What Did You Do In The War On Terror, Daddy

[TheStripey1]

keep running away from the debate..... your cowardice is overwhelming.

that's all he does...

 

[TheStripey1]

Iran's Secret Plan For Mayhem
By ELI LAKE
Staff Reporter of the Sun
January 3, 2007


WASHINGTON — Iran is supporting both Sunni and Shiite terrorists in the Iraqi civil war, according to secret Iranian documents captured by Americans in Iraq.

The news that American forces had captured Iranians in Iraq was widely reported last month, but less well known is that the Iranians were carrying documents that offered Americans insight into Iranian activities in Iraq.

An American intelligence official said the new material, which has been authenticated within the intelligence community, confirms "that Iran is working closely with both the Shiite militias and Sunni Jihadist groups." The source was careful to stress that the Iranian plans do not extend to cooperation with Baathist groups fighting the government in Baghdad, and said the documents rather show how the Quds Force — the arm of Iran's revolutionary guard that supports Shiite Hezbollah, Sunni Hamas, and Shiite death squads — is working with individuals affiliated with Al Qaeda in Iraq and Ansar al-Sunna.

Another American official who has seen the summaries of the reporting affiliated with the arrests said it comprised a "smoking gun." "We found plans for attacks, phone numbers affiliated with Sunni bad guys, a lot of things that filled in the blanks on what these guys are up to," the official said.

One of the documents captured in the raids, according to two American officials and one Iraqi official, is an assessment of the Iraq civil war and new strategy from the Quds Force. According to the Iraqi source, that assessment is the equivalent of " Iran's Iraq Study Group," a reference to the bipartisan American commission that released war strategy recommendations after the November 7 elections. The document concludes, according to these sources, that Iraq's Sunni neighbors will step up their efforts to aid insurgent groups and that it is imperative for Iran to redouble efforts to retain influence with them, as well as with Shiite militias.

http://www.nysun.com/article/46032

credible sources... got any?

 

[TheStripey1]

I searched the web,and the only place such a bizarre claim was made was in the New York SUN. Do you consider that PROOF? If so, let me ask you a question: if I posted an article written by a New York Times staff writer and tried to suggest that the article was proof of anything, what would be your response?

He'd dismiss it because it came from the "liberal media" but ohhhhhh, it's a different story when the article is from a right winger site. Then it's the gospel...

typical winger tactic.

 

[maineman]

credible sources... got any?

of course not...just the new york sun.....

isn't that the same paper that claimed that Hillary's lovechild was fathered by an extra-terrestrial?

 

[TheStripey1]

I have NEVER said he wasn't a threat. I have only questioned why a shiite nation would provide support to a sunni group that was engaged in killing shiites in Iraq.

cmon, MaineMan, you know as well as I, logic isn't going to faze rsr...

 

[TheStripey1]

Iran is funding them and sending weapons to defeat the US

link?

 

[Truthmatters]

https://ssl.tnr.com/p/docsub.mhtml?i=20051010&s=lake101005

he also writes for the new republic

 

[TheStripey1]

As the article stated, iran is trying to start a civil war knowing the yellow Dems will push harder for surrender

Then Iran move in and takes over with the terrorists

are you calling the shiites terrorists now, too? You know, Shiites control the government of Iraq, so are you saying that the government of Iraq are terrorists too?

If that's the case, why are we supporting them?

 

[TheStripey1]

On the specific issue of funding the troops, I don't think it should be tied to any partisan games.

I'm ALL FOR some non-partisan, objective people sitting down and assessing the situation and coming to the most feasible plan. The Dems are NOT the group to do that because partisanship comes first with them.

where are you going to find those non-partisan republicans? I haven't seen any of them anywhere. You complain about partisan democrats... what about the partisans in your own party? Or is that ok because they are of your own party?

 

[TheStripey1]

Isn't that EXACTLY who the Iraq Study Group was and what they did? Bush told them to go fuck off!

yep, yep and yep...

 

[TheStripey1]

If we leave Iraq before the government can stand on its own and provide physical security for its Nation, we are surrendering Iraq to militant Islamic fundamentalists from BOTH sides.

If we leave there having gradually replaced our troops with theirs, we at least leave them no worse off without us.

I will also point out that since Congress proposed this bill with attached rider, the government of Iraq has voted to do just as I suggest, setting their own timeline. IMO, it is THEIR place to do that, not US Congressional Democrats, and it provides the most hope on this issue there is.

And I would think you liberal-types would be all for it, because if Bush refuses to support the Iraqi government's timeline for taking over the physical security of their own nation, he's going to find himself REAL short of support. I for one, will not support his refusing them, as circmustances stand now.

Do you think the Iraqi government be allowed to take 2 months off this summer?

 

[TheStripey1]

I see another proud member of the angry left has joined the discussion

Dems are pushing for surrender and defeat

that's right, rsr, angry because spineless morons go on and on and on about how much they support the war... all the while just sitting on their fat asses, stuffing their fat faces with junk food, drooling over their keyboards...

if you have so much patriotism, why don't you push yourself away from the keyboard, and waddle down to the recruiter's office...

enlist... be a man... for once.

 

[TheStripey1]

If it is not "reported" on Dead Air America, PSMNBC, or the Clinton News Netowrk - it never happened as far as the left is concerned

I bet you listen to rush, savage and oreilly... they're just like you... all three of them are chickenhawks...

 

[TheStripey1]

They voted on and made a statement. That's making a decision. I say give them a chance.

How long should we give them? How many americans will die while you're giving them a chance? How many more will be wounded? When will it be enough?

 

[TheStripey1]

It took the US about 13 years to write and ratify the US Constitution

so? that was over 200 years ago... they didn't have computers.

 

[TheStripey1]

You tell me where they are. Last I saw, there are a couple of tons of WMDs and/or their percursors unaccounted for by the UN, KNOWN to be in Saddam's possession. Assuming they didn't just vanish into thin air, they have to exist somehwere.

And to that extent, Buhs did not lie about WMDs. Saddam had them. He used them. He could not account for them.

I sure took a lot of anthrax shots for nothing when Clinton was President if only Bush believed Saddam had WMDs.

they were destroyed... back in the 90s... if they weren't, then where are they?

sorry about those shots, better safe than sorry, right? where were you that you were getting them?

 

[TheStripey1]

Depends on which story you want. From the time I joined this board to date, he has served in every branch of the service from the Korean War through the First Gulf War. He also claimed to have been in ground combat, but when the truth came out, he was in the AFNG.

So your guess is as good as anyone's.

Well. I haven't heard any of those tales... but I can tell you that the AFNG served in Viet Nam...

 

[TheStripey1]

So only the 4% of the population who have served are the only ones who can voice an opinion on the war

Seems that is NOT what you defended when you served

Or is that what you call free speech?

I didn't say you couldn't speak or have an opinion, I say since you are so gung ho for the war that you should walk your talk...

so? why haven't you signed up? are you afraid?

 

[TheStripey1]

Are you always this obnoxious or are you having a good day?

I'm always this way with chickenhawkscum and rsr? I'm just getting warmed up.

 

[TheStripey1]

MM always has a problem with facts - much as you seem to do

I haven't presented any yet, just commenting on you and MaineMan's conversation, but I have asked you numerous times for links to the drivel that comes off your keyboard... I doubt that they will be forth coming.