Iraq and Al-Queda

[GostHacked]

You don't say.....

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/13/alqaeda.saddam/index.html

The report released by the Joint Forces Command five years after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq said it found no "smoking gun" after reviewing about 600,000 Iraqi documents captured in the invasion and looking at interviews of key Iraqi leadership held by the United States, Pentagon officials said

But many will still say that there was a link. Just another lie that got the US into a unneeded war.

Although other groups, like the September 11 commission, have concluded that there was no link between Hussein and al Qaeda, the Pentagon was able to analyze much more information

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/JDF-Saddam-Report.pdf

And they still found no link.

[bush_cheney2004]

You don't say.....

But many will still say that there was a link. Just another lie that got the US into a unneeded war.

And they still found no link.

Why do you believe "them" now? The Iraq war was "wanted", not "needed", and totally consistent with American foreign policy for Iraq since 1991.

[GostHacked]

Why do you believe "them" now? The Iraq war was "wanted", not "needed", and totally consistent with American foreign policy for Iraq since 1991.

Well, you and I both know that. But the way it was sold to dupe the rest of the idiots shows that there was no real threat from Iraq. And, yes you are correct, I am not sure if I believe this new report. Since everything else seems to be utterly false. That is part of the game plan, baffle with bullshit and hope no one calls you out on it.

Snake oil salesmen mentality.

Is it the norm now to play the defeatist and just take everything the way it is? Or would you like to change things?

[eyeball]

Isn't it the norm to impeach American presidents that lie to their people?

Isn't it also the norm to defend sovereign nations that are illegally invaded?

[bush_cheney2004]

Well, you and I both know that. But the way it was sold to dupe the rest of the idiots shows that there was no real threat from Iraq. And, yes you are correct, I am not sure if I believe this new report. Since everything else seems to be utterly false. That is part of the game plan, baffle with bullshit and hope no one calls you out on it.

Snake oil salesmen mentality.

All wars are sold in such ways. Disinformation, half-truths, denials, obfuscating, etc. etc. Why would it be any different for "Iraq Part 2 - Get Saddam No Matter What"

Is it the norm now to play the defeatist and just take everything the way it is? Or would you like to change things?

Do you think American interventions ("wars") are a new development? What part do you want to change...only when George W. Bush does it?

[GostHacked]

All wars are sold in such ways. Disinformation, half-truths, denials, obfuscating, etc. etc. Why would it be any different for "Iraq Part 2 - Get Saddam No Matter What"

Do you think American interventions ("wars") are a new development? What part do you want to change...only when George W. Bush does it?

Ahh you are indeed a defeatist, or a Bush apologist.

No they are not new developements. I know and understand and realize this has been going on for decades (and yes throw Canada in here as well, for I know you will gladly point that out)

I would like to change the attitudes of the common folk. You can do something about it, only if you want to. But with all the dissinformation/propaganda, most do not have an idea or a clear picture of what is really happening. I am sick of it myself. But it is not hard to figure out that the lies started right off the bat.

[bush_cheney2004]

Ahh you are indeed a defeatist, or a Bush apologist.

Well, that didn't take long...defeatist indeed.

No they are not new developements. I know and understand and realize this has been going on for decades (and yes throw Canada in here as well, for I know you will gladly point that out)

Sorry for spoiling the illusion...I guess some lies are quite acceptable.

I would like to change the attitudes of the common folk. You can do something about it, only if you want to. But with all the dissinformation/propaganda, most do not have an idea or a clear picture of what is really happening. I am sick of it myself. But it is not hard to figure out that the lies started right off the bat.

There are actually many millions of Americans who think the same thing, and they actually have the right to vote for change, not just whine about it from afar.

Let's sit back and see what happens.

Edited March 14, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

[eyeball]

Let's sit back and see what happens.

No, lets intervene in Iran next.You know you wannnnt it.

Edited March 14, 2008 by eyeball

[bush_cheney2004]

No, lets intervene in Iran next.You know you wannnnt it.

Intervention in Iran has already started.

[eyeball]

That's right, back around 1953 or so I believe (but it was secret).

[DogOnPorch]

That's right, back around 1953 or so I believe (but it was secret).

Ah yes... the old "CIA did it" defence. When left to its own devices, guess what happened with Iran? In 1941, they nearly became an Axis nation (ie: Hitler and crew) when the Shah's father started entertaining the Nazis who were looking for cheap oil and a backdoor to the Middle-East. Churchill and Stalin invaded, putting "the Shah" into power on the throne.

In 1953, the government of Iran (not the Shah...who was still "the Shah") decided that the oil wells were theirs as opposed to the folks who paid for them. Thus the CIA aided coup (Iranians actually did the coup with US support) turning Iran back into a Monarchy. It may not be fair in your books, but both sides were playing hardball. If it was your oil well, you might have found the CIA's solution quite favorable.

---------------------------------------------------

If everything isn't black and white, I say, "Why the hell not?"

---John Wayne

[Oleg Bach]

Ah yes... the old "CIA did it" defence. When left to its own devices, guess what happened with Iran? In 1941, they nearly became an Axis nation (ie: Hitler and crew) when the Shah's father started entertaining the Nazis who were looking for cheap oil and a backdoor to the Middle-East. Churchill and Stalin invaded, putting "the Shah" into power on the throne.

In 1953, the government of Iran (not the Shah...who was still "the Shah") decided that the oil wells were theirs as opposed to the folks who paid for them. Thus the CIA aided coup (Iranians actually did the coup with US support) turning Iran back into a Monarchy. It may not be fair in your books, but both sides were playing hardball. If it was your oil well, you might have found the CIA's solution quite favorable.

---------------------------------------------------

If everything isn't black and white, I say, "Why the hell not?"

---John Wayne

As "opposed to the folks who PAID FOR THEM" - Reguarding oil wells ...that is a very imperialistic system that breeds hate and terrorism in time..that is like saying that if I have a hand dug water well on my land and an investor comes on to my property and digs a modern well with a nice shinny new electric pump - THAT now the water on my land belongs to the guy for eternity that dug the well and "paid for it" ...small wonder there is great resentment in the middle east of western investors who after a hundred years still attempt to profit from a small investment from a bygone era...it's like saying - if I give you charity once - I own your ass and control the lives of your decendants for ever - absurd - and pure usery ----no wonder they hate us.

[Regulus de Leo]

This thread is incorrectlly titled. There were plenty of links between Saddam, Al Quaeda and other terrorist organizations. Saddam sponsored terrorists. The report says there were no 'operational links,' meaning they were not acting in concert with Al Quaeda.

[eyeball]

Ah yes... the old "CIA did it" defence. When left to its own devices, guess what happened with Iran?

If everything isn't black and white, I say, "Why the hell not?"

---John Wayne

The CIA turned Iran into a dot that connected to 9/11.

Its pretty black and white don't you think?

[bush_cheney2004]

This thread is incorrectlly titled. There were plenty of links between Saddam, Al Quaeda and other terrorist organizations. Saddam sponsored terrorists. The report says there were no 'operational links,' meaning they were not acting in concert with Al Quaeda.

Correct....Saddam was sponsoring Palestinian suicide bombers with cash payments to families. But the US/UK had plenty of other reasons to topple Saddam's regime, and didn't need any "justification".

[Oleg Bach]

Correct....Saddam was sponsoring Palestinian suicide bombers with cash payments to families. But the US/UK had plenty of other reasons to topple Saddam's regime, and didn't need any "justification".

If there are links between Saddam and Bin Laden ..then there are links between the CIA - Bin Laden - Saddam and a host of other terrorists who were trained and installed by the great satan...they are all terrible - America has broken down morally - as has the middle east and they are all terrorising each other - reminds me of a horrible dog chasing it's own tail - America and it's league of gangsters - create terrorists - and when these mad dogs that they create turn on the master - then suddenly the terrorists are bad and America is good - they are all bad. If America was pure and just they would not have the problems internationally that they have - but the Roman Empire fell apart also because of gangsterism and common corruption - all empires rise and fall - at least Egypt lasted 7000 years..thats because they kept the social contract in order along with benevolence - America forgot that you have to be good to last. Evil is stupidy!

[DogOnPorch]

LOL...alrighty, then.

Either way...like it or not...that's how it came down. That you think or don't think it is fair is not material to the facts. The Shaw came about for reasons other than the CIA.

---------------------------------------------

Trudge, trudge, trudge...it's off to settle a grudge.

[Oleg Bach]

LOL...alrighty, then.

Either way...like it or not...that's how it came down. That you think or don't think it is fair is not material to the facts. The Shaw came about for reasons other than the CIA.

---------------------------------------------

Trudge, trudge, trudge...it's off to settle a grudge.

The CIA has de-evolved from a public service to a private for profit enterprize..my point was - when the Pentagon releases it's findings publically that thousands of their soldiers are wasted via a fraud by the merchant crimminal oil goofs - then you know that the military has lost respect and loyalty for their political handlers and their so-called commander in chief - no soldier likes to be lied to and sacraficed needlessly - Iraq is a great insult and hurt to the military community - you don't needlessly kill the sons in the flower of their youth - because you are a bored and rich spoiled - disconnected oil nut.

[Moonlight Graham]

Dear Pentagon,

5 years too late, morons!! Why was the tyrant of the Pentagon, Mr. Rumsfeld, saying the exact oppoiste things before the Iraq invasion.

I really don't a crap about any of these reports. Until Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rice etc. are put on the stand for the crimes they have commited it means nothing and changes nothing. Lucky for them the Democrats have yet to grow and stones.

So frustrating...

[kuzadd]

You don't say.....

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/13/alqaeda.saddam/index.html

But many will still say that there was a link. Just another lie that got the US into a unneeded war.

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/JDF-Saddam-Report.pdf

And they still found no link.

'Gosthacked' but you are not surprised by this are you????

I think you had a solid suspicion that this was just more bs to scare the populace.

Like "the smoking gun , in the form of a mushroom cloud"

Or colin powells scary show at the UN , all theatrics.

Or the dossier, from Blair,

etc.

[kuzadd]

Why do you believe "them" now? The Iraq war was "wanted", not "needed", and totally consistent with American foreign policy for Iraq since 1991.

back in 2004 there was already info disputing any linkage between OBL and Iraq.

and probably even prior to that, in all likelihood.

No proof links Iraq, al-Qaida, Powell says

Secretary of State Colin Powell reversed a year of administration policy, acknowledging Thursday that he had seen no “smoking gun [or] concrete evidence” of ties between former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/ID/3909150/

but just to keep the fear going...... "but I do believe the connections existed,”

He believes it. Like religion. Like Santa Claus, he "believes" it, despite the fact he saw NO smoking gun, NO concrete evidence.

the Iraq war was wanted, same as Afghanistan, just had to get the people on side, just had to get the people to" believe"

[bush_cheney2004]

America has broken down morally - as has the middle east and they are all terrorising each other - reminds me of a horrible dog chasing it's own tail - America and it's league of gangsters - create terrorists .....

America was never the figment of morality you pretend it was. Far from breaking down, it is the same. It owes your moralty and inflated expectations absolutely nothing.

If America was pure and just they would not have the problems internationally that they have - but the Roman Empire fell apart also because of gangsterism and common corruption - all empires rise and fall - at least Egypt lasted 7000 years..thats because they kept the social contract in order along with benevolence - America forgot that you have to be good to last. Evil is stupidy!

Now you're getting it....America was never "pure and just", and was never intended to be. Hell, you won't even find "pure and just" in Canada, so why should it be so in America?

Your empire has already fallen.

Edited March 15, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

[Regulus de Leo]

http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/A...14/889pvpxc.asp

"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."

[jazzer]

According to the Pentagon study, Egyptian Islamic Jihad was one of many jihadist groups that Iraq's former dictator funded, trained, equipped, and armed."

From the pentagon you say? That somehow gives this old chestnut credibility?

[AngusThermopyle]

but the Roman Empire fell apart also because of gangsterism and common corruption -

Did you spend a lot of time thinking about the most innaccurate thing you could say? C'mon, show some proof of your assertion, show a study or thesis that backs up your totally unfounded and ridiculous assumption.

I was a disinterested observer until I saw that ridiculous statement, now I would like to see something other than hot air to back it up.

Obviously from what you just said you dont know what the hell you're talking about. Just a guess but I'd say that history wasn't your strong point was it?