40% of foreign fighters in Iraq are Saudis

[Truthmatters]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2215798,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront

Are we going to bomb them?

 

[William Joyce]

Those rich kids are just bored.

 

[Gunny]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2215798,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront

Are we going to bomb them?

Why should we "bomb them?"

 

[Psychoblues]

Ignore the question. Ridicule the premise. Republican Playbook page 1, paragraph 3.

Why should we "bomb them?"

Let me repeat the premise and the implied question for you: "Saudis make up 41% of foreign fighters in Iraq."

Perhaps the business interests preempt the national ones? Go figure?

Another link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2215798,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront

Have a good day, you idiot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Toro]

As I understand it, 40% of a shrinking (dying) number is less and less.

 

[Psychoblues]

As you ignore the growing number of religionists that become more and more afraid of the intentions of the USofA and the growing number of the beforehand coalition that now are also afraid of American intentions, I count you as unAmerican and antiAmerican spirit.

As I understand it, 40% of a shrinking (dying) number is less and less.

Have you considered putting on a Marine uniform for real?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

As you ignore the growing number of religionists that become more and more afraid of the intentions of the USofA and the growing number of the beforehand coalition that now are also afraid of American intentions, I count you as unAmerican and antiAmerican spirit.




Have you considered putting on a Marine uniform for real?

That your to stupid to understand what is happening in Iraq would be shock, except for the fact it is you.

 

[Toro]

As you ignore the growing number of religionists that become more and more afraid of the intentions of the USofA and the growing number of the beforehand coalition that now are also afraid of American intentions, I count you as unAmerican and antiAmerican spirit.




Have you considered putting on a Marine uniform for real?

Gosh, no, the marines wouldn't take me. I'm on the wrong side of 30.

However, al-Qaeda in Iraq is being destroyed because the Sunni and Shi'a are sick and tired of foreigners blowing up their own. So the number of dead Saudis is rising.

 

[DeadCanDance]

Gosh, no, the marines wouldn't take me. I'm on the wrong side of 30.

Bush upped the enlistment age to 44. At least, for the army.

However, al-Qaeda in Iraq is being destroyed because the Sunni and Shi'a are sick and tired of foreigners blowing up their own. So the number of dead Saudis is rising.

I can't tell you how many times in 2004, 2005, and 2006, Bush fans told me that the iraqis were turning on al qaeda. The predictions of imminent "victory" never seem to end.

If you'd turn off the limbaugh show, I will gladly explain what is happening in iraq. We are arming sunni warlords, and former sunnin insurgents who killed americans, and paying them money to go kill al qaeda. There's no doubt, that many sunnis are pissed at the way al qaeda blew up a lot of innocents. Jack Murtha said over two years ago that the sunnis would turn on al qaeda if we stopped refereeing a civil war. But, al qaeda in iraq, is a relatively small part of the problem. The US military admits this. Although they are responsible for many spectacular bombings, their influence and power in iraq has always been limited.

What were doing is further fragmenting iraq. By paying and arming sunni warlords, we're creating whole new militias who have little if any allegiance to the central government. In fact, the shia government fears what these sunni warlords will do with all the guns and money we've given them.

For their part, the sunni warlords are glad to take our money and weapons. They have their own agenda, and their own interests. They're happy to take our money. For the time being.

 

[Paulie]

Bush upped the enlistment age to 44. At least, for the army.



I can't tell you how many times in 2004, 2005, and 2006, Bush fans told me that the iraqis were turning on al qaeda. The predictions of imminent "victory" never seem to end.

If you'd turn off the limbaugh show, I will gladly explain what is happening in iraq. We are arming sunni warlords, and former sunnin insurgents who killed americans, and paying them money to go kill al qaeda. There's no doubt, that many sunnis are pissed at the way al qaeda blew up a lot of innocents. Jack Murtha said over two years ago that the sunnis would turn on al qaeda if we stopped refereeing a civil war. But, al qaeda in iraq, is a relatively small part of the problem. The US military admits this. Although they are responsible for many spectacular bombings, their influence and power in iraq has always been limited.

What were doing is further fragmenting iraq. By paying and arming sunni warlords, we're creating whole new militias who have little if any allegiance to the central government. In fact, the shia government fears what these sunni warlords will do with all the guns and money we've given them.

For their part, the sunni warlords are glad to take our money and weapons. They have their own agenda, and their own interests. They're happy to take our money. For the time being.

You'd think the US would have learned by now to stop funding and arming foreigners, especially one's that are at war with each other.

Historically, it has always come back to bite us in the ass. By "us" I mean the American people. It seems to usually present an opportunity later in the future though, for the people who love war.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You'd think the US would have learned by now to stop funding and arming foreigners, especially one's that are at war with each other.

Historically, it has always come back to bite us in the ass. By "us" I mean the American people. It seems to usually present an opportunity later in the future though, for the people who love war.

Ya your right, I mean look how the Germans, Japanese and Italians turned out.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And of course we shouldn't have armed the British, French, or Free European Regimes in WW2 and after either, I mean look at how THAT bit us in the ass. And need I list Thailand and the Philippines or Taiwan or South Korea? Such bad choices indeed.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

We should also quit arming Egypt and Jordan, Turkey and Greece as well. I mean how stupid can we be?

 

[Paulie]

I love how the only time you respond to me is when you feel like you can refute me. Shit, I gave you respect in a thread yesterday, and you haven't said a WORD. How's the weather up there on that pedestal?

Maybe I should have clarified my post for the laymen, and said specifically the "jihad" nations, huh?

You're fooling yourself if you think Jordan is really a friend of ours. We'd double cross them in a SECOND if they ever stepped out of line and stopped playing ball. See what happens to them should they ever propose a Bourse and sell oil in Euro. You know, like what we did to Iraq? But you don't even believe that 'nonsense', so it's a wonder why I even bother with you.

 

[DeadCanDance]

Ya your right, I mean look how the Germans, Japanese and Italians turned out.

Your Bush-worship is showing again.

We armed, democratically elected and stable governmnet in Germany and Japan.

In Iraq we're arming sunni warlords and militia groups in the midst of a sectarian conflict.

 

[DeadCanDance]

And of course we shouldn't have armed the British, French, or Free European Regimes in WW2 and after either, I mean look at how THAT bit us in the ass. And need I list Thailand and the Philippines or Taiwan or South Korea? Such bad choices indeed.

You still appear to be unclear on the subject.

We're arming unaccountable miltias and warlords in Iraq. We're giving money to them, to dirty work on our behalf.

This is a failed policy. Arming unaccountable warlords - who have their own agenda, but are happy to take our money and weapons - is the sign of how desperate things have gotten in Iraq. We would never have done this, if the country hadn't turned into a failed state. A failed state thanks to bush.

Arming unaccountable warlords is not a sign of success. Its a sign of desperation. I can't say I blame bush. He's mucked up iraq so bad, that there are no good options left.

 

[DeadCanDance]

Turn off the Michael Savage show, and Get informed, RSG.

Meet Abu Abed: the US's new ally against al-Qaida

With summary beatings and imprisonments, he has the methods of a mafia don. But he and others like him are crucial to American strategy

Ghaith Abdul-Ahad in Baghdad
Saturday November 10, 2007

On a recent Friday morning in west Baghdad, 20 of Hajji Abu Abed's men were shifting their feet nervously in the dusty yard outside his house as they waited for their leader to emerge.

The men, young and well armed with Kalashnikovs, pistols and hand grenades, were wearing the favoured dress for militiamen in Iraq these days: green camouflage commando uniforms decorated with bits of US army kit - a pouch on one man, webbing on another, a cap here, sunglasses there, a few flak jackets between them. Some bore the insignia of Iraqi army officers....snip

Abu Abed, a member of the insurgent Islamic Army, has recently become the commander of the US-sponsored "Ameriya Knights". He is one of the new breed of Sunni warlords who are being paid by the US to fight al-Qaida in Iraq. The Americans call their new allies Concerned Citizens.

It is a strategy that has worked well for the Americans, on paper at least. This week, the US military claimed it had forced the extremist group al-Qaida in Mesopotamia out of Baghdad altogether, and cut the number of murders in the city by 80%. Major General Joseph Fil, commander of US forces in Baghdad, said: "The Iraqi people have decided that they've had it up to here with violence."

Critics of the plan say they are simply creating powerful new strongmen who run their own prisons and armies, and who eventually will turn on each other.

A senior Sunni sheikh, whose tribe is joining the new alliance with the Americans against al-Qaida, told me in Beirut that it was a simple equation for him. "It's just a way to get arms, and to be a legalised security force to be able to stand against Shia militias and to prevent the Iraqi army and police from entering their areas," he said.

"The Americans lost hope with an Iraqi government that is both sectarian and dominated by militias, so they are paying for locals to fight al-Qaida. It will create a series of warlords.


The Americans pay him $400 (£200) a month for each fighter he provides, he said, and he had 600 registered. His men are awed by his courage, his piety and his neurotic rages.

Like many other insurgent groups, the Islamic Army had an uneasy alliance with al-Qaida. On one hand they needed financial support; on the other, al-Qaida became a burden, bringing upon the Sunnis the wrath of Shia militias and death squads who started an organised campaign of sectarian cleansing against the Sunnis in retaliation against al-Qaida's mass killing of Shia.

"We lost our area," Abu Abed said. "It became a battle zone between al-Qaeda and the Shia militias."

So when a prominent Iraqi Sunni politician who had lived in the US returned to Iraq last year and started direct talks between the Islamic Army commanders from his tribe and the Americans, Abu Abed was prepared to listen. "A year ago we reached the decision that we needed to fight al-Qaida," he said. "I knew I couldn't fight them face to face - they had more men and weapons. So I started gathering intelligence on their commanders. I knew them all very well."

The turning point came last year, when al-Qaida declared the establishment of the Islamic State of Iraq and attempted to impose itself on other insurgent groups. In one instance in west Baghdad, they demanded 25% of all the loot from other insurgent groups' operations. The Islamic Army refused to pay and direct confrontations ensued.

"The bodies piled up in the streets," Abu Abed said. "Most of the people had to leave the area and flee."

The Hajji and his men used the same techniques they mastered as insurgents against their former allies. Sitting on a big sofa in his office, he recounted the events. "When we decided to attack we started with assassinations. We killed six [al-Qaida] commanders in the first week of fighting," he said. "We would drive in unmarked cars, shoot a commander dead and then flee. At first, no one knew who was killing them."

Soon an open war started. Of the hundreds who pledged to fight al-Qaida, only 13 actually stuck with Abu Abed. These days, almost all his followers claim to have been one of the 13. "When the Americans intervened, we went out with them on missions, leading them to the Qaida fighters," he said.

continued

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2208821,00.html

 

[Toro]

Bush upped the enlistment age to 44. At least, for the army.



I can't tell you how many times in 2004, 2005, and 2006, Bush fans told me that the iraqis were turning on al qaeda. The predictions of imminent "victory" never seem to end.

If you'd turn off the limbaugh show, I will gladly explain what is happening in iraq. We are arming sunni warlords, and former sunnin insurgents who killed americans, and paying them money to go kill al qaeda. There's no doubt, that many sunnis are pissed at the way al qaeda blew up a lot of innocents. Jack Murtha said over two years ago that the sunnis would turn on al qaeda if we stopped refereeing a civil war. But, al qaeda in iraq, is a relatively small part of the problem. The US military admits this. Although they are responsible for many spectacular bombings, their influence and power in iraq has always been limited.

What were doing is further fragmenting iraq. By paying and arming sunni warlords, we're creating whole new militias who have little if any allegiance to the central government. In fact, the shia government fears what these sunni warlords will do with all the guns and money we've given them.

For their part, the sunni warlords are glad to take our money and weapons. They have their own agenda, and their own interests. They're happy to take our money. For the time being.

Thanks for taking the time to deign to me on "what's really happening in Iraq."

No wonder the term "liberal" is a dirty word in America.

Perhaps if you cleared away your liberal fog of rage, you might have noted that I mentioned nothing other than the number of al-Qaeda in Iraq is falling. And that is happening regardless of the secondary and tertiary effects.

The latest reports concerning the war in Iraq suggest the situation is looking up for the United States. First, U.S. military and Iraqi civilian casualties continue to fall. Second, there are confirmed reports that Sunni insurgents controlled by local leaders have turned on al Qaeda militants, particularly those from outside the country. Third, the head of U.S. Central Command, in an interview with the Financial Times, implied that an attack against Iran is a distant possibility. ...

This brings us to the second point, the attacks by the Sunnis against the jihadists. Immediately after the invasion in 2003, the United States essentially attempted to strip the Sunnis -- the foundation of Saddam Hussein's strength -- of their power. The U.S. de-Baathification laws had the effect of eliminating the Sunni community's participation in the future of Iraq. Viewing the Shia -- the victims of Hussein's rule -- as likely interested not only in dominating Iraq but also in retribution against the Sunnis, the Sunni leadership, particularly at the local level, supported and instigated an insurgency against U.S. forces. The political purpose of the insurgency was to force the United States to shift its pro-Shiite policy and include the Sunnis, from religious to Baathist, in the regime.

Given the insurgency's political purpose, the power of U.S. forces and the well-organized Shiite militias, the Iraqi Sunnis were prepared to form alliances wherever they could find them. A leading source of support for the Iraqi Sunnis came from outside Iraq, among the Sunni jihadist fighters who organized themselves under the banner of al Qaeda and, weapons in hand, infiltrated the country from outside, particular through Syria.

Nevertheless, there was underlying tension between the local Sunnis and the jihadists. The Iraqi Sunnis were part of the local power structure, many having been involved in the essentially secular Baath Party, and others, more religious, having remained outside the regime but ruled by traditional tribal systems. The foreign jihadists were revolutionaries not only in the sense that they were prepared to fight the Americans but also in that they wanted to revolutionize -- radically Islamize -- the local Sunni community. By extension, they wanted to supplant the local leadership with their own by supporting and elevating new local leaders dependent for their survival on al Qaeda power.

For an extended period of time, the United States saw the Sunni insurgency as consisting of a single fabric. The local insurgents and the jihadists were viewed as the same, and the adopted name of the jihadists, al Qaeda, caused the Americans to see them as the primary enemy. Over time, and particularly since the death of al Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the United States has adopted a more nuanced view of the Sunni insurgency, drawing a distinction between the largely native Iraqi insurgents and the largely foreign jihadists.

Once this occurred and the United States began to make overtures to the native Iraqi insurgents, the underlying tensions between the foreign jihadists and the Iraqi insurgents emerged. The Sunnis, over time, came to see the jihadists as a greater danger to them than the Americans, and by the time U.S. President George W. Bush last visited Iraq, several Sunni leaders were prepared to be seen publicly with him. The growing animosities eventually turned into active warfare between the two factions, with al Qaeda being outnumbered and outgunned and the natives enjoying all of the perks of having the home-court advantage. ...

http://www.stratfor.com/products/premium/read_article.php?id=298227

<3

 

[Psychoblues]

Why did you not mention the number of dead Americans?

Gosh, no, the marines wouldn't take me. I'm on the wrong side of 30.

However, al-Qaeda in Iraq is being destroyed because the Sunni and Shi'a are sick and tired of foreigners blowing up their own. So the number of dead Saudis is rising.

Just whose damn side are you on, you traitorous shithead full of facts and no intelligence?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Why did you not mention the number of dead Americans?




Just whose damn side are you on, you traitorous shithead full of facts and no intelligence?

The idiot in this thread, as usual, would be the reject from another board. YOU in other words.