No connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda?

[-Cp]

No connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda?

Hmm....

U.S. Special Forces Kill No. 2 Terrorist in Iraq
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,170467,00.html

 

[manu1959]

No connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda?

Hmm....

U.S. Special Forces Kill No. 2 Terrorist in Iraq
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,170467,00.html

i ibelive the argument is pre 911

 

[-Cp]

i ibelive the argument is pre 911

And I believe idiot anti-war protestors are STILL screaming that there is no connection....

 

[insein]

the left will use the argument that we brought them there through our actions. To those with that timeless argument, i direct you to this thread.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?p=333088#post333088

 

[manu1959]

And I believe idiot anti-war protestors are STILL screaming that there is no connection....

yes......and they calim we are the dumb ones

 

[Palestinian Jew]

Its not really fair to say Iraq was a terrorist country just because it has al-Qaeda(numbers unknown) operatives within its country. There are certainly al-Qaeda members within America, but that doesn't mean America is a terrorist nation just because we have their operatives within the country.

As to whether there was a connection between Iraq's government and al-Qaeda, Colin Powell has said on numerous occasions, most recently in an interview with Barbara Walters that Iraq and al-Qaeda had no connection.

Also, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace stated ""The most intensive searching over the last two years has produced no solid evidence of a co-operative relationship between Saddam Hussein's government and al-Qaeda."

As well as the 9/11 commission: ""We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al-Qaeda co-operated on attacks against the United States."

And the Senate Report of Prewar Intelligence in Iraq: "No information has emerged thus far to suggest that Saddam did try to employ al-Qaida in conducting terrorist attacks".

A great site that outlines the debate is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein_and_al-Qaeda

On a different note, its good to be back.

 

[Zhukov]

Its not really fair to say Iraq was a terrorist country just because it has al-Qaeda(numbers unknown) operatives within its country. There are certainly al-Qaeda members within America, but that doesn't mean America is a terrorist nation just because we have their operatives within the country.

Yes, but are they in this country with even the tacit approval of our government?

Iraq under Hussein was a totalitarian nation, in which I doubt very little occured without his knowledge and approval.

 

[insein]

Its not really fair to say Iraq was a terrorist country just because it has al-Qaeda(numbers unknown) operatives within its country. There are certainly al-Qaeda members within America, but that doesn't mean America is a terrorist nation just because we have their operatives within the country.

As to whether there was a connection between Iraq's government and al-Qaeda, Colin Powell has said on numerous occasions, most recently in an interview with Barbara Walters that Iraq and al-Qaeda had no connection.

Also, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace stated ""The most intensive searching over the last two years has produced no solid evidence of a co-operative relationship between Saddam Hussein's government and al-Qaeda."

As well as the 9/11 commission: ""We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al-Qaeda co-operated on attacks against the United States."

And the Senate Report of Prewar Intelligence in Iraq: "No information has emerged thus far to suggest that Saddam did try to employ al-Qaida in conducting terrorist attacks".

A great site that outlines the debate is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein_and_al-Qaeda

On a different note, its good to be back.

Sigh. The 9/11 commission is a contradictory bunch of crap anyway. Just like any other Congressional committee. They state within the commissions findings that Ansar al islam, a group known to be led by Bin Laden at the time, was actively seeking refuge in middle eastern nations. Ansar al islam officials met in Baghdad with top Saddam officials to discuss the development of training camps within their borders. They did the same in Afghanistan. What the 9/11 commission specifically says that people trot out all the time is that there is no evidence linking directly to 9/11. They did however have ties to many terrorist organizations including al queda.

The guardian reported that these camps existed pre-invasion and were a gathering point in Iraq for terrorists from all of the middle east.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,779359,00.html

Add to that these documented connections between top Al queda officials and Saddam or Saddam surrogates and you begin to see why invasion was logical.
http://www.techcentralstation.com/092503F.html

From the evidence that is availble, its obvious that Al queda had direct connections to Afghanistan and Iraq. That is why they were the first targets.

 

[manu1959]

Its not really fair to say Iraq was a terrorist country just because it has al-Qaeda(numbers unknown) operatives within its country. There are certainly al-Qaeda members within America, but that doesn't mean America is a terrorist nation just because we have their operatives within the country.

As to whether there was a connection between Iraq's government and al-Qaeda, Colin Powell has said on numerous occasions, most recently in an interview with Barbara Walters that Iraq and al-Qaeda had no connection.

Also, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace stated ""The most intensive searching over the last two years has produced no solid evidence of a co-operative relationship between Saddam Hussein's government and al-Qaeda."

As well as the 9/11 commission: ""We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al-Qaeda co-operated on attacks against the United States."

And the Senate Report of Prewar Intelligence in Iraq: "No information has emerged thus far to suggest that Saddam did try to employ al-Qaida in conducting terrorist attacks".

A great site that outlines the debate is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein_and_al-Qaeda

On a different note, its good to be back.

why is alqueda there defending iraq then?

would you say alqueda and iraq are allies?

 

[dilloduck]

Sigh. The 9/11 commission is a contradictory bunch of crap anyway. Just like any other Congressional committee. They state within the commissions findings that Ansar al islam, a group known to be led by Bin Laden at the time, was actively seeking refuge in middle eastern nations. Ansar al islam officials met in Baghdad with top Saddam officials to discuss the development of training camps within their borders. They did the same in Afghanistan. What the 9/11 commission specifically says that people trot out all the time is that there is no evidence linking directly to 9/11. They did however have ties to many terrorist organizations including al queda.

The guardian reported that these camps existed pre-invasion and were a gathering point in Iraq for terrorists from all of the middle east.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,779359,00.html

Add to that these documented connections between top Al queda officials and Saddam or Saddam surrogates and you begin to see why invasion was logical.
http://www.techcentralstation.com/092503F.html

From the evidence that is availble, its obvious that Al queda had direct connections to Afghanistan and Iraq. That is why they were the first targets.

Thanks----and AGAIN --It doesn't matter if Al Quaeda was actually in Iraq or not----we are not ONLY at war with the Al-queada terrorist group and NEVER claimed such. We are at war with terrorism around the world and states that sponsor them. Are there terrorist groups and terrorists states that we have not got around to dealing with ? YES but that is not to infer that we won't.

 

[insein]

Thanks----and AGAIN --It doesn't matter if Al Quaeda was actually in Iraq or not----we are not ONLY at war with the Al-queada terrorist group and NEVER claimed such. We are at war with terrorism around the world and states that sponsor them. Are there terrorist groups and terrorists states that we have not got around to dealing with ? YES but that is not to infer that we won't.

Yes it is a WOT. But if you go by the strict argument that anti-Bush people make, that we should attacking Al queda, then you can see how baseless that is.

 

[dilloduck]

Yes it is a WOT. But if you go by the strict argument that anti-Bush people make, that we should attacking Al queda, then you can see how baseless that is.

Thats why I refuse to argue with them on the very narrow ground rules they insist on using. I refuse to split hairs with stupid people and I wish the administration would quit too------if we kill a terrorist I don't give a shit what silly group he belongs to. I'm just glad he's dead.

 

[USMCDevilDog]

Its not really fair to say Iraq was a terrorist country just because it has al-Qaeda(numbers unknown) operatives within its country. There are certainly al-Qaeda members within America, but that doesn't mean America is a terrorist nation just because we have their operatives within the country.

Are you serious? Yes we most likely have terrorists in our country but are we ALLOWING them to be here? No. Unlike Iraq who, under Hussein was allowing terrorists to operate in his country. If we knew where the terrorists were in our country, trust me we'd root them out ASAP! About a month ago they caught a terrorist in training living in Maryland, that's 20 minutes from my house. So yes, there are definetely terrorists in the country, but what are we letting them come in and stay here, no frickin way! :bat: