Pentagon: Saddam Hussein's Iraq had no links to Al Qaeda

Recent yes, but as a substitute for a diminished defense capability... no evidence that terrorism was to be utilized in an offensive, or exported capacity. Just to secure his position in power.

Statements immediately after the '91 conflict could reflect some frustration at the outcome of that situation. Did those statements result in anything? Has Iraq EVER been implicated in American deaths by terrorism before we started the 2003 war?.. Without any researching, none come to mind.
 
You tell me..was there or was there not an attempt on Bush Sr.'s life ala Saddam Hussein after that statement was made? The Bush in the quote was Sr. as Jr. wasn't the President yet.
 
Throwing Saddam out was a just cause. He was in violation of a previous cease fire agreement whether he had WMD or not.

The problem is that we stuck around to long after victory was achieved. Bush managed to turn an obvious victory into an ambiguous quagmire, and in so doing cost the Republicans control of the House and Senate.
 
Fortunatly no HJB. They were stopped. I believe however the last thread you were clinging to was that even if Saddam SAID it, he couldn't DO it, and he DID pull off the attempt. Granted the attempt failed, but his capacity to import terrorism into the US to do his will was demonstrated. Did Americans have to die for him to prove his word?

How thin we going here?
 
Granted the attempt failed, but his capacity to import terrorism into the US to do his will was demonstrated

I am not sure I am following you. What are you talking about him importing terrorism into the US? Are you talking about the attempt at assassinating Bush Sr?
 
Ambiguous quagmire? You have ALOT of absurd assertions. I would point out the absurdity of Iraq being an 'ambiguous quagmire' but first, it would be incumbent on a rational debater to substantiate their assertions, and second, after showing you point blank unequivocal proof that the freedom of Iraqis WAS stated as a goal in Operation Iraqi Freedom from the beginning you still said you believed the lie that it wasn't brought up until later. So I have absolutely no confidence you care to know, only that you enthusiastically argue.

My 9 year old daughter has a very similar ability.:p

As it grows late I'll leave you to your Googling some substance for your 'ambiguous quagmire' assertion. Or more likly skipping past it to something like 'Bush knew 9/11 was going to happen' or some of the such.......
 
I don't need to google. The vast majority of Americans think Iraq is a quagmire, so its a quagmire. I am glad you think it is an example of utopian nation building, but I don't think too many of your friends are buying that. Sorry.
 
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/889pvpxc.asp?pg=1

This ought to be big news. Throughout the early and mid-1990s, Saddam Hussein actively supported an influential terrorist group headed by the man who is now al Qaeda's second-in-command, according to an exhaustive study issued last week by the Pentagon. "Saddam supported groups that either associated directly with al Qaeda (such as the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, led at one time by bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri) or that generally shared al Qaeda's stated goals and objectives." According to the Pentagon study, Egyptian Islamic Jihad was one of many jihadist groups that Iraq's former dictator funded, trained, equipped, and armed.

The study was commissioned by the Joint Forces Command in Norfolk, Virginia, and produced by analysts at the Institute for Defense Analyses, a federally funded military think tank. It is entitled "Iraqi Perspectives Project: Saddam and Terrorism: Emerging Insights from Captured Iraqi Documents." The study is based on a review of some 600,000 documents captured in postwar Iraq. Those "documents" include letters, memos, computer files, audiotapes, and videotapes produced by Saddam Hussein's regime, especially his intelligence services. The analysis section of the study covers 59 pages. The appendices, which include copies of some of the captured documents and translations, put the entire study at approximately 1,600 pages.

An abstract that describes the study reads, in part:

Because Saddam's security organizations and Osama bin Laden's terrorist network operated with similar aims (at least in the short term), considerable overlap was inevitable when monitoring, contacting, financing, and training the same outside groups. This created both the appearance
of and, in some way, a 'de facto' link between the organizations. At times, these organizations would work together in pursuit of shared goals but still maintain their autonomy and independence because of innate caution and mutual distrust. Though the execution of Iraqi terror plots was not always successful, evidence shows that Saddam's use of terrorist tactics and his support for terrorist groups remained strong up until the collapse of the regime."

Among the study's other notable findings:

In 1993, as Osama bin Laden's fighters battled Americans in Somalia, Saddam Hussein personally ordered the formation of an Iraqi terrorist group to join the battle there.

For more than two decades, the Iraqi regime trained non-Iraqi jihadists in training camps throughout Iraq.

According to a 1993 internal Iraqi intelligence memo, the regime was supporting a secret Islamic Palestinian organization dedicated to "armed jihad against the Americans and Western interests."

In the 1990s, Iraq's military intelligence directorate trained and equipped "Sudanese fighters."

In 1998, the Iraqi regime offered "financial and moral support" to a new group of jihadists in Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq.

In 2002, the year before the war began, the Iraqi regime hosted in Iraq a series of 13 conferences for non-Iraqi jihadist groups.

That same year, a branch of the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) issued hundreds of Iraqi passports for known terrorists.
 
LOL, truth by popular opinion eh. I think Cobert did a skit on this calling it 'truthiness'.

Truth isn't so by popular opinion. Opion is just that, opinion. I bet most people think that freeing Iraqis is a new goal to Operation Iraqi Freedon too.

Quagmire hasn't been true since early to mid 07'. Even the most liberal political leaders admit that. That's when they changed to talking points to political reconciliation remember. Now that political reconciliation is making progress the cost is the issue.

Your quagmire talking points are a year old, you didn't get the 'political reconciiation' change, and if you want to be current with the shifting primary opposition it's now cost. There is a new thread about that. I believe you've posted to it........

Truth by popular opinion......that was a funny episode.
 
I've got family over there and personally heard from soldiers that's been there, heard much more so on the radio and TV. They aren't calling it a quagmire and believe there's been much progress. Which is why the media has almost dropped it altogether, reserving their limited coverage to the casualties that occur, playing the emotional card as much as possible. The polling and reporting that as news. Pravda had nothing on these guys.
 
They aren't calling it a quagmire and believe there's been much progress.

OK. If its not a quagmire, and we have made so much progress, then our mission must be accomplished, and its time to leave.

If things are so rosy, why does McCain think we will need to be there for 100 years?
 
You've got all the talking points don't you.

Got any INFORMATION to share. Your assertions lack substance. Just more dribble from MoveOn.
 
OK. If its not a quagmire, and we have made so much progress, then our mission must be accomplished, and its time to leave.

If things are so rosy, why does McCain think we will need to be there for 100 years?
Quagmire implies a hopeless situation, I think it's foolish to call it hopeless, especially since many Iraqis seem to want to join civilization now and are rejecting the radicals. One general counted over 100 soccer matches on a recent fly over. You aren't playing soccer in a military quagmire. You also misunderstand McCain's words, he made it clear that he was talking about a presence, ala, Germany, Japan, Korea, etc. Sounds like a good idea to me and one a democratic Iraq would likely not object to.
 
You aren't playing soccer in a military quagmire.

I agree. Perhaps I have been misled by the liberal-biased media, and things are really great in Iraq. But if they are great, why can't we leave?

We have been told we can't leave Iraq because things are bad.

Now you are telling me we can't leave because things are good?
 
Back
Top