?

you have no interest in discussion otherwise you wouldnt perform in such a typical jackass fashion. That's a good moniker for you actually :

Shimp - jackass fashion


use it !

 

[Leif Roar]

for now, let's see this group as a terror group.

What definition of "terror group" do you use here? I would assume that the goal of these men would be to fight as guerilla-fighters against the US and British forces in Iraq, but I don't consider that by itself to be "terrorism."

 

[Suddenly]

Re: Re: Re: 80 AL Qaeda Captured Inside Iraq

yeah. We should have left Saddam in power. That way there wouldnt be any Al Queda in Iraq.

Bush appeal to fear
Goal of war: Stop Al Queda
But they are growing

That Saddam was bad
Known for years, still gave him guns
Odd now act to oust

Perhaps Saddam evil
Convienient distraction part
of planned deception

 

[Upchurch]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 80 AL Qaeda Captured Inside Iraq

here are only 3 sources :

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_560030.html?menu=

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,48822,00.html

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/03/25/1017004766310.html

Okay. All the connections were in reference to Saddam supporting the Palastinians, which I will grant you are Islamic Extremists. No where in any of that does it mention any connection to either Al Queda or, the 9/11 attacks or "blowing up skyscrapers". So, yes, it has nothing to do with Islamic extremists blowing up skyscrapers. Unless you want to pull up more articles that don't connect Saddam to Al Queda?

 

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Re: Re: Re: Re: 80 AL Qaeda Captured Inside Iraq

Bush appeal to fear
Goal of war: Stop Al Queda
But they are growing

That Saddam was bad
Known for years, still gave him guns
Odd now act to oust

Perhaps Saddam evil
Convienient distraction part
of planned deception

Instead of playing the fear-paranoia-as-propaganda game maybe it would be wise to NOT fear al qaeda, but have the intelligence to recognize them as murderers regardless of what group name they are operating under.

America isn't to blame for Saddam's evil. Spoon companies didnt make Rosie fat and America didn't make Saddam murder his own civilians by trying to get him to help the international community fight a known enemy of peace.

fine....have it your way. Lets all just sit back, not fear or suspect any terrorists, let them destroy and take what they want and maybe if we are nice enough to them they'll let us live comfortably.