What Did You Do In The War On Terror, Daddy

[maineman]

I say again: Cut and paste the sentence from this article which supports your assertion that Iran is arming AQ or any other sunni group, for that matter.

to which you offer:

U.S. officials say they have found smoking-gun evidence of Iranian support for terrorists in Iraq: brand-new weapons fresh from Iranian factories. According to a senior defense official, coalition forces have recently seized Iranian-made weapons and munitions that bear manufacturing dates in 2006.

your cut and paste paragraph says nothing about AQ and nothing about sunnis. The entire article talks about Iran's support for shi'ite in Iraq.

try again.

 

[red states rule]

I say again: Cut and paste the sentence from this article which supports your assertion that Iran is arming AQ or any other sunni group, for that matter.

to which you offer:

U.S. officials say they have found smoking-gun evidence of Iranian support for terrorists in Iraq: brand-new weapons fresh from Iranian factories. According to a senior defense official, coalition forces have recently seized Iranian-made weapons and munitions that bear manufacturing dates in 2006.

your cut and paste paragraph says nothing about AQ and nothing about sunnis. The entire article talks about Iran's support for shi'ite in Iraq.

try again.

Keep trying to spin there are no terrorists in Iarq

To libs (like John Kerry) the only terrorists in Iraq are US troops

 

[maineman]

ah, what the hell...sunnis...shi'ites...who gives a fuck, they are all just ragheads to you, RSR, ain't they?

 

[red states rule]

ah, what the hell...sunnis...shi'ites...who gives a fuck, they are all just ragheads to you, RSR, ain't they?

terrorists are terrorists

unless you are John Kerry and other Dems - then the US troops are the real terrorists

 

[maineman]

Keep trying to spin there are no terrorists in Iarq

To libs (like John Kerry) the only terrorists in Iraq are US troops

I have never suggested that there are no terrorists in Iraq. I have only pointed out that Iran would certainly have no reason to support sunni terrorists and your own link backs me up on that.



you were the one who posted the ABC news link as proof, somehow, that Iran was funding AQ or any other sunni organization.

Just show me where or admit you fucked up.

 

[Gunny]

I say again: Cut and paste the sentence from this article which supports your assertion that Iran is arming AQ or any other sunni group, for that matter.

to which you offer:

U.S. officials say they have found smoking-gun evidence of Iranian support for terrorists in Iraq: brand-new weapons fresh from Iranian factories. According to a senior defense official, coalition forces have recently seized Iranian-made weapons and munitions that bear manufacturing dates in 2006.

your cut and paste paragraph says nothing about AQ and nothing about sunnis. The entire article talks about Iran's support for shi'ite in Iraq.

try again.

Am I lost here, or what? Why would anyone suppose Iran would support the Sunni when Iran is Shia?

 

[maineman]

Am I lost here, or what? Why would anyone suppose Iran would support the Sunni when Iran is Shia?

That is what I have been trying to get RSR to address ever since he first made his claim that Iran was funding AQ in Iraq.

I really think that it boils down to the fact that RSR really does not understand the difference between sunnis and shiites...they are really all just raghead in his infantile world.

I ask him to please provide some evidence that Iran is supporting sunnis and he proudly posts an ABC News article which specifically talks about Iran supporting Sadr and shiites.....I ask him what the fuck he is talking about and to please cut and paste the portion of the ABC news article which supports his idiotic contention that Iran is supporting sunnis and he posts a sentence which talks about Iran supporting terrorists in Iraq...the rest of the article speaks in great detail about how all of the support goes to shiites, but RSR is just too fucking stupid to understand how he posted a link that proves he is an idiot in his feeble attempt to prove that he is not an idiot.

 

[maineman]

to RSR, "Al Qaeda" is synonymous with "terrorist"....

to RSR, all terrorists belong to Al Qaeda..... that is the only way he can keep things straight and the only way he can keep blindly supporting this war.... Al Qaeda attacked us..... Iraq is filled with terrorist sectarian violence... therefore every antagonist in Iraq is Al Qaeda and therefore every antagonist in Iraq is part of the same organization that attacked us....we HAVE to stay there and keep killing them...they are all part of the same group that flew airplanes into the WTC..... it makes this messy entanglement in an Iraqi civil war seem so much more righteous and noble, somehow.

 

[Gunny]

That is what I have been trying to get RSR to address ever since he first made his claim that Iran was funding AQ in Iraq.

I really think that it boils down to the fact that RSR really does not understand the difference between sunnis and shiites...they are really all just raghead in his infantile world.

I ask him to please provide some evidence that Iran is supporting sunnis and he proudly posts an ABC News article which specifically talks about Iran supporting Sadr and shiites.....I ask him what the fuck he is talking about and to please cut and paste the portion of the ABC news article which supports his idiotic contention that Iran is supporting sunnis and he posts a sentence which talks about Iran supporting terrorists in Iraq...the rest of the article speaks in great detail about how all of the support goes to shiites, but RSR is just too fucking stupid to understand how he posted a link that proves he is an idiot in his feeble attempt to prove that he is not an idiot.

I would think the Sunni would be getting support from Saudi Arabia via wahabbis, and unless I am wrong, isn't the Iraq verison of AQ wahabbi?

 

[maineman]

to the best of my knowledge, Al Qaeda was, and continues to be a radical wahabbist movement. For the most part, all of the sectarian violence in the middle east are proxy wars between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

 

[CSM]

to the best of my knowledge, Al Qaeda was, and continues to be a radical wahabbist movement. For the most part, all of the sectarian violence in the middle east are proxy wars between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Now that is an intriguing idea and worthy of real discussion, imo.

 

[red states rule]

Am I lost here, or what? Why would anyone suppose Iran would support the Sunni when Iran is Shia?

Iran wants the US out of Iraq - they will do whatever they can to do it.

Knowing the Dems want to surrender the war - Iran gets what they want

Iran is providing money and arms to increase attacks knowing with each bomb blast and US troop death - the US inches closer to surrender

 

[red states rule]

Islamic Legal Scholar Says Iraq Needs American Presence for Stability and Defense
Posted by Noel Sheppard on May 19, 2007 - 18:17.
If you believe what you see from our news media, everybody in the Middle East with the exception of Israelis wants American military forces out of Iraq as soon as possible, and thinks suicide bombers are martyrs to be revered.

Well, meet Abd Al-Hamid Al-Ansari, the former dean of Islamic Law at Qatar University. He was interviewed by Al-Arabiya TV on May 11 during which he made some statements that folks in our media wouldn’t want you to hear (video available here courtesy of MemriTV).

First, Al-Ansari came out strongly against suicide bombers:

Should I respond by sending my children to commit suicide and blow themselves up? Let's say we accept that a certain person is anti-American – who are the civilians, children and women in Algeria to blame? Are they Americans? I ask you, who are most of the victims of suicide operations and terrorism - the Muslims or the non-Muslims? They are Muslims. The number of people killed by Muslims carrying out suicide operations is far greater than those killed by the Americans or the Israelis.

Amazing. Yet, Al-Ansari was just getting warmed up:

There has never been in Islam – not in the raids of the Prophet, or of his companions, or of other Muslims – anybody who blew himself up among the enemy or anybody else. Whoever gave the green light to suicide operations against Israeli civilians, and said that the dialogue with the Jews would take place through human bombs, did so out of political, ideological motives, in support of a certain political group. It has nothing to do with religion. All the religious scholars, especially the Salafi scholars, have said that whoever blows himself up, even among the enemy, is killing himself, and will be punished in hell.

This is all the more true when we are talking about innocent civilians. According to the teachings of Jihad, we must not kill the children, even among the enemy. Some talk about quid pro quo. They say that since the enemy kills our children, we should kill... quid pro quo is not allowed in this case, because our deeds should be restricted by virtue by virtue. We have a [divine] message. If I compete with the barbaric deeds of the enemy, this means I am like him.

In addition, the claim that we have no other means except human bombs is not true. This is self-destruction. We live in an era in which we are destroying ourselves.

Allow me to ask you a question. Have suicide operations, throughout their long history here and elsewhere, achieved any political goal? Never. Suicide operations have never achieved any political goal or benefited the Muslims.

for the complete article and to watch the video
http://newsbusters.org/node/12874

 

[red states rule]

Am I lost here, or what? Why would anyone suppose Iran would support the Sunni when Iran is Shia?

More Evidence of Saddam-al Qaeda Ties
By Ray Robison
An al Qaeda document newly released by the Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) of the United States Military Academy provides an extraordinary new connection to a previously reported order by Saddam Hussein to support al Qaeda attacks upon US forces in Somalia. It corresponds with other documents that show Saddam Hussein was using Islamic terrorists as proxies to attack US interests. The document was part of a US Army report on al Qaeda in Africa. That study contends that although al Qaeda managed to train other Islamic fighters in Africa, it did the organization no long term good, as it failed to bend the region to al Qaeda doctrine.


The al Qaeda document is entitled The Ogaden File: Operation Holding (Al-Msk). Its' name refers to a tribal region of Ethiopia extending into Somalia (Ogaden) and ‘al-Msk' is an acronym for the Mission to hold Somalia and Kenya. The file is a personal log about a group of al Qaeda terrorists sent to Somalia in 1993 to provide military training to local Islamic militants. Islamic fighters trained by al Qaeda would later kill 18 Army Special Forces soldiers in what has become know as the Battle of Mogadishu which was portrayed in the popular movie Black Hawk Down. The US government confirmed the involvement of al Qaeda and Usama bin Laden in a 1998 indictment against him for the Somali attacks.


The al Qaeda document itself provides a fascinating look at training operations of an expeditionary nature in hostile territory. It lists several terrorists who subsequently became high ranking al Qaeda leaders (most were later killed or captured by US forces). Many of them were Egyptians with the Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) terror group led by al Qaeda number two man Ayman al Zawahiri. The log was written by an al Qaeda terrorist named Saif al-Islam al Masri who was known to be a leader of al Qaeda in Somalia and an EIJ leader. He is now in US custody.


Saif writes that on the 20th of January, 1993 he and his men were ordered to drop everything (marriage plans, travel) and report to a man named Abu Hafs in Peshawar, Pakistan. This deployment to Somalia heralded a major escalation of al Qaeda activities in Africa. Abu Hafs is also known as Mohammed Atef. Mohammed Atef was the number two man in the EIJ under Ayman al Zawahiri and also part of Usama bin Laden's inner circle. He was included in the 1998 indictment for attacking US forces in Somalia and was considered the number three man in al Qaeda. He was killed by US forces shortly after 9/11.


Saif describes how he and his men were ordered by Atef to go Somalia and set up training camps. The fighters they trained would ultimately grab power in Somalia, only to be driven out by Ethiopian and American Special Forces action last year.


The date of Atef's order for them to go to Somalia is very significant because it corresponds with an order by Saddam Hussein to do just that. A different set of documents, provided by the Cyber News Service (CNS) in 2004 and reported on here, are purported to be from a cache of documents captured in Iraq. CNS stated they were given to them by a member of the Iraqi Survey Group. Those documents - which have not yet been verified by the US government but do match secret information from other known Saddam documents and have been confirmed by several experts - are memorandums between Saddam and his intelligence service.


Saddam Hussein ordered his intelligence service to "hunt the Americans" in Somalia via Afghan mujahideen proxies including the EIJ on January 18th, 1993 just two days before EIJ leader Atef ordered his best men to Somalia. The CNS memoranda also show that Saddam's intelligence service was meeting with the leader of the EIJ (almost certainly Ayman al Zawahiri) to give him the assignment.


Saddam wanted his intelligence service to work with mujahideen (Islamic fighters) displaced from Afghanistan in 1992, which likely also included Usama bin Laden's followers, the EIJ (the two groups would officially merge together to become al Qaeda) and another associated terror leader, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. The order provided funding to the mujahideen and drew precedent from operations with the EIJ against the Egyptian government because it sided with the UN coalition against Iraq in the Gulf War.


This new al Qaeda document, when combined with the CNS documents, provides a sequential timeframe for the events and the human linkages to carry out the order from Saddam to his intelligence service to Ayman al Zawahiri to Mohammed Atef and then to his terror trainers.


The revelation about Mohammed Atef comes just days after former CIA Director George Tenet caused a political and media stir with the release of his new book At the Center of the Storm: My Years at the CIA. Tenet devotes a portion of the book to discussing al Qaeda-Saddam ties. In it he writes about the case of Ibn Sheikh al Libi, "a senior military trainer for al-Qa'ida in Afghanistan." Al Libi told his interrogators that


"a militant known as Abu Abudullah had told him that...al-Qa'ida leader Mohammed Atef had sent Abu Abdullah to Iraq to seek training in poisons and mustard gas."


Al Libi would later recant his testimony and become a flash point in the debate over pre-war intelligence. Tenet notes the controversy and says it is unclear if al Libi was lying with the initial report or his recantation. Tenet writes,


"Another senior al-Qa'ida detainee told us that Mohammed Atef was interested in expanding al-Qa'ida's ties to Iraq, which, in our eyes, added credibility to [al-Libi's initial] reporting."


This new evidence may provide more insight into why Saddam was making his military officers watch Black Hawk Down just prior to the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom. He may have been shoring up their courage by reminding them of what he considered his previous defeat of the American army.


Ray Robison is a former army officer, a former member of the ISG, and co-author of the new ebook Both In One Trench: Saddam's support to the Global Islamic Jihad Movement and International Terrorism

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/05/more_evidence_of_saddamal_qaed.html

 

[maineman]

that long winded quote did not ever come close to answering GUnny's question.....

 

[red states rule]

that long winded quote did not ever come close to answering GUnny's question.....

I knew you would ignore the Iran influence

 

[maineman]

I knew you would ignore the Iran influence

ummm RSR...the link you just pasted does not even have the word "Iran" in it. I think you are the one who is ignoring sometihing!

 

[Gunny]

Now that is an intriguing idea and worthy of real discussion, imo.

Our presence notwithstanding, that what the sectarian violence is all about, IMO. Wahabbism was created by Saudi's after WWII in an attempt to counter the rising influence of Shi'ism from Iran. Iraq, standing squarely between Iran and Saudi Arabia, are where the two opposing forces come together.

The Ba'athist regime in Iraq was the wedge between those two forces. Removing that wedge created a power vaccuum between two factions battling for domination of the region.

 

[Gunny]

Iran wants the US out of Iraq - they will do whatever they can to do it.

Knowing the Dems want to surrender the war - Iran gets what they want

Iran is providing money and arms to increase attacks knowing with each bomb blast and US troop death - the US inches closer to surrender

Your view is rather simplistic. Of course Iran wants us out of Iraq.

Does Iran want us out of Iraq badly enough to supply a faction they are at war with? We are sitting right in the center of an ideological war between Sunni and Shia. Iran supports the Shia, while Saudi Arabia supports the Sunni/wahabbi.

Neither is going to support their enemy just to get us out. They already know we'll leave sooner or later anyway.

 

[maineman]

Your view is rather simplistic. Of course Iran wants us out of Iraq.

Does Iran want us out of Iraq badly enough to supply a faction they are at war with? We are sitting right in the center of an ideological war between Sunni and Shia. Iran supports the Shia, while Saudi Arabia supports the Sunni/wahabbi.

Neither is going to support their enemy just to get us out. They already know we'll leave sooner or later anyway.

Gunny: RSR's view of this conflict is so uninformed, so simplistic that it really is no more complex to him than: America - Good. Ragheads - Bad.