RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events "It's not about oil or Iraq..."

Quote:

---

Matter-eater man said:
And now that Saddam is gone, Iraq's links to terrorism have increased.

---

Quote:

---

Wonder Boy said:...
As Sen. John McCain repeated for the Nth time this morning on NBC's Meet the Press (after Russert's over and over rephrasing a narrow line of questioning, in a sleazy attempt to make McCain say Bush was wrong), McCain said that "Mistakes have been made in every war, including this one." but that McCain still overall supports President Bush's actions in Iraq. ...

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:Oh & I thought 9/11 happened while Bush was President.

---

But Bush was only in office barely 8 months. It was 8 years of Clinton doing nothing to resolve Saddam Hussein's antagonism and U.N. violations, that set the stage for 9-11.

Specifically Al-Qaida's stated "Declaration of Jihad" that U.S./"Crusader" troops were stationed in Saudi Arabia, in Bin Ladin's mind, violating the heart of Islam. Clinton sat on 5this situation, when he had abundant justification (by Saddam Hussein's actions ) to invade and resolve the situation, removing the need for U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia.

Clinton had 8 years that he squandered.

George W. Bush had barely 8 months.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:
His leadership in those first crucial minutes of the first tower getting hit consisted of him reading a children's book. He's been consistent with his leadership during the Iraq war & Katrina.

---

That's just an infantile argument, typical leftist whining, that offers blind criticism of Bush, with no suggestion for an alternative course of action.
Until the second plane hit the second tower, no one thought it was a terrorist attack, just a tragic accident.

Please explain what difference that tiny fraction of minutes would have made. [/quite]

I would argue that the folks who went to the trouble sending the President a brief titled something like "Bin Laden plans to use planes in a terrorist attack" might have suspected. They may have even figured the President would have remembered reading it. That is of course to much to expect of this particular President though. I would have preferred a President who was a bit quicker on his feat. Somebody who used those first 8 months not moving terrorism to the backburner to tackle StarWars missile defense & taking a month long vacation but prioritizing a bit better. Those couple of minutes between planes crashing into the towers was just a prelude to how Bush handles diseasters.

Quote:

---

Would Bush have personally scrambled to an F-16 himself and personally shot down the plane before it hit the second WTC tower?
Bush was on the other side of the country.

If he somehow magically had been able to stop the second plane, you'd just be wailing that he killed all the Americans on the plane, and should have found a way to save them, bla bla bla.
What crap.

---

You have the President you deserve, unfortunatley we have to share

Quote:

---

wannabuyamonkey said:
The Left has become Ahab and Bush the White Whale. They are so singleminded about getting him that they ignore everything else to the point of insanity. Determined to take him down even if they get taken down as well.

I have a prediction. Niether Bush nor Democrats will be elected in 2008.

Call me Ishmael.

---

Polling suggest that your wrong concerning future elections
Personally I'm not interested in just "getting Bush" but you of course know me better than myself.

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:
I thought Bush's poor leadership concerning Iraq would be part of the topic but I can talk about what you prefer to. You accuse me of

Quote:

---

G-man said:
..., contrary to your earlier assertions, there is a link between Iraq and terror?

---

Now I've posted stuff about the Bush administration making misleading claims concerning Saddam being linked to 9/11 but don't remember at any point suggesting that there could be no links at all ever. I would be curious what posts of mine you based this on?

And now that Saddam is gone, Iraq's links to terrorism have increased.

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:

Quote:

---

wannabuyamonkey said:
The Left has become Ahab and Bush the White Whale. They are so singleminded about getting him that they ignore everything else to the point of insanity. Determined to take him down even if they get taken down as well.

I have a prediction. Niether Bush nor Democrats will be elected in 2008.

Call me Ishmael.

---

Polling suggest that your wrong concerning future elections
Personally I'm not interested in just "getting Bush" but you of course know me better than myself.

---

Quote:

---

Wonder Boy said:...
If the Democrats can produce a worthy candidate, I'd consider a Democrat, if they can run on something substantial, rather than usual Republicans are evil, Bush is an idiot rhetoric, with no real policies of their own, other than fragmenting the country along class and racial lines with divisive rhetoric about how everyone is victimized.

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:
I pretty much agree with the posts from Klinton & Whomod that you've picked out Wonder Boy. I just haven't seen anything of substance that shows Saddam working with Bin Laden. We do know the UAE had some links to Osama via the 9/11 report. Care to comment on Bush's support of that organization owning ports Dave?

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:
Why would I try to trick anyone about what I think? That doesn't make sense.

---

Quote:

---

wannabuyamonkey said:

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:
Why would I try to trick anyone about what I think? That doesn't make sense.

---

I didn't say trick people about what you think. I said trick them into believing you. It makes perfect sence. People have been doing it since the dawn of time.

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:

Quote:

---

wannabuyamonkey said:

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:
Why would I try to trick anyone about what I think? That doesn't make sense.

---

I didn't say trick people about what you think. I said trick them into believing you. It makes perfect sence. People have been doing it since the dawn of time.

---

Guess I just was putting down what I thought about the subject. What would you have considered more honest language?

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:
I pretty much agree with the posts from Klinton & Whomod that you've picked out Wonder Boy. I just haven't seen anything of substance that shows Saddam working with Bin Laden. We do know the UAE had some links to Osama via the 9/11 report. Care to comment on Bush's support of that organization owning ports Dave?

---

Quote:

---

Wonder Boy said:
But with further revelation of UAE's ties to terrorist funding, as well as circumstantial evidence of UAE direct meetings with Osama Bin Ladin, I would disagree with Bush and say that this sale of port business should definitely not be allowed to go into the control of UAE's Dubai company. UAE has forfeited the right to this sale, by their own actions. Not so much for security reasons, because I don't see much risk, but simply as a matter of principle, of not rewarding these people for being assholes to the United States in our attempts to contain Al Qaida terror.

---

Quote:

---

Troop levels to stay the same

As the deadline arrives for renewing troop levels in Iraq, the government announces plans to seek an additional full-year of deployment and to send a Hercules cargo pla

Denmark's military contribution in Iraq will remain basically unchanged, Foreign Minister Per Stig Møller said at a press conference on Friday. The minister's statement quelled rumours circulating earlier in the week that 100 Danish troops would be withdrawn from Iraq.
Together with Defence Minister Søren Gade, Møller announced that the government would seek a renewal of Denmark's troop deployment when the issue came up in parliament.

The two ministers outlined a plan that included reducing troop levels by 80 and sending a Hercules cargo plane.

'We expect an Iraqi battalion to be trained this summer. It will overtake a number of tasks currently covered by our troops,' said Møller.

He added that the UN had asked Denmark to send the cargo plane, which could serve to transport humanitarian aid and supplies from neighbouring Jordan.

'We will present the proposal next week along with a new analysis of the situation in Iraq.' We presented the details today, because so many rumours have circulated about what is happening.'

Denmark currently has 488 soldiers stationed in Iraq, according to the Ministry of Defence's homepage.

Opposition parties the Social Democrats and the Social Liberals, which voted in support of the decision to renew the mission in January, repeated their demands that the all the Danish troops be recalled.

'Over a year ago, we proposed that a sensible exit strategy be devised, so the Iraqis can assume responsibility,' said Mogens Lykketoft, the former leader of the Social Democrats.

Together with the Social Liberals, he called upon the government to redeploy Danish troops from Iraq to conflict-ridden Darfur province.

The opposition's call to move forces from Iraq to Sudan were dismissed by Defence Minister Søren Gade.

'A continued Danish presence is necessary to reach our goal in Iraq,' he sai

---

While I'm all for having troops in Iraq, I'd just wish that my government would say screw the UN, screw international politics, screw international opinion and send a shit load of troops to Darfur beat those antagonists into submission. To simply force peace upon them.

yeah yeah yeah, violence begets violence, screwheads

CBS interview: Iraqi opinion of U.S. occupation

"The American government made the right decision," commented [student number] 2, "probably weren't prepared very well and made so many mistakes. That's true, but I don't think they're here to hurt us or to use us or to take advantage of us, and I think it's in America's best interest to make things work in Iraq."

[CBS reporter HARRY SMITH: ] What's the most important thing they want people in the United States to understand about their lives? [The lives of people in Iraq]

"I personally want to thank America for what it did to Iraq," replied [student] No. 2. "I want to thank every American who supported this war, and I know that even those who stood against it don't mean harm to us. But I want them to understand that what has been done is a good thing, indeed."

Asked if they would leave Iraq if they could, five of the seven said, "Yes, immediately. Can't get out of here fast enough," Smith reports.

But when asked if the United States should pull out now, says Smith, "Their voice was unanimous: 'No. America should finish what it started.'
One even said, 'If you really want to see all-out civil war, America leaves, and that's what's gonna happen.' "

Quote:

---

PM pays soldiers surprise visit

The prime minister traded his suit and tie for a flak jacket before touching down in Baghdad's Green Zone on Tuesday


PM Anders Fogh Rasmussen paid a surprise visit on Tuesday to the 535 Danish soldiers stationed at Camp Danevang in Iraq.
'The purpose of the trip is to visit the soldiers,' said Rasmussen. 'Partly to show that we support their efforts, partly to hear about the conditions they work under. Both the military conditions and the conditions for reconstruction.'

Rasmussen was joined by the defence minister, Søren Gade, on the trip. While most of their itinerary was held secret, the prime minister flew to Denmark's embassy in Baghdad under the protection of US helicopter gunships.

The visit marked the prime minister's first visit to Iraq since two Danish soldiers were killed by roadside bombs in Iraq in March and October. The visit also takes place shortly after parliament extended the Danish mission until June 2007.

The extension passed by a narrow majority secured by the Danish People's Party, while the opposition's Social Democrats and Social Liberals withdrew their support for the mission, calling for a Danish withdrawal and a focus on reconstruction.

The current contingent of troops at Camp Danevang arrived in February. It is the seventh rotation of Danish soldiers in the camp, which is located in the British Shaiba Log Base near Basra.

---

Quote:

---

Bush in Baghdad: 'Seize the moment'

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- President Bush capped a surprise trip to Baghdad on Tuesday by visiting U.S. troops and urging Iraqis to "seize the moment" and rally behind their new government.

"I come away from here believing that the will is strong and the desire to meet the needs of the people is real and tangible," Bush said after meeting with Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and the new leader's Cabinet.

The U.S. president addressed Iraqi officials during a teleconference with members of his own Cabinet, who were at Camp David, Maryland.

"I've come to not only look you in the eye, I've also come to tell you that when America gives its word, it keeps its word," Bush told al-Maliki as cameras flashed.

"And it's in our interest that Iraq succeed. It's not only in the interest of the Iraqi people, it's in the interest of the American people, and for people who love freedom."

The whirlwind visit came less than a week after U.S. forces killed the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, in an airstrike north of Baghdad.

A statement posted online Tuesday and attributed to the purported new leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Hamza al-Muhajer, threatens attacks on Baghdad's Green Zone and warns that al-Zarqawi "left behind lions."

Bush told the troops that he came to Baghdad "to look Prime Minister [al-]Maliki in the eyes to determine whether or not he is as dedicated to a free Iraq as you are -- and I believe he is."

"I have come today to personally show our nation's commitment to a free Iraq," he said. "My message to the Iraqi people is this: Seize the moment. Seize this opportunity to develop a government of and by and for the people."

The military crowd applauded loudly when Bush said, "We will continue to hunt down people like Mr. [al-]Zarqawi and bring them to justice."

He praised the troops for their service and "for making history," telling them they were working to spread peace and freedom across the Middle East.

Bush made the trip in a show of support for the new Iraqi government, finalized last week with the approval of al-Maliki's choices for three key Cabinet posts -- defense and interior ministers and minister of state for national security.

Biden: Showing support not enough

The summit came on the heels of a poll showing most Americans believe the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was a mistake.

After a briefing members of Bush's Cabinet on Tuesday, Democratic Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware said "the administration thus far has not had a strategy for victory."

Biden said he hoped the president "went with a message to deal with three things everyone knows has to be dealt with," Biden said.

He said those were controlling militias and the infiltration of security forces; getting greater Sunni support for the government; and holding a regional conference to get "the powers in the region to agree to keep hands off Iraq."

Bush and his top officials had begun a two-day summit at Camp David on Monday to discuss Iraq's progress and had scheduled the teleconference with al-Maliki for Tuesday morning.

But Bush secretly left for Iraq on Monday night to see al-Maliki in person.

White House officials said the summit was scheduled at Camp David rather than at the White House to ensure it was easier for the president to get out of Washington undetected.

Presidential counselor Dan Bartlett said the trip had been planned over the past month by six White House officials, whom Bartlett described as a "very close circle of people."

Bartlett told reporters aboard Air Force One that Bush had wanted to come to Iraq as soon as all positions in al-Maliki's government were chosen.

By meeting face to face, Bush and al-Maliki would be able to "establish a closer relationship than you can just over a telephone," Bartlett said.

Bartlett declined to say whether Bush and al-Maliki were to discuss the withdrawal of any U.S. troops.

U.S. officials told al-Maliki of Bush's arrival in Baghdad only after the president's Nighthawk helicopter had landed in the former Green Zone following a six-minute trip from Baghdad International Airport.

Danger requires secrecy

Bartlett said the secrecy of the trip was necessary because of Iraq's tenuous security situation.

Underscoring that point, one Iraqi police officer was killed and five others wounded Tuesday when two roadside bombs hit their patrol near a bridge in southeastern Baghdad, an Iraqi Interior Ministry official said.

Gunmen also killed Hani Aref Jassim, a professor at Baghdad University's College of Engineering, in western Baghdad's Mansour neighborhood.

And Iraqi police on Tuesday found six bodies shot dead and showing signs of torture in neighborhoods of the capital, an Interior Ministry official said.

Bush last visited Baghdad in November 2003 for a surprise Thanksgiving dinner with troops.

Bush has invited the Iraqi leader to visit the White House, but the trip has not been finalized, Bartlett said.

Up to 70,000 troops to patrol Baghdad

Bush's trip comes as at least 70,000 troops -- most of them Iraqi -- prepare to deploy Wednesday on the streets of Baghdad in an effort to bring security to the Iraqi capital, according to the Iraqi Interior Ministry.

The additional security will include Iraqi police, police commandos, soldiers and emergency police as well as U.S.-led coalition forces, the ministry said.

The forces will secure checkpoints on Baghdad's roads as well as enforce a 9 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew. There also will be a ban on civilians carrying weapons.

The forces will wear new uniforms to distinguish them from insurgents, who often wear police or military outfits to carry out attacks.

Officials said it's the largest operation in Baghdad since the U.S. turnover to Iraqis in June 2004.

Other developments

At least five car bombs exploded Tuesday in the oil-rich northern city of Kirkuk, killing at least 14 people and wounding 20 others, police and morgue officials said. Police casualties included two among the dead and six wounded.


The judge in Saddam Hussein's trial barred the ousted Iraqi leader's half brother, Barzan Hassan al-Tikriti, from the courtroom Tuesday, following disruptions the previous day.

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:
Since we've had a thread by G-man concerning Iraq & Democrats (the Calling for Surrender thread) it's well past time to have one for the Republicans & Iraq.

I'll let John Kerry start this out...

Quote:

---

...'Lie and Die'

Kerry, a former presidential candidate, was well-prepared for the Republican criticism and took to the morning radio airwaves on Don Imus' popular program to fight back.
"'Cut and run' — that's their phrase," he said. "They found their three words. They love to do that. And they're going to try to make the elections in November a choice between 'cut and run' and 'stay the course.' That's not the choice."
"My plan is not 'cut and run,'" he said. "Their plan is 'lie and die.' And that's what they are doing. They lie to America, what's happening on the ground. They lie about why we're there. They lie about what's happening. And our plan is very simple. It's redeploy to win the war on terror. Change to succeed."
...

---

ABC News

---

Quote:

---

Kerry, a former presidential candidate, was well-prepared for the Republican criticism and took to the morning radio airwaves on Don Imus' popular program to fight back.

---

Quote:

---

wannabuyamonkey said:
Is Kerry seriously saying that Bush's goal and strategy is to kill as many of our own troops as possible? If so he's a sick ass-hole, if not then he's just plain stupid.

---

Quote:

---

the G-man said:

Quote:

---

wannabuyamonkey said:
Is Kerry seriously saying that Bush's goal and strategy is to kill as many of our own troops as possible? If so he's a sick ass-hole, if not then he's just plain stupid.

---

Kerry is reverting to form is all.

He first made a name for himself falsely accusing his fellow soldiers (the ones he later tried to exploit in his presidential bid) of atrocities and war crimes...which emboldened the enemy, demoralized the troops and led to the deaths of thousand, if not millions, in the Killing Fields.

I guess he figured that strategy worked once before so why not try it again.

---

Quote:

---

wannabuyamonkey said: ... Is Kerry seriously saying that Bush's goal and strategy is to kill as many of our own troops as possible? If so he's a sick ass-hole, if not then he's just plain stupid.

---

Quote:

---

Posted on Sun, Jul. 23, 2006



PRICE OF SUCCESS IN IRAQI WAR WILL BE PAINFUL
BY ANTHONY H. CORDESMAN
www.csis.org



The United States and the government of Iraq should have a common goal: to restore Iraq to full sovereignty and withdraw American forces as soon as the insurgency is defeated or contained, and Iraqi forces are able to take over the security mission -- and as soon as the United States is reasonably confident that Iraq has reached some degree of political stability.

But there is a price that U.S. forces will have to pay to have any chance of serious success.

• First: If an amnesty that brings insurgents into the Iraqi political process is possible, the United States cannot indulge in political posturing over whether some of the insurgents who join the government are people who attacked and wounded or killed Americans.

Violent terrorists and extremists will be excluded from such Iraqi proposals in any case. But there are a significant number of Sunnis and other insurgents who saw the United States as an invader, an ''occupier'' and a ''crusader,'' and who saw their struggle as a war.

This will mean amnesty for some who struck American as well as Iraqi targets. There are as many as 20 such Sunni movements, and ultimately some Shiite elements may be involved. If Iraq is to have peace and reach a stable series of political compromises, these insurgents need to be brought into the political process. They need to be treated as combatants and not as criminals or terrorists.

This not only is the best way to minimize future U.S. casualties, it is also the best way to give meaning to the sacrifices of American soldiers. The goal and purpose of their service is a free Iraq, not punishing the enemy.

• Second: It must be shown, by the Iraqi government, that it will separately investigate any charge against U.S. personnel in Iraq. The new government cannot claim to be free or sovereign while ignoring American abuses to date. We have made real mistakes, and a handful of soldiers have committed real crimes. The Iraqi people must see that their government will not ignore this or defer to us because of its dependence upon us.

At the same time, we need to understand that honest investigations of this kind will save American lives. Iraq is filled with false charges and conspiracy theories. Exaggerating or falsifying U.S. incidents and crimes is a key propaganda weapon for our enemies. Iraqi investigations that refute such charges, explain the necessities of battle and show that U.S. and Iraqi forces are cooperating will defuse such charges and the anger and vengeance that follow. It will also give credibility to our efforts to end the involvement of the Iraqi police and security forces in abuses, death squads and other actions that move the country toward civil war and that aid the insurgency.

• Third: There must be a steady increase in Iraqi decision-making and command authority, and Iraqi control over the actions of U.S. forces. The rate at which this occurs should be left to the U.S. ambassador in Iraq and the U.S. military. If it comes too fast, it will endanger victory. If it comes too slowly, it will endanger Iraqi political unity and credibility.

Part of this transition will have to be some better mechanism for jointly reviewing operations and any further charges against American forces. Iraq is far too volatile to allow Iraqi authorities to arrest and try American personnel. They would inevitably become human sacrifices to those Iraqi political interests that want to rush American forces out or serve their own factional interests.

Joint review boards or fact-finding groups, however, are very feasible. So is the idea of a special Iraqi tribunal or prosecutor that would raise charges for consideration by U.S. courts-martial. This would give the Iraqi government the ability to exert the proper kind of pressure to prosecute and ensure that complaints and charges get full and immediate U.S. attention.

• Fourth: It must be clear that the United States will not seek military bases in Iraq and will help Iraq move toward possession of a counterinsurgency force capable of defending the country against foreign threats. Far too many Iraqis see our present bases as the prelude to permanent occupation, and many in the Iraqi military question whether we really will give Iraq the ability to defend itself.

If the United States makes it clear that it has no intention to stay any longer than Iraq wants and needs U.S. forces, this will be a further major demonstration of our integrity and credibility, and it will undermine the insurgency while potentially bringing some factions back into the peaceful political process.




Every one of these steps will ultimately save American lives and reduce American casualties.

Every one will increase the probability that past American sacrifices will have real meaning.

Each will show we are serious about creating a free and independent Iraq, and will help to restore the honor tarnished by a handful of soldiers who endangered and dishonored their comrades.

___________________________________________________

Anthony H. Cordesman holds the Arleigh A. Burke chair in strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and is the author of The Iraq War: Strategy, Tactics, and Military Lessons.

---

Quote:

---

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Iraq war gave birth to a new generation of Islamic radicals and the terrorist threat has grown since the September 11 attacks, according to a U.S. intelligence report cited in The New York Times on Saturday.

A National Intelligence Estimate completed in April says Islamic radicalism has mushroomed worldwide and cites the Iraq war as a reason for the spread of jihad ideology, the newspaper reported.

"The estimate concludes that the radical Islamic movement has expanded from a core of Qaeda operatives and affiliated groups to include a new class of 'self-generating' cells inspired by al Qaeda's leadership but without any direct connection to Osama bin Laden or his top lieutenants," the newspaper said.

The Times cited more than a dozen U.S. government officials and outside experts with knowledge of the classified document.

It is the first formal appraisal of global terrorism by U.S. intelligence agencies since the war began in March 2003 and represents a consensus view of the 16 U.S. spy services.

Some of the estimate's conclusions confirm predictions in a January 2003 National Intelligence Council report that said a war in Iraq might increase support for political Islam worldwide, according to the newspaper.
...

---

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Iraq war gave birth to a new generation of Islamic radicals and the terrorist threat has grown since the September 11 attacks, according to a U.S. intelligence report cited in The New York Times on Saturday.

---

Quote:

---

the G-man said:

Quote:

---

Matter-eater Man said:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Iraq war gave birth to a new generation of Islamic radicals and the terrorist threat has grown since the September 11 attacks, according to a U.S. intelligence report cited in The New York Times on Saturday.

---

Bush Disputes, Will Release Leaked Iraq Intel Report

President Bush forcefully disputed the findings of a leaked intelligence report Tuesday, declaring that it was not a mistake to go into Iraq, and that U.S. forces stationed there have not caused a rise in terror around the world.

Bush said he was declassifying part of a classified National Intelligence Estimate completed last April because he wanted the public to be able to read the conclusions without filters that "create confusion in the minds of the American people."

Bush said he agreed with one conclusion — that the effort in Iraq had forced Al Qaeda cells to become more diffuse and independent. But he questioned why such an old document had appeared on the front pages of major newspapers just six weeks ahead of the November midterm election.

The president said that the leak distressed him because, in part, it shows that someone in the government is trying to play politics, but moreso, because it hurts the intelligence collection process.

The president rejected claims that the U.S. presence in Iraq has increased terror threats, saying the United States wasn't in Iraq when America was attacked on Sept. 11, 2001; or when the USS Cole was hit; or when the U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya were bombed.

"If we weren't in Iraq, they'd find some other excuse because they have ambitions. They kill to achieve their objectives," Bush said. "The best way to protect America is to defeat these killers overseas so we don't have to face them at home."

Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai, whose country is facing an increase in terror after the Taliban were defeated in late 2001, [was also at the press conference and] interjected to offer a similar plea.

"Terrorism was hurting us way before Iraq or September 11 ... These extremist forces were killing people in Afghanistan for years, closing schools, burning mosques, killing children, uprooting vineyards," Karzai said. "They came to America on September 11, but they were attacking you before September 11 in other parts of the world. We are a witness in Afghanistan.

"Do you forget people jumping off the 80th floor or 70th floor when the planes hit them? Can you imagine what it will be for a man or woman to jump from that high?" Karzai asked recalling some of the more shocking scenes from the World Trade Center bombing. "How do we get rid of them? ... Should we wait for them to come and kill us again?"

---

so Bush and a man who is reliant on Bush disagree with a report that basically says Bush has fucked up?

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
But that's just the thing, Ray. We don't know what the report actually says. All the NY Times leaked was what some anonymous sources interpreted the report as saying.

Let's wait for the actual report, not the NY Times spin.

Then you can misrepresent its findings all you want.

---

you've been winking at me a lot....

A senior Al Qaeda operative who engineered a brazen escape from a high security American prison in Afghanistan last year was killed in a predawn raid by British soldiers in a quiet, wealthy neighborhood in southern Iraq on Monday

Two companies of about 250 soldiers wearing night goggles and carrying night-vision rifles stormed a house in the neighborhood of al-Tuninnah in Basra, intending to capture the operative. The spokesman for the British military in Iraq, Maj. Charles Burbridge, I [sic] identified the operative as Omar al-Faruq. But they were fired upon as they entered and shot back, killing Mr. Faruq.

Major Burbridge said Mr. Faruq was "a terrorist of considerable significance" who had been hiding in Basra, but he declined to say whether this was the same man who escaped from the American military detention center in Bagram, Afghanistan, last July. Mr. Faruq's identity was confirmed by an American official in Washington and by an official in Basra, who was not authorized to speak on the subject.

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
In fact, today's New York Times inadvertently makes a point long made by conservatives, namely, that the Iraq war may be keeping the terrorists in that country, where they can be more easily fought, than on U.S. soil:

A senior Al Qaeda operative who engineered a brazen escape from a high security American prison in Afghanistan last year was killed in a predawn raid by British soldiers in a quiet, wealthy neighborhood in southern Iraq on Monday

Two companies of about 250 soldiers wearing night goggles and carrying night-vision rifles stormed a house in the neighborhood of al-Tuninnah in Basra, intending to capture the operative. The spokesman for the British military in Iraq, Maj. Charles Burbridge, I [sic] identified the operative as Omar al-Faruq. But they were fired upon as they entered and shot back, killing Mr. Faruq.

Major Burbridge said Mr. Faruq was "a terrorist of considerable significance" who had been hiding in Basra, but he declined to say whether this was the same man who escaped from the American military detention center in Bagram, Afghanistan, last July. Mr. Faruq's identity was confirmed by an American official in Washington and by an official in Basra, who was not authorized to speak on the subject.

The anti-war crowd might argue that if Saddam Hussein hadn't been topped, Faruq wouldn't have been in Iraq.

But that means that he wouldn't have been in Iraq where allied troops could kill him. This is supposed to be an argument against our presence there?

---

Quote:

---

r3x29yz4a said:
let me ask how you might feel if you were an Iraqi civilian and you heard Bush boast how great it is to "fight them over there" meaning the Americans want to have all fighting focus on your city streets?

---

I'd stay the hell off the streets if I heard shooting. It's no different from my neighborhood growing up.

Quote:

---

thedoctor said:

Isn't this the same report that states that the best way to defeat Global Terrorism is to defeat it in Iraq? That fighting and defeating the insurgents and terrorists there will deflate the recruitment of new terrorists just as well as the war became a rallying cry for them?

---

Quote:

---

the G-man said:

Quote:

---

thedoctor said:

Isn't this the same report that states that the best way to defeat Global Terrorism is to defeat it in Iraq? That fighting and defeating the insurgents and terrorists there will deflate the recruitment of new terrorists just as well as the war became a rallying cry for them?

---

Yes

"Whoever leaked this report forgot to mention a key finding of the intelligence community: If we defeat the terrorists in Iraq, there will be fewer terrorists inspired to carry on the fight. In other words, defeating terrorists in Iraq not only secures that new democracy, but prevents future attacks here at home. This is a dramatically different message than the selective leaks to the media," he said in a statement.

Basically, it seems that the conclusion of the report is that, no matter what we do, some crazy ass Muslims will use it as an excuse, just like they use cartoons and papal speeches, to declare jihad.

---

Well, isn't that just fucking peachy for you fascists..using another sovereign nation to deflect terror is a great pronouncement...