Al Qaida Leader Caught in Iraq

red states rule

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
16,011
Reaction score
573
Points
48
Libs have to deal with the fact that Al Qaeda is the real problem in Iraq


Pentagon: al-Qaida Operative Captured

Apr 27 11:24 AM US/Eastern
By ROBERT BURNS
AP Military Writer


WASHINGTON (AP) - The Pentagon announced Friday the capture of one of al-Qaida's most senior and most experienced operatives, an Iraqi who was trying to return to his native country when he was captured.
Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman, said the captive is Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi. He was received by the Pentagon this week from the CIA, Whitman said, but the spokesman would not say where or when al-Iraqi was captured or by whom.

The Pentagon described Al-Iraqi as an associate of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden and as someone who may have been targeting Westerners outside of Iraq.

The Pentagon took custody of al-Iraqi at Guantanamo Bay, the detention center for terror suspects, Whitman said. He is the 15th so-called high-value detainee to be taken to Guantanamo Bay after being held by the CIA in secret prisons abroad. The other 14 were sent to Guantanamo Bay last September and have since undergone military hearings there to affirm their status as enemy combatants eligible for military trials.

Whitman said al-Iraqi was believed responsible for plotting cross- border attacks from Pakistan on U.S. forces in Afghanistan, and that he led an effort to assassinate Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, as well as unspecified officials of the United Nations.


http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8OP1BT80&show_article=1
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,852
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
Gunny. We have to go after al queda though dont we?
One does not "go after al Qaeda" by embroiling itself in another county's civil war. Our focus on al Qaeda was lost the second we diverted attention by invading Iraq.

We've got our forces bogged dowm between two Arab, Islamofascist groups bent on killing each other instead of hunting terrorists.
 

maineman

Rookie
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
13,003
Reaction score
572
Points
0
Location
guess
One does not "go after al Qaeda" by embroiling itself in another county's civil war. Our focus on al Qaeda was lost the second we diverted attention by invading Iraq.

We've got our forces bogged dowm between two Arab, Islamofascist groups bent on killing each other instead of hunting terrorists.
EXACTLY!!!!!!
 

actsnoblemartin

I love Andrea & April
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
4,039
Reaction score
412
Points
98
Location
La Mesa, CA
Will somebody please explain to me, what exactly is a civil war, and how do we know, beyond a reasonable doubt that a civil war is going on?.

Im just asking :)
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,852
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
Will somebody please explain to me, what exactly is a civil war, and how do we know, beyond a reasonable doubt that a civil war is going on?.

Im just asking :)
Iraq is comprised of several different religious/ethnic factions. The Kurds are just sitting off to the side letting the Sunni and Shia kill each other off, but they ARE an ethnic minority and a player in the game.

Shi'ism is a faction of Islam originating in and supported by Iran. The sunni's are supported by Saudi Arabia. Wahabbism in particular is a Sunni subsect begun after WWII in Saudi Arabia to offset the then rapid spread of Shi'ism in the west. Both Islamic sects have a common enemy to focus their hatred on -- the US and Israel.

The Sunni's and Shia are currently waging a war against each other for control of the government of Iraq. The government of Iraq and the US are sitting in between the two factions.

While it may currently be a civil war, it is in the bigger picture a battle between Saudi Arabia and Iran for consolidating control of power in the region, and controlling Iraq's resources. The only faction missing in the fight is it was assumed back in the 90's the power vaccum would include Syria, but Syria has chosen to sit this one out and lend only clandestine support.
 

actsnoblemartin

I love Andrea & April
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
4,039
Reaction score
412
Points
98
Location
La Mesa, CA
The winner of this civil war. Assuming we leave of course, will they we be a long term threat to the stability of the middle east, and then eventually the u.s.??

I concede the point to you, because I do believe youre right and that a civil war is going on.

Thank you so much for explaining it to me :)
 

Bullypulpit

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2004
Messages
5,849
Reaction score
382
Points
48
Location
Columbus, OH
Libs have to deal with the fact that Al Qaeda is the real problem in Iraq


Pentagon: al-Qaida Operative Captured

Apr 27 11:24 AM US/Eastern
By ROBERT BURNS
AP Military Writer


WASHINGTON (AP) - The Pentagon announced Friday the capture of one of al-Qaida's most senior and most experienced operatives, an Iraqi who was trying to return to his native country when he was captured.
Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman, said the captive is Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi. He was received by the Pentagon this week from the CIA, Whitman said, but the spokesman would not say where or when al-Iraqi was captured or by whom.

The Pentagon described Al-Iraqi as an associate of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden and as someone who may have been targeting Westerners outside of Iraq.

The Pentagon took custody of al-Iraqi at Guantanamo Bay, the detention center for terror suspects, Whitman said. He is the 15th so-called high-value detainee to be taken to Guantanamo Bay after being held by the CIA in secret prisons abroad. The other 14 were sent to Guantanamo Bay last September and have since undergone military hearings there to affirm their status as enemy combatants eligible for military trials.

Whitman said al-Iraqi was believed responsible for plotting cross- border attacks from Pakistan on U.S. forces in Afghanistan, and that he led an effort to assassinate Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, as well as unspecified officials of the United Nations.


http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8OP1BT80&show_article=1
How many "high level" al Qaeda leaders have been captured or killed in Iraq now? Three? Four? Five? And, don't forget, there was no al Qaeda presence in Iraq prior to Bush's invasion and occupation of said country.

And you're right Gunny, cut one head off this particular serpent and two more spring up in its place.
 

Gunny

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
44,689
Reaction score
6,852
Points
198
Location
The Republic of Texas
The winner of this civil war. Assuming we leave of course, will they we be a long term threat to the stability of the middle east, and then eventually the u.s.??

I concede the point to you, because I do believe youre right and that a civil war is going on.

Thank you so much for explaining it to me :)
Assuming the winner is the Sunni or Shia, they will pretty-much fall in line with Saudi Arabia or Iran, respectively.

Whether that makes them a threat to stability in the Middle East will remian to be seen; however, both Shia and Sunni are raised from Day One to despise ALL Westerners, and the US in particular. The Saudi's just pretend to be our allies because it suits them to do so at the moment.
 

GeeWhiz

Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2006
Messages
166
Reaction score
25
Points
16
The Sunni's and Shia are currently waging a war against each other for control of the government of Iraq. The government of Iraq and the US are sitting in between the two factions.

While it may currently be a civil war, it is in the bigger picture a battle between Saudi Arabia and Iran for consolidating control of power in the region, and controlling Iraq's resources. The only faction missing in the fight is it was assumed back in the 90's the power vaccum would include Syria, but Syria has chosen to sit this one out and lend only clandestine support.
It can get more complicated than that. One of the biggest mistake the Bush administration made was to outlaw the Baathist Party. It was a legitimate political party created 60 years ago. It is 3 million members strong. They are secular and socialists. They would have nothing to do with either Saudi Arabia or Iran.

The reason they chose the socialist route was because back in 1946 the colonial powers were no longer in the region. When the colonial powers left they also left a region of illiterate people deep in poverty. The Baathists felt going socialist and using the oil resources to pull the people out of backwardness, illiteracy and poverty is the only solution. They created schools, hospitals and other resources to achieve their goal.

Sixty years later Bush comes along and blows up their entire infrastructure of electricity, school, hospitals and then he rapes the American taxpayers of their money by giving it all to war profiteers who produce nothing for the people of Iraq.

Bush went on the carry out a de-baathification policy. Big mistake. The 3 million strong says screw you. Now Bush is trying to backpeddle and bring back the Baath Party as that is the only way to appease angry Sunnis because a majority of them were Baaths. Problem is it is too late because the Shias whom never had any interest in politics until Bush came along are not going to let go of their power grab.

If you think his handling Katrina was a major FUBAR his handling Iraq is COMMFU, FUBAR, FUBB, FUMTU, G.F.U, IMFU, JAAFU, JACFU, JANFU, M.F.U, NABU, SABU, SAMFU, SAPFU, SNEFU, SNRAFU, SUSFU, TABU, TAFUBAR, TARFU,TASSFUIRA. T.C.C.FU all rolled up in one.
 
OP
red states rule

red states rule

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
16,011
Reaction score
573
Points
48
How many "high level" al Qaeda leaders have been captured or killed in Iraq now? Three? Four? Five? And, don't forget, there was no al Qaeda presence in Iraq prior to Bush's invasion and occupation of said country.

And you're right Gunny, cut one head off this particular serpent and two more spring up in its place.
As usual, any good news from Iraq is bad news for the left
 
OP
red states rule

red states rule

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
16,011
Reaction score
573
Points
48
You really need to get past this left right paradign. There are more important things than that alot of the time.
Such as?

Right now, defeating the terrorists should be the top issue right now
 

maineman

Rookie
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
13,003
Reaction score
572
Points
0
Location
guess
MM would rather fight them in Okinawa - like Murtha said we should do

find a quote from me where I said I would want to FIGHT terrorists in Okinawa or have the grace to retract that statement. I have NEVER said such a thing.... nor has Murtha, for that matter.

Oh...and will you ever explain about that 60% decrease in American casualties? DoD figures now show that over the last seven months, American casualties are 52% HIGHER than the previous seven months.
 
OP
red states rule

red states rule

Senior Member
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
16,011
Reaction score
573
Points
48
find a quote from me where I said I would want to FIGHT terrorists in Okinawa or have the grace to retract that statement. I have NEVER said such a thing.... nor has Murtha, for that matter.

Oh...and will you ever explain about that 60% decrease in American casualties? DoD figures now show that over the last seven months, American casualties are 52% HIGHER than the previous seven months.
Being a loyal Dem I thought you support Murtha

You did not seem to have a problem with him we he said the troops murdered civilians in cold blood
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top