Marijuana.com

Niteshift

You're failing to see the point that when it comes to supporting terorism Iraq was a small player. When it comes to threats to America Iraq was a non-player. Yet here you are scrambling for anything you can get your hands on to try to justify this stupid war.

I'm not scrambling for anything. I KNOW what I am saying. I know it on more levels than an occasional internet link and random news story. Further, I don't need a reason to justify it. I've said more than once on here that toppling Saddam and freeing the Iraqi's to live in a democracy is a good enough to me.

Providing a link from 2000 doesn't really mean much. We didn't discover a lot of what we now know until after that. Further, we KNOW that we were weak in that areas intelligence gathering. Surely you won't dispute THAT.

but here are a few sources for you to ponder, aside from the extensive amount of information I've provided in other threads regarding Iraqi terrorism training camps (such as Salman Pak) and Iraqi plots that were interrupted, such as the plot to assassinatre Bush41 and the plot to blow up a radio Free Europe station. Also, continue to ignore the connections of Iraq to the first WTC attacks, their intelligence officer meeting with Mohammed Atta immediately prior to 9/11 as well as proof that he recieved training in Iraq.

"CIA Analysis, January 2003: Iraqi Support for Terrorism, (p. 314 of Senate Intel Report):
"Iraq has a long history of supporting terrorism."

"CIA Analysis, January 2003--Iraqi Support for Terrorism, (p. 314 of Senate Intel Report):
"Iraq continues to be a safehaven, transit point, or operational node for groups and individuals who direct violence against the United States, Israel and other allies."

" Bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee Report (p. 315):
"The CIA provided 78 reports, from multiple sources, [redacted] documenting instances in which the Iraqi regime either trained operatives for attacks or dispatched them to carry out attacks."

Bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee Report (p. 316):
"Iraq continued to participate in terrorist attacks throughout the 1990s."

"Bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee Report (p. 316):
"From 1996 to 2003, the [Iraqi Intelligence Service] focused its terrorist activities on western interests, particularly against the U.S. and Israel."

Bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee Report (p. 331):
"Twelve reports received [redacted] from sources that the CIA described as having varying reliability, cited Iraq or Iraqi national involvement in al Qaeda's [chemical, biological, nuclear] CBW efforts."

The 9/11 Commission Report (p. 66):
"In March 1998, after bin Laden's public fatwa against the United States, two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraq Intelligence. In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with bin Laden."

I don't know where there is a link to these on the internet, but feel free to file a FOIA request to verify any of them. (Not EVERYTHING gets done on the internet)

From the Brookings Institute, in March 2003, prior to the invasion of Iraq

"Iraq supported several terrorist groups in the past. For example, Baghdad has harbored the May 15 Organization—a Palestinian group known for bombing airplanes—and gave sanctuary to the Palestine Liberation Front (PLF)—infamous for the 1985 hijacking of the Achille Lauro and the murder of Leon Klinghoffer. Iraq helped form the Abu Nidal Organization (ANO), using it to assassinate Syrian and Palestinian opponents. Most of Iraq's support to these groups has consisted of logistical support, such as bases, training, and supplies. Nevertheless, the scale of its backing of terrorist groups was dwarfed by others like Iran, which tried to create large popular insurgencies from whole cloth."

Yes, they actually said Iran does more...........but they also say what I said.......Iraq's main support was logisitcs, training etc, not operational support.

"Iraq has provided more extensive support to the anti-Tehran Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) and the anti-Turkey Kurdish Workers Party (PKK) as means of exerting pressure on their northern and eastern neighbors. In both cases, Iraq has helped these groups establish a safe haven in Iraq itself where they could base their guerrilla wars and plan terrorist attacks. Ties to the MEK are particularly close, and it has in essence become a wholly owned proxy of Baghdad for use against Iran."

Turkey is a NATO ally.

"Whenever it has sought to attack the United States itself, Iraq has preferred to rely on its own operatives. Thus, Iraqi agents—not terrorist proxies—were involved in attempted bombings of U.S. facilities in Indonesia, the Philippines, and Malaysia during the first Gulf War. Similarly, Iraq used its own people in the failed assassination of President Bush in 1993. "

Yes, terrorists that were IRAQI and tried bombing US faciliates.



Wow. The Arab Liberation front, the PLF, and Abu Nidal. Groups that are generally a threat to Isreal, not the US.

First, AGAIN, the war isn't ONLY about al Qaeda. second, PLF was the group responsible fro the Achille Lauro hijacking. Third, ANO has a history of anti-US actions.
And don't forget Hamas, another supposed threat to Israel alone........."HAMAS's spiritual leader, Shaykh Ahmed Yassin, issued an open letter regarding the crisis with Iraq that stated: "Muslims should threaten Western interests and strike them everywhere."



Thank you fearless leader. Lead us into a war against Iraq in order to protect us from terrorists, but pay no mind to the country exporting the nuclear material to terrorist supporting states.

Sickening. Go ahead and stand up for this useless ass-clown of a president if you want to NS. Buy the snake oil he's peddling to the American people. Support his decision to invade Iraq while the truly dangerous terrorist supporting regimes continue to operate. Line up behind him as he softens his tone on thhe country that's exporting uranium to countries like Libya.

You deal with different countries different ways. Are you honestly going to have us believe that all governments will respond the same way?


No, the war in Iraq isn't REALLY about al Qaeda, nor is it REALLY about weapons of mass destruction or REALLY about terrorism. What it's REALLY about is our oil . . . er, Iraqi oil. What's so confusing about that?

Your questions and "points" have ceased to make sense.

__________________
A burning desire for social justice is never a substitute for knowing what you're talking about. -Thomas Sowell

Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is muzzle flash.

 

Hiz Highness

Yeah, it's sad when it comes down to that, but what can you expect from sheep? They can't formulate their own thoughts or ideas, so they just parrot the venom that's easiest to understand. I've written Murdock off as a useless clown. He's able to shift his political view 180 degrees in a day, and now he has to fall back on bloggers to sling his insults. If at some point in the future he develops his own mind I might address his ideas, but I'm not arguing his idiot blogs with him.

-HH

Murdock

Nightshift takes you to school in a reply and the best you can come up with is a personal attack on me, again?

Thats just sad, HH... I expect better from you. BTW, the Blog entry refutes everything you've said on this thread and countless others about Iraq.

Hiz Highness

No, it doesn't. But if you're not smart enough to make your own arguments, you're not smart enough to understand my rebuttal. I'm not going to waste my time proving how stupid your blogs are because you'll be able to copy and paste more idiot blogs than I'll ever be able to find time to respond to.

Hopefully you can grasp that.

-HH

Hiz Highness

That's the crux of the disagreement. You find it "good enough", and I don't.

I think you missed the point. The intelligence we had about global terrorism from 2000 is the same intelligence we were using to justify the war. According to the flawed intelligence we had back then Iran, Syria, and North Korea were all more of a terrorist threat than Iraq. That was the point I was making.

Alright, then we agree. Iraq was doing on a small scale what Iran and Syria are doing to this day on a large scale. Explain to me why you think Iraq was a better target than Iran. Not an easier target mind you, but a better one.

What's your point with this? You're upset at Saddam for harboring anti-Iranian terrorists?

Sounds like Turkey should have dealt with their problem. As I recall they wouldn't allow us to move our ground troops in from the north on the initial attack. Obviously Turkey wasn't too worked up about the PKK.

I ask for reason and consistency. We invade the secular muslim country that supports terrorism on a small scale, but soften our tone with North Korea as they ship uranium to Libya? I don't understand the reasoning you use to make this 'ok' with yourself, but it looks like a big ol' pile of BS to me.

-HH

 

S2

I dont know about how smart Murdock is but that George W. Bush sure is stupid, thats for sure. Man is he stupid. I cant belive how stupid he is.



Just sayin....

Hiz Highness

WORD my brotha'! Preach it! If stupid was real estate GWB would have his own continent.



-HH

MickityMike

Murdock's a "useless clown" to you? ...That's not very nice...

Anyhoo, I'd be careful dissing blogs like you are, chief. Blogs are great, both Left and Right, for getting stories out that the MSM would otherwise ignore. And as I mentioned in another thread, a good blog will name it's sources and those sources can be easily verified - can't get that on TV or print news, yo. And even if a blog is just giving an opinion piece, you can find another blog out there that's willing to cut the first guy's opinion to shreds. It's called "fisking."

You might wanna put on a little "Tears of a Clown" and delve into the blogosphere - you could learn somethin'.

__________________
I'd be delighted to live in a country where happily married gay couples had closets full of assault weapons. - Glenn Reynolds

MickityMike

Maybe the fact that is is easier does indeed make it better. If the goal is to spread democracy as a means of curbing Islamic extremism in the region, maybe it's a good idea to start with a country that's not already firmly in the grips of Saudi-exported Wahabism and actually retains a bit of secularity. Perhaps Iraq didn't have as large a connection to terrorists as Iran and Syria, but maybe Iraq was better strategically?

Maybe fewer American soldiers would end up dying in an invasion and democratization of Iraq vs. Iran/Syria/Saudia Arabia?

Hiz Highness

What's my name, clown defender?

You know me, Mickety-G . . . when have I ever been accused of nice?

So you claim. Most of the blogs I see are opinionated pieces of cr*p that provide sources to flakey sites like commondreams.org, or newsmax.com. If you're bringing some content to a discussion you can always cite the credible source of the information without citing the blog.

Yep. That's why I'm content to let that stuff go down in blog world, and not resort to "fisking" in these threads. What is difficult to grasp about that?

-HH