• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Study says Iraq war did not damage terror groups

Dorian Gray

Hypocrisy Detector
Dorian Gray
Joined
Nov 15, 2002
Messages
20,366
Think Tank: Iraq War Distracted U.S.!
(http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041011/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_terrorism)
By MARK LAVIE, Associated Press Writer

TEL AVIV, Israel - The war in Iraq (news - web sites) did not damage international terror groups, but instead distracted the United States from confronting other hotbeds of Islamic militancy and actually "created momentum" for many terrorists, a top Israeli security think tank said in a report released Monday.

President Bush (news - web sites) has called the war in Iraq an integral part of the war on terrorism, saying that deposed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) hoped to develop unconventional weapons and could have given them to Islamic militants across the world.

But the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University said that instead of striking a blow against Islamic extremists, the Iraq war "has created momentum for many terrorist elements, but chiefly al-Qaida and its affiliates."

Jaffee Center director Shai Feldman said the vast amount of money and effort the United States has poured into Iraq has deflected attention and assets from other centers of terrorism, such as Afghanistan (news - web sites).

The concentration of U.S. intelligence assets in Iraq "has to be at the expense of being able to follow strategic dangers in other parts of the world," he said.
(more)
Click to expand...
Exactly what I have been thinking for years.
 
Jaffee Center director Shai Feldman said the vast amount of money and effort the United States has poured into Iraq has deflected attention and assets from other centers of terrorism, such as Afghanistan (news - web sites).
Click to expand...
Yes, that would explain why the Taliban were able to terrorize the entire population of Afghanistan into staying home this past weekend, rather than voting in their first free elections ever...
The concentration of U.S. intelligence assets in Iraq "has to be at the expense of being able to follow strategic dangers in other parts of the world," he said.
Click to expand...
Hmmm. So the people coming into Iraq from Syria and shooting at U.S. soldiers aren't terrorists or a strategic danger, I guess. They're just coming into town because they hear the food is really good.
 
AWPrime said:
Well most of those 'terrorsits' are native.
Click to expand...
Yes, most of them are.

What about the rest? Why are they coming into Iraq?
 
Multiple reasons:

Money
Killing americans
Trying to take over an instable Iraq
Revenge
and maybe more....


But I think that those foreign fighters are only a few percent.
 
Do you think a terrorist attack has become less likely since invading Iraq?

I think that foreigners are going into Iraq because it has effectively been called the battlefield against terror and they want to do something in case America goes after their country next.

You can bet that any country which might be next under the spotlight is desperately trying to score nukes to keep the US off its back.
 
BPSCG said:
Yes, most of them are.

What about the rest? Why are they coming into Iraq?
Click to expand...
To counter the why US, UK, Poland -who are not native of Iraq- they come into Iraq, attacking Iraq in breach of the UN.
 
How does any of that negate the title of this thread? If Syrian terrorists are pouring over the border, that is not exactly 'damaging', is it? More like 'encouraging'.

By the way, i like how you assume your intelligence is superior to that of the group doing the study.
 
Dorian Gray said:
How does any of that negate the title of this thread? If Syrian terrorists are pouring over the border, that is not exactly 'damaging', is it? More like 'encouraging'.
Click to expand...
I like to think of it as flypaper. Get 'em all in one place...
 
BPSCG said:
Yes, that would explain why the Taliban were able to terrorize the entire population of Afghanistan into staying home this past weekend, rather than voting in their first free elections ever...
Click to expand...
Kindly explain how this election makes the slightest difference to the fact that Afghanistan is not a country but the combined territoty of a lage group of warlords?
Hmmm. So the people coming into Iraq from Syria and shooting at U.S. soldiers aren't terrorists or a strategic danger, I guess. They're just coming into town because they hear the food is really good.
Click to expand...
What does this have to do with the observation that the US invasion of Iraq was not a boon to the war on terror but rather the opposite?
 
BPSCG said:
I like to think of it as flypaper. Get 'em all in one place...
Click to expand...
:D

Aside from being incredibly callous and uncaring for the US soldiers stuck in the flypaper, the fact that US soldiers and other Westerners are now easy targets in Iraq, have little to do with making any inroads to wiping out "terrorists".

Terrorists aren't born as such, they are created. Setting up the ideal situation for their creation in Iraq, hardly means that they are less likely to spring up elsewhere.
 
DanishDynamite said:
Kindly explain how this election makes the slightest difference to the fact that Afghanistan is not a country but the combined territoty of a lage group of warlords?

What does this have to do with the observation that the US invasion of Iraq was not a boon to the war on terror but rather the opposite?
Click to expand...
What, you mean Dorian can post something, to wit...
Jaffee Center director Shai Feldman said the vast amount of money and effort the United States has poured into Iraq has deflected attention and assets from other centers of terrorism, such as Afghanistan (news - web sites).
Click to expand...
and I'm not allowed to respond to it? That hardly seems fair.
 
BPSCG said:
What, you mean Dorian can post something, to wit... and I'm not allowed to respond to it? That hardly seems fair.
Click to expand...
Certainly you can respond, and indeed you did. I'm just asking for some confirmation that your response was relevant and truthful.
 
BPSCG said:
Yes, that would explain why the Taliban were able to terrorize the entire population of Afghanistan into staying home this past weekend, rather than voting in their first free elections ever...
Click to expand...
You do realise that the Taliban didn't instigate the terrorist attack on the US, right? You knew that they were harbouring Al Qaeda, didn't you? You wouldn't be stupid enough, therefore, to equate "Taliban out of business" with "world safer from terrorism"?
Hmmm. So the people coming into Iraq from Syria and shooting at U.S. soldiers aren't terrorists or a strategic danger, I guess. They're just coming into town because they hear the food is really good.
Click to expand...

I wonder how many times one has to point out that the majority of insurgents in Iraq are not freakin' foreigners. The only reason US soldiers are being 'terrorised' in Iraq is because they invaded the damn country.
 
Sometimes I wonder if the US military doesn't DELIBERATELY provoke group X into retaliating.

After all, what purpose would their lives serve if they didn't?
 
Mr Manifesto said:
You do realise that the Taliban didn't instigate the terrorist attack on the US, right? You knew that they were harbouring Al Qaeda, didn't you? You wouldn't be stupid enough, therefore, to equate "Taliban out of business" with "world safer from terrorism"?
Click to expand...
I don't understand. Are you saying that the world was safer from terrorism with theTaliban in power harboring al Qaeda?

Are you saying Afghan women were safer from terrorism with the Taliban in power?

I wonder how many times one has to point out that the majority of insurgents in Iraq are not freakin' foreigners.
Click to expand...
If you read what I wrote above, you'll see I never made that claim.
The only reason US soldiers are being 'terrorised' in Iraq is because they invaded the damn country.
Click to expand...
Exactly - though I would be willing to bet shocking sums of money against frightful odds that the U.S. soldiers in general don't consider themselves to be "terrorized." When they're in Iraq fighting against the best-trained and best equipped army the world has ever known, they're not here flying planes into buildings. Call me stupid - oh, wait, you already did - but I prefer it that way.
 
DanishDynamite said:
:D

Terrorists aren't born as such, they are created. Setting up the ideal situation for their creation in Iraq, hardly means that they are less likely to spring up elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Wait a moment. Was not the original hatred of Osma toward the US a result of "infidels" being present in Saudi Arabia? It seems to me that when you are dealing with loons of this order, to quote Voltaire, "to the wicked everything serves as pretext".

If our, or your, foreign policy has to be defined as a course that will not outrange lunitics we are in a sorry state.
 
BPSCG said:

...
Exactly - though I would be willing to bet shocking sums of money against frightful odds that the U.S. soldiers in general don't consider themselves to be "terrorized."
...
Click to expand...
Of course "...the U.S. soldiers in general don't consider themselves to be "terrorized"...".

After all, the US soldiers are not native of Iraq, they come into Iraq, and they attack Iraq in breach of UN.

Therefore I agree that the US soldiers are not terrorized:

on the contrary, they terrorize Iraq since March of 2003.
 
BPSCG said:
What about the rest? Why are they coming into Iraq?
Click to expand...

Maybe because there's now a power vacuum and they're trying to sieze their chance?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom