Hussein's Iraq and Al Qaeda not linked, Pentagon says

[Mad Mike]

MM, we also know that AQ was the enemy of several ME states like Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. Your argument is that evidence doesn't matter, not even from sources that you yourself consider credible.

At this point it is clear that you are obsessrive over the idea.

HAVE YOU READ THIS REPORT? :doh:

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Nah, Saddam was no threat. This document proves it right? WRONG!

This is just a brief look. I haven't even gone through it all yet.

A quote from an Iraqi document:

Training foreign terrorists

Terrorism against american interests

al Qaeda

But hey... as long as there is no smoking gun.

dude, you really need to comprehend what you read. The first quote is about what was believed by a faction AFTER the war.

[Chief skin]

Cheney still does not believe it

[Mad Mike]

dude, you really need to comprehend what you read. The first quote is about what was believed by a faction AFTER the war.

From the report referring to that quote:

Iraq was a long-standing supporter of international terrorism. The existence of a memorandum (Extract 10) from the lIS to Saddam, written a decade before OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM, provides detailed evidence of that support. Several of the organizations listed in this memorandum were designated as international terrorist organizations by the US Department of State.

[Thiebear]

dude, you really need to comprehend what you read. The first quote is about what was believed by a faction AFTER the war.

I believe AFTER the Gulf war is what they are referring to..

[GibbsFactor]

The simple fact that we are still trying to justify our own actions is ludicrous to me. If there is proof, solid proof to invade a country, we wouldn't have this thread right now.

And I love how people think you win a war of ideology via conventional warfare.

Sure the surge has worked and violence is done, but that doesn't mean the war is succeeding. It just means we are creating more enemies who are regrouping.

[JimmyConway]

MM I think you've made it obvious that Saddam supported terrorists in many ways but can you prove a connection to AQ and not just Islamic terrorists in general. I skimmed most of the posts and didn't really see one. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[Koolblue13]

FYI

No use in further responding to cav as he & the other voice in his head are not going to be able to respond.

Carry on.

:applause:

[Burgundy Burner]

MM I think you've made it obvious that Saddam supported terrorists in many ways but can you prove a connection to AQ and not just Islamic terrorists in general. I skimmed most of the posts and didn't really see one. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

The report, which I have posted, gives numerous references to the inter-connectivity of al-Qaeda and Saddam. To give a brief summation, it states that both had similar goals of how they would attack the U.S. and American interests and where they could work together. However, they differed on how and who would rule the Middle East and Islam in general.

No, it doesn't go as far as Mike suggests, but it is no where near what the media and those on the left have reported.

[Utah]

I ask a question for clarifying reasons.........

We all know that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. My impression has always been that Al Quack went to Iraq after we started targeting Afghanistan. One of the reasons we went in. Saddam wasn't turning them away and he had many other reasons to go in and kick his ass.

Every solider I have spoken with who was in the first Gulf War wishes they would of finished the job. Every solider I have spoken with who has served over there during this war wishes they could do more to help the people over there but have no regrets for being there or why they went. One of the reasons I view the situation the way I do. Correct or incorrect way to look at things, it is what it is.

While I do not always agree with what President Bush has done, I make no mistake about thinking that I know more then he does about the situation and why he made the decisions he did. What I do know, is he couldn't do it by himself and there aren't enough who think the way he does to make it happen the way it did.

[twa]

The report, which I have posted, gives numerous references to the inter-connectivity of al-Qaeda and Saddam. To give a brief summation, it states that both had similar goals of how they would attack the U.S. and American interests and where they could work together. However, they differed on how and who would rule the Middle East and Islam in general.

No, it doesn't go as far as Mike suggests, but it is no where near what the media and those on the left have reported.

Not much use for nuance on this subject for most.

Operational links and simply links are too complicated....perhaps if you quoted from the report it would convince someone,but I doubt it.

[Jumbo]

FYI

No use in further responding to cav as he & the other voice in his head are not going to be able to respond.

Carry on.

This is what happens when don't listen to Uncle Jumbo's friendly in-thread warnings and break rules or go too far one day.

[Mad Mike]

More to chew on....

Ten more pages in this document folder give further details on operatives sent into the countries around Iraq to attack American installations, the ruling families in the Middle East, and oil installations. Most of this material details the cover identities they would use while traveling and how Unit 999 could guarantee their future loyalty once they were out of the unit's direct control.

Some aspects of the indirect cooperation between Saddam's regional terror enterprise and al Qaeda's more global one are somewhat analogous to the Cali and Medellin drug cartels. Both drug cartels (actually loose collections of families and criminal gangs) were serious national security concerns to the United States. Both cartels competed for a share of the illegal drug market. However, neither cartel was reluctant to cooperate with the other when it came to the pursuit of a common objective-expanding and facilitating their illicit trade.

Saddam Hussein was demonstrably willing to use terrorism to achieve his goals. Using this tactical method was a strategic choice of Saddam's, often requiring direct and indirect cooperation with movements, organizations, and individuals possessing, in some cases, diametrically opposed long-term goals. An example of indirect cooperation is the movement led by Osama bin Laden. During the 1990s, both Saddam and bin Laden wanted the West, particularly the United States, out of Muslim lands (or in the view of Saddam, the "Arab nation"). Both wanted to create a single powerful state that would take its place as a global superpower. But the similarities ended there: bin Laden wanted-and still wantsto restore the Islamic caliphate while Saddam, despite his later Islamic rhetoric, dreamed more narrowly of being the secular ruler of a united Arab nation. These competing visions made any significant long-tenn compromise between them highly unlikely. After all, to the fundamentalist leadership of al Qaeda, Saddam represented the worst kind of "apostate" regime-a secular police state well practiced in suppressing internal challenges. In pursuit of their own separate but surprisingly "parallel" visions, Saddam and bin Laden often found a common enemy in the United States.

The Saddam regime was very concerned about the internal threat

posed by various Islamist movements. Crackdowns, arrests, and monitoring of Islamic radical movements were common in Iraq. However, Saddam's security organizations and bin Laden's terrorist network operated with similar aims, at least for the short tenn. Considerable operational overlap was inevitable when monitoring, contacting, financing, and training the regional groups involved in terrorism. Saddam provided training and motivation to revolutionary pan-Arab nationalists in the region. Osama bin Laden provided training and motivation for violent revolutionary Islamists in the region.

Nevertheless, these similarities created more than just the appearance of cooperation. Common interests, even without common cause, increased the aggregate terror threat.

Conclusion

One question remains regarding Iraq's terrorism capability: Is there

anything in the captured archives to indicate that Saddam had the will to use his terrorist capabilities directly against United States? Judging from examples of Saddam's statements (Extract 34) before the 1991 Gulf War with the United States, the answer is yes.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

MM - the conclusion does not link AL QAEDA to Iraq.

[Mad Mike]

MM - the conclusion does not link AL QAEDA to Iraq.

THE CONCLUSION WAS THAT SADDAM WAS A MASSIVE SUPPORTER OF TERRORISM, OFTEN DIRECTLY AGAINST THE US AND THAT HE WAS A THREAT.

[Mad Mike]

My letter to CNN. For all of the good that it will do.

Hussein's Iraq and al Qaeda not linked, Pentagon say

This article makes no mention of anything other than what the reporter wanted heard. It is biased beyond all journalistic comprehension.

94 pages detailing Saddam's extensive support of terrorism, training of terrorists, and including examples of direct use of terrorism against US interests and personnel were left out, giving the reader the impression that the only thing it had to say was Saddam was innocent.

Among some of the more shocking quotes unreported...

"In the first, from January 1993, and coinciding with the start of the US humanitarian intervention in Somalia, the Presidential Secretary informed the council member of Saddam's decision to "form a group to start hunting Americans present on Arab soil; especially Somalia." "

"Other documents show Saddam's terror organizations could be deadly. They were willing to target not only Western interests but also to directly attack Americans. Uday Hussein reports to his father the results of one such terrorist strike that specifically targeted American aid workers with the UN"

"This and other attacks were not isolated incidents but part of a state-directed program of significant scale."

Or a quote taken directly from an Iraqi document...

"Renewal and Jihad Organization

Secret Islamic Palestinian Organization established after the war. It believes in armed jihad against the Americans and Western interests. They also believe our leader [saddam Hussein], may God protect him, is the true leader in the war against the infidels. The organization's leaders live in Jordan... when they visited Iraq two months ago they demonstrated a willingness to carry out operations against American interests at any time."

How about this gem...

"Captured documents reveal that the regime was willing to co-opt or support organizations it knew to be part of al Qaeda-as long as that organization's near-term goals supported Saddam's long term vision."

And let us not forget the actual conclusion of the report. Again, UNREPORTED.

"Conclusion

One question remains regarding Iraq's terrorism capability: Is there anything in the captured archives to indicate that Saddam had the will to use his terrorist capabilities directly against United States? Judging from examples of Saddam's statements (Extract 34) before the 1991 Gulf War with the United States, the answer is yes."

Hurray Journalism.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

THE CONCLUSION WAS THAT SADDAM WAS A MASSIVE SUPPORTER OF TERRORISM, OFTEN DIRECTLY AGAINST THE US AND THAT HE WAS A THREAT.

Are you yelling at me? Because the title is "Iraq and Al Qaeda not linked." So, what are you all upset about?

[BigMike619]

Are you yelling at me? Because the title is "Iraq and Al Qaeda not linked." So, what are you all upset about?

I DONT KNOW WHAT WERE YELLING ABOUT!!!

:laugh:

[Tulane Skins Fan]

I DONT KNOW WHAT WERE YELLING ABOUT!!!

:laugh:

nice... it reminds me of that scene from Private Parts...

Howard Stern: Hello. Is this Betty Jean Rushton?

Betty Jean Rushton: Yes, it is.

Howard Stern: Hi, there. This is Howard Stern, WNnnnnBC. I'm calling because your husband Kenny has been really ****y around the station lately and we thought that maybe you should give him some more sex.

Betty Jean Rushton: More sex?

Howard Stern: Yeah, he's *backed up*! Isn't he backed up, Ross?

:laugh:

[Mad Mike]

Are you yelling at me? Because the title is "Iraq and Al Qaeda not linked." So, what are you all upset about?

The title of a biased pile of dog dung passed off as journalism.

The ACTUAL REPORT concluded...

One question remains regarding Iraq's terrorism capability: Is there

anything in the captured archives to indicate that Saddam had the will to use his terrorist capabilities directly against United States? Judging from examples of Saddam's statements (Extract 34) before the 1991 Gulf War with the United States, the answer is yes.

90+ pages of damning evidence that Saddam supported, trained and exported terrorism, often directly targeting the US were completely ignored.

If you have any interest in the truth, YOU SHOULD BE PISSED OFF TOO.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

MM - you are inappropriately claiming/reading that "terrorism" and "al qaeda" are synonymous.

You're also looking at a statement made prior to 1991 as proof that 2002 Iraq could attack the U.S.

[@DCGoldPants]

I thought we attacked because Saddam and Iraq was imminent threat. No?

[Mad Mike]

MM - you are inappropriately claiming/reading that "terrorism" and "al qaeda" are synonymous.

I DONT CARE IF IT WAS THE GIRL SCOUTS. THEY WERE TERRORIST AND THEY ATTACKED AND KILLED AMERICANS.

WTF is so hard to understand here?

Inappropriate? Are you f'n kidding me? This document outlines a massive Iraqi effort to fund, train and export terrorism and target the US and you think that its "inappropriate" for me to point that out? Have you lost your freakin mind?

:doh:

[Mad Mike]

You're also looking at a statement made prior to 1991 as proof that 2002 Iraq could attack the U.S.

The pentagon report made that conclusion based not only on statements but documented attacks on US interests and people. THey made that conclusion based upon reading Iraqi documents that outlined an effort by Saddam to recruit terrorists willing to attack the US.

[Destino]

Mad Mike - all the misdirection in the world isn't going to save you here. You've been arguing for a long time about a connection between Al Qaeda and Saddam and are slowly being buried by a mountain stating the opposite. The reason this is more important than all the argument you are now putting forth, that saddam supported other forms of terrorism, is that 9/11 played a major role in our path to war. 9/11 was the work of a single group, Al Qaeda.

The irony is that our justification, that we would rather fight them there than in our own country, is the same thing Al Qaeda can say about the Iraq war. They would rather fight us there than where their leaders, the people behind the murder of near 3000 americans on 9/11, are currently housed.

The link dis not exist. The WMD dis not exist. The nuclear program did not exist. There was no imminent threat. At worst we were mislead/manipulated into a war the current leaders of this country wanted prior to holding office. At best we were seriously wrong in our beliefs. Either way the Iraq war has been a disaster for the US, in terms of credibility needed to continue our fight against radical Islam. Even as we argue this Iran continues towards nuclear power while US words have calmed out of the realization that a war with Iran, or any true threat, is all but impossible given the current state of things.