Pentagon find no evidence that Saddam tried to assasinate Poppy Bush

[maineman]

http://www2.nysun.com/article/72906

Quote from article:

"WASHINGTON — A Pentagon review of about 600,000 documents captured in the Iraq war attests to Saddam Hussein's willingness to use terrorism to target Americans and work closely with jihadist organizations throughout the Middle East.

The report, released this week by the Institute for Defense Analyses, says it found no "smoking gun" linking Iraq operationally to Al Qaeda. But it does say Saddam collaborated with known Al Qaeda affiliates and a wider constellation of Islamist terror groups"

I read it, did you?

the "affiliates", however, were all arab nationalist organizations. Different entirely from Al Qaeda.

 

[BrianH]

the "affiliates", however, were all arab nationalist organizations. Different entirely from Al Qaeda.

Fair enough...but if you were hanging out with a group of guys that belonged to the Russian Mafia, you'd be associated with them whether you wanted to or not. Just because they're "affiliates" doesn't make it any less bad.

 

[jreeves]

conservative news warriors.

Now THERE is a non-partisan news site if I ever saw one! [/sarcasm off]

Refute the evidence with facts, or can you?

 

[Taomon]

http://www2.nysun.com/article/72906

Quote from article:

"WASHINGTON — A Pentagon review of about 600,000 documents captured in the Iraq war attests to Saddam Hussein's willingness to use terrorism to target Americans and work closely with jihadist organizations throughout the Middle East.

The report, released this week by the Institute for Defense Analyses, says it found no "smoking gun" linking Iraq operationally to Al Qaeda. But it does say Saddam collaborated with known Al Qaeda affiliates and a wider constellation of Islamist terror groups"

I read it, did you?

Yes, and what is your opinion on our own culpability with known al Qaeda operatives and their allies, like Saudi Arabia & Pakistan?

 

[Taomon]

Fair enough...but if you were hanging out with a group of guys that belonged to the Russian Mafia, you'd be associated with them whether you wanted to or not. Just because they're "affiliates" doesn't make it any less bad.

So you are arguing semantics? The fact is that we are just as culpable about 9/11 & the whole al Qaeda organization.

 

[Swamp Fox]

the "affiliates", however, were all arab nationalist organizations. Different entirely from Al Qaeda.

Where did it say that or are you inventing that "fact" to bolster your case?

 

[Swamp Fox]

So you are arguing semantics? The fact is that we are just as culpable about 9/11 & the whole al Qaeda organization.

Wow, you really are an idiot..........

 

[Taomon]

Wow, you really are an idiot..........

Based on what? The fact that you disagree? That does not make me an idiot, it makes you wrong.

 

[BrianH]

Yes, and what is your opinion on our own culpability with known al Qaeda operatives and their allies, like Saudi Arabia & Pakistan?

Irrelevant to the topic.

We're talking about Saddam's ties to AQ or so called, "Affiliates." Us having allied relations with Pakistan or Saudi Arabia has nothing to do with Saddam having or not having ties with AQ.

You guys refuse to admit that your wrong...don't know why though...
You also try to derail by talking about the U.S. and ties to countries with ties to AQ. Like I've said several times, I'm not justifying action based upon his ties with AQ...however, if you're going to argue that Saddam had no ties to AQ or terrorism, then you're sadly mistaken.

 

[Taomon]

Irrelevant to the topic.

We're talking about Saddam's ties to AQ or so called, "Affiliates." Us having allied relations with Pakistan or Saudi Arabia has nothing to do with Saddam having or not having ties with AQ.

You guys refuse to admit that your wrong...don't know why though...
You also try to derail by talking about the U.S. and ties to countries with ties to AQ. Like I've said several times, I'm not justifying action based upon his ties with AQ...however, if you're going to argue that Saddam had no ties to AQ or terrorism, then you're sadly mistaken.

Not irrelevant at all. You are avoiding the glaring truth that whether or not Saddam had any ties or affiliations to al Qaeda, we definitely did...but somehow, that is forgotten.

 

[BrianH]

Not irrelevant at all. You are avoiding the glaring truth that whether or not Saddam had any ties or affiliations to al Qaeda, we definitely did...but somehow, that is forgotten.

Have you read what this argument is about??? It is not about whether we or anyone else has had ties to terrorism... It's not even about the war being justified over Saddam's ties to terrorism. IT is about whether or not Saddam had ties to AQ...and he did, end of story.

 

[Taomon]

Have you read what this argument is about??? It is not about whether we or anyone else has had ties to terrorism... It's not even about the war being justified over Saddam's ties to terrorism. IT is about whether or not Saddam had ties to AQ...and he did, end of story.

Actually, no he did not. And if you blindly believe our military or our intelligence agencies...then you are more foolsih than I thought.

al Qaeda is made up of Fundamentalists. To them Saddam was an infidel. To Saddam, they were a threat.

 

[BrianH]

Actually, no he did not. And if you blindly believe our military or our intelligence agencies...then you are more foolsih than I thought.

al Qaeda is made up of Fundamentalists. To them Saddam was an infidel. To Saddam, they were a threat.

Ok...dude. We're discussing the article about whether or not Saddam had ties to terrorist based on Pentagon reports. The article states that he (according to Pentagon reports) was collaborating with AQ affiliates (which is not much better). He did, end of story.

SO there's no way a country (or group of people) would collaborate with another country they viewed an enemy?? HMM...That's never happened in history....but sure it did.
The U.S. and Russia allied in WWII.

 

[BrianH]

Once again....

"WASHINGTON — A Pentagon review of about 600,000 documents captured in the Iraq war attests to Saddam Hussein's willingness to use terrorism to target Americans and work closely with jihadist organizations throughout the Middle East.

The report, released this week by the Institute for Defense Analyses, says it found no "smoking gun" linking Iraq operationally to Al Qaeda. But it does say Saddam collaborated with known Al Qaeda affiliates and a wider constellation of Islamist terror groups"

Here's the article again: http://www2.nysun.com/article/72906


What are you not understanding???

 

[maineman]

Where did it say that or are you inventing that "fact" to bolster your case?

Egyptian Islamic Jihad arab nationalist organization.

Saddam's intelligence services maintained extensive support networks for a wide range of Palestinian Arab terrorist organizations, including but not limited to Hamas. Among the other Palestinian groups Saddam supported at the time was Force 17, the private army loyal to Yasser Arafat.

nationalist organizations

 

[maineman]

Where did it say that or are you inventing that "fact" to bolster your case?

"Egyptian Islamic Jihad" arab nationalist organization.

"Saddam's intelligence services maintained extensive support networks for a wide range of Palestinian Arab terrorist organizations, including but not limited to Hamas. Among the other Palestinian groups Saddam supported at the time was Force 17, the private army loyal to Yasser Arafat."

nationalist organizations

"The report finds that Abdul Rahman Yasin, who is wanted by the FBI for mixing the chemicals for the 1993 World Center Attack, was a prisoner, and not a guest, in Iraq."

 

[Alpha1]

"This is the beginning of the process of exposing Saddam's involvement in Islamic terror. But it is only the beginning. Time and declassification I'm sure will reveal yet more," he said.

"Even so, this report is damning to those who doubted Saddam Hussein's involvement with Jihadist terrorist groups. It devastates one of the central myths plaguing our government prior to 9-11, that a Jihadist group would not cooperate with a secular regime and vice versa."

Really now...who woulda "thunk" that...
Who would have been dumb enough to believe that a Jihadist group would not cooperate with a secular regime... and vice versa

I recall someone making that uninformed claim for years, but can't remember who....

 

[Paulie]

Someone let me know as soon as we intervene in the known AQ-sympathizer/collaborative countries that DON'T have an affect on the US Dollar in trade.

 

[jreeves]

Someone let me know as soon as we intervene in the known AQ-sympathizer/collaborative countries that DON'T have an affect on the US Dollar in trade.

We do it quite often actually, blocking financial transfers and the such.

 

[Paulie]

We do it quite often actually, blocking financial transfers and the such.

Right, and even though in many of those countries there are oppresive regimes violating human rights and threatening our security via collaboration with AQ, we refrain from large scale military action, regime changes, and nation building, because the potential economic benefits aren't worth the effort.

Don't you ever question, for example, why we let N. Korea lob missiles at their pleasure? Could it be that they just don't threaten the Dollar on the same level as, say, Iraq or Iran trading oil for something other than US Dollars? If anyone could provide terrorists with nuclear weapons RIGHT NOW, it's Korea.

The double-standards within our foreign policy these days is ridiculous. Luckily though, there's a media that is highly efficient at keeping people from thinking outside the box.