T1B

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2006 6:46 pm**

OBL Himself released a statement denouncing saddam before the war. Outside of 15 year old training camps, AQ was NOT a presence in iraq when we arrived there.

And A.Q. was not in iraq before the war at anywhere near the level they are now, but our presence there has helped local recruitment quite a bit, because we are a target within reach.

The fallacy you continue to believe is that Iraq is like a bug zapper for terrorists when it's more of a breeding ground. If your theory had proven true, bombings, deaths and the level of violence would have decreased over time, not increased the way it has.

If we're not there, the local crazies have no enemy to shoot at but their own countrymen, which they will do. They won't be coming to America to do it. That's a separate group of nutcases who are already here, waiting.

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2006 11:46 pm**

FIrst AQ was not a presence there. They may have been there to some minor extent, but they were not actively fighting in the war until after the insurgency started. They used the war to recruit.

And you act as if they will be piling into ships to come here to america if we leave iraq. They are fighting us there because we are there and they want us to leave. We will never eliminate them all because we are too good of a recruiting tool for them.

If we are not in their country, we only have to defend our own and we're managing that just fine these days.

Be nice to have the 50 billion they just authorized for Iraq to use here, though. What a colossal waste of our money.

Besides, a good portion of the battles currently being waged over there are either A: sectarian or B: intended to disrupt the democratic process. They have little to do with worldwide terrorism.

Posted: **Sun Jun 11, 2006 6:23 am**

Mister Bushice wrote:FIrst AQ was not a presence there.

So, Zarquari only existed in someones imagination, then?

Does it really surprise when someone calls you a gibbering dumbfuck?

Surprise, then.

If we are not in their country, we only have to defend our own and we're managing that just fine these days.

Which part of "It's ALL about the OIL" don't you understand?

Newsflash: The only reason we give a flying FUCK about Iraq and the Middle East in general is that OIL is of a strategic, vital importance to the U.S.

Posted: **Sun Jun 11, 2006 7:29 am**

War Wagon wrote:
Mister Bushice wrote:FIrst AQ was not a presence there.
So, Zarquari only existed in someones imagination, then?

Does it really surprise when someone calls you a gibbering dumbfuck?

Surprise, then.

If we are not in their country, we only have to defend our own and we're managing that just fine these days.
Which part of "It's ALL about the OIL" don't you understand?

Newsflash: The only reason we give a flying FUCK about Iraq and the Middle East in general is that OIL is of a strategic, vital importance to the U.S.

WAS NOT A PRESENCE = AL Z was there but was essentially underground, he was not waging a war, he was invisible. He did not declare his allegiance with AL Q almost 18 months AFTER we arrived. THus, there was no real presence of AL Q until AFTER we arrived. got it?

It's about the oil yet. production is not even sufficient to meet iraqs own needs. exports are at their lowest point in years because the insurgents are not under control

its currently all about the insurgents. you may go now.

Posted: **Sun Jun 11, 2006 7:35 am**

mvscal wrote: Where do you intend to fight AQ if not in Iraq?

We are fighting a small portion of an AL queda affiliated group in iraq. The largest battles we have are actually with sectarian insurgents, not OBL terrorists.

AL Q exists as small groups that declare their allegiance to OBL and AL Q. They are all around the world, not Just in iraq, and there is no way for us to go and fight a ground war with all of them.

However as long as international efforts continue to hunt them down and eliminate them, we won't need to keep pouring our money and blood into the sand and call it fighting the global war on terror.

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2006 5:30 pm**

mvscal wrote:
Mister Bushice wrote:They are all around the world, not Just in iraq, and there is no way for us to go and fight a ground war with all of them.

No shit, dumbfuck. They are coming from all around the world to fight Americans in Iraq. We have killed far more of these fuckheads in the sands of Iraq than any international police effort.

They are? Link, please.

Odd how so many AL Q most wanteds are being caught or chased in other countries, isn't it?

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2006 5:39 pm**

Mister Bushice wrote:
mvscal wrote:
Mister Bushice wrote:They are all around the world, not Just in iraq, and there is no way for us to go and fight a ground war with all of them.

No shit, dumbfuck. They are coming from all around the world to fight Americans in Iraq. We have killed far more of these fuckheads in the sands of Iraq than any international police effort.
They are? Link, please.

Odd how so many AL Q most wanteds are being caught or chased in other countries, isn't it?

AL Q "Most wanteds" are probably the types that can administer, nurture, and execute, not unlike our own "brass" are trying to do in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Foot Soldiers, logistical support personnel, and the like will be culled from less ubiquitious sources, local and foreign.

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2006 6:00 pm**

That is true, but cannon fodder is in plentiful supply.

Most of the little militant groups that have allied themselves with AL Q are local, or regional, and the recruit from the same area.

What better possible applicants could you have as cannon fodder than a bunch of young men who just had their best friends blown up or shot by the Americans?

add to that the life time of hate indoctrinated into them of western culture, and you will not lack for local recruits.

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2006 6:34 pm**

doesn't make your assertion that people from all over the world are flocking to iraq to shoot marines anywhere close to being true.

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2006 7:28 pm**

Mister Bushice wrote:doesn't make your assertion that people from all over the world are flocking to iraq to shoot marines anywhere close to being true.

Well see now you're changing the assertion. I don't think "people from all over the world are flocking" has ever been the assertion.

But clearly, and I'd bet my house on this, plenty of Islamic fundies have. From the Middle East to the Balkans and Chechnya many have come to get their "tickets punched". That would be, they come in, get some experience in fighting the "infidel" and then either die, get maimed, captured OR they move on to set up their own "cells" in some other country.

If you don't think this is occurring, I'd recommend doing a bit more research.

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2006 7:50 pm**

Tom In VA wrote:
Mister Bushice wrote:doesn't make your assertion that people from all over the world are flocking to iraq to shoot marines anywhere close to being true.
Well see now you're changing the assertion. I don't think "people from all over the world are flocking" has ever been the assertion.

I'm not changing anything, Tom. mvscal said it himself:

mvscal wrote:They are coming from all around the world to fight Americans in Iraq.

But clearly, and I'd bet my house on this, plenty of Islamic fundies have. From the Middle East to the Balkans and Chechnya many have come to get their "tickets punched". That would be, they come in, get some experience in fighting the "infidel" and then either die, get maimed, captured OR they move on to set up their own "cells" in some other country.

If you don't think this is occurring, I'd recommend doing a bit more research.

I think most of the fighter are locals, or regional, meaning saudis and iranians as well as iraquis. I did not say every single one is local, but the majority certainly are, and recruitment is mostly local.

And those who may come there are not going to put a dent in global terrorism.

I would like to see a story link that shows some proof of your assertion that peopel are coming from all over the world to fight there. I have not heard anyone claim that but you and mvscal.

All the pics of dead insurgents I've seen are wearing tattered sandals and ragged clothing. Not exactly what you'd be wearing while traveling from europe to fight there. Looks like local poor people to me.

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2006 7:55 pm**

And mvscal is right. They are coming from all around the world.

YOU are applying the quantitative constraint on his remark. "Flocking" is far too subjective.

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2006 7:58 pm**

Mister Bushice wrote: All the pics of dead insurgents I've seen are wearing tattered sandals and ragged clothing. Not exactly what you'd be wearing while traveling from europe to fight there. Looks like local poor people to me.

I'm going to leave that one alone, okay Blackshice***. What the fuck do you think they'd be wearing ? Versace ?

C'mon man, you must have been kidding when you said that.

Cryptic reference to Blackwell, some fashion dude that used to be disussed on Howard Stern years ago.

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2006 8:06 pm**

But by inference it IS quantitative because he is claiming that iraq was/is intended as the focal point for defetaing terrorism by drawing AL Q terrorists to their deaths. That won't happen if you're talking a small number of people, and by all accounts, it is small, 5% or more.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0923/dailyUpdate.html

The 'myth' of Iraq's foreign fighters
Report by US think tank says only '4 to 10' percent of insurgents are foreigners.
By Tom Regan | csmonitor.com
The US and Iraqi governments have vastly overstated the number of foreign fighters in Iraq, and most of them don't come from Saudi Arabia, according to a new report from the Washington-based Center for Strategic International Studies (CSIS). According to a piece in The Guardian, this means the US and Iraq "feed the myth" that foreign fighters are the backbone of the insurgency. While the foreign fighters may stoke the insurgency flames, they make up only about 4 to 10 percent of the estimated 30,000 insurgents.

The CSIS study also disputes media reports that Saudis are the largest group of foreign fighters. CSIS says "Algerians are the largest group (20 percent), followed by Syrians (18 percent), Yemenis (17 percent), Sudanese (15 percent), Egyptians (13 percent), Saudis (12 percent) and those from other states (5 percent)." CSIS gathered the information for its study from intelligence sources in the Gulf region.

The CSIS report says: "The vast majority of Saudi militants who have entered Iraq were not terrorist sympathizers before the war; and were radicalized almost exclusively by the coalition invasion."

The average age of the Saudis was 17-25 and they were generally middle-class with jobs, though they usually had connections with the most prominent conservative tribes. "Most of the Saudi militants were motivated by revulsion at the idea of an Arab land being occupied by a non-Arab country. These feelings are intensified by the images of the occupation they see on television and the Internet ... the catalyst most often cited [in interrogations] is Abu Ghraib, though images from Guantánamo Bay also feed into the pathology."

09/22/05
Hurricanes sap support for Iraq policy
09/21/05
Uzbek 'show trial' begins
09/20/05
British storm Basra jail, infuriate Iraqis

Sign up to be notified daily:

Find out more.

Subscribe via RSS:
XML: RSS file What is this?
Add to My Yahoo!
Subscribe in Pluck RSS reader
Subscribe with Bloglines

The report also gives notes that the Saudi government for spending nearly $1.2 billion over the past two years, and deploying 35,000 troops, in an effort to secure its border with Iraq. The major problem remains the border with Syria, which lacks the resources of the Saudis to create a similar barrier on its border.

The Associated Press reports that CSIS believes most of the insurgents are not "Saddam Hussein loyalists" but members of Sunni Arab Iraqi tribes. They do not want to see Mr. Hussein return to power, but they are "wary of a Shiite-led government."

The Los Angeles Times reports that a greater concern is that 'skills' foreign fighters are learning in Iraq are being exported to their home countries. This is a particular concern for Europe, since early this year US intelligence reported that "Abu Musab Zarqawi, whose network is believed to extend far beyond Iraq, had dispatched teams of battle-hardened operatives to European capitals."

Iraq has become a superheated, real-world academy for lessons about weapons, urban combat and terrorist trade craft, said Thomas Sanderson of [CSIS].

Extremists in Iraq are "exposed to international networks from around the world," said Sanderson, who has been briefed by German security agencies. "They are returning with bomb-making skills, perhaps stolen explosives, vastly increased knowledge. If they are succeeding in a hostile environment, avoiding ... US Special Forces, then to go back to Europe, my God, it's kid's play."

Meanwhile, The Boston Globe reports that President Bush, in a speech Thursday that was "clearly designed to dampen the potential impact of the antiwar rally" this weekend in Washington, said his top military commanders in Iraq have told him that they are making progress against the insurgents and "in establishing a politically viable state."

Newly trained Iraqi forces are taking the lead in many security operations, the president said, including a recent offensive in the insurgent stronghold of Tal Afar along the Syrian border – a key transit point for foreign fighters and supplies.

"Iraqi forces are showing the vital difference they can make," Bush said. '"They are now in control of more parts of Iraq than at any time in the past two years. Significant areas of Baghdad and Mosul, once violent and volatile, are now more stable because Iraqi forces are helping to keep the peace."

The president's speech, however, was followed by comments made Thursday by Saudi Arabia's foreign minister. Prince Saud al-Faisal said the US ignored warnings the Saudi government gave it about occupying Iraq. Prince Faisal also said he fears US policies in Iraq will lead to the country breaking up into Kurdish, Sunni, and Shiite parts. He also said that Saudi Arabia is not ready to send an ambassador to Baghdad, because he would become a target for the insurgents. "I doubt he would last a day," Faisal said.

Finally, The Guardian reports that "ambitions for Iraq are being drastically scaled down in private" by British and US officials. The main goal has now become avoiding the image of failure. The paper quotes sources in the British Foreign Office as saying that hopes to turn Iraq into a model of democracy for the Middle East had been put aside. "We will settle for leaving behind an Iraqi democracy that is creaking along," the source said.

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2006 8:27 pm**

5% of 30,000 is 1,500, and you think eliminating that number will make a serious dent in global terrorism?

Be serious..

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2006 9:05 pm**

You're assuming quite a bit yourself.
Why don't you go ahead and tell me how many "international terorists" there are in Iraq?

I can wait.

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2006 9:30 pm**

How does one figure equate with the other? What, they capture 353 so there must be a whole lot more?

BTW - they're all from geographically local arab countries except perhaps the tunisians, who are still part of the arab league. No one is from asia, russia, europe, or anywhere else in the world, as you seemed to claim.

Unless of course that global group is really really good at either escaping or dying.

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2006 9:48 pm**

Indonesia has a huge muslim population, as does pakistan. And don't forget the huge euro population, not to mention the US based ones.

You did say worldwide, didn't you?

And I don't buy that 335 captured foreigners equates with a huge number more. And you have nothing more than I do to back that up.

In other words, you have no proof of your assertions, only assumptions based on guesses.

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2006 11:14 pm**

like perhaps 1500 to 2000.

T1B

For All the Bush Supporters