October 12, 200521 yr Author As per the History Channel/CBS News multi-part series on the war in Iraq that aired in March of 2004, during the initial march to Baghdad the 1st MARDIV overran an "Ansar-al-Islam" terrorist training camp only 25 miles south of Baghdad spanning several acres. After a 9 hour firefight, the Marines killed over 700 Egyptian and Sudanese terrorists in training But alas, Saddam never had any ties to terrorism - Please . Did Saddam have ties to Al Qaeda? Mabye, mabye not. Did he have ties to terrorism? Absolutely. Ah yes, Ansar-al-Islam sounds like a good old fashion evil doer and Al Qaeda is also a good old fashion evil doer, they are both brown and Aaaaarabs so they the link has been made! Ansar al Islam existed before we invaded. Nobody ever denied it. So you officialy discovered sliced bread. But here, read some more info about the smoking gun that really isnt worth a dime: Ansar al-Islam (Arabic: انصار الاسلام, Supporters or Partisans of Islam) is a Kurdish Islamist group, promoting a radical interpretation of Islam and holy war. At the beginning of the 2003 invasion of Iraq it controlled about a dozen villages and a range of peaks in northern Iraq on the Iranian border. It has been in conflict with other groups such as the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan. It was formed in December 2001 as a merger of Jund al-Islam (Soldiers of Islam), led by Abu Abdallah al-Shafi'i (real name: Raid al-Khalaf al-Khuraisat), and a splinter group from the Islamic Movement in Kurdistan led by Mullah Krekar. Krekar is alleged to be the leader of Ansar al-Islam. He has lived in Norway, where he has refugee status, since 1991. On March 21, 2003 his arrest was ordered by kokrim, a Norwegian law enforcement agency, to ensure he did not leave the country while accusations that he had threatened terrorist attacks were investigated. Ansar al-Islam has been accused by the United States of providing a safe haven to al-Qaeda associates, led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. According to the US, they had established a camp for the production of poisons, including ricin. The US has also claimed that Ansar al-Islam has links with Saddam Hussein, thus claiming a link between Hussein and al-Qaeda. The claims were rejected by Krekar, and a presentation by Colin Powell to the UN on February 5, 2003 was met with widespread scepticism (see United Nations actions regarding Iraq). When the US invaded, it attacked AI training camps in the north, and the organization's leaders retreated to neighboring countries. When the war in the north settled down, the militants returned to Iraq to fight against the occupying American forces. [/size] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansar_al-Islam and then... But it is American suggestions that Ansar could represent the missing link between Baghdad and al-Qaeda which have created the most interest. Mullah Krekar categorically denies this: "I never had links with Saddam Hussein's family, Saddam Hussein's government, Saddam Hussein's party, not in the past, not now, not in the future, and not inside Iraq or outside, not directly, not indirectly. "As a Kurdish man, I believe that he is our enemy, and as an Orthodox Muslim also, I believe that Saddam Hussein and his group are outside of Islam's zone." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2713749.stm And perhaps the best evidence against this silly claim, our very own ally the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan(PUK), has denied that their two mutal enemies are friends. Human Rights Watch, which recently sent an investigative team to the region controlled by Ansar, said it was "not aware of any convincing evidence supporting" the contention of a connection between the Baghdad government and Ansar. 10 In its recent report on Iraqi Kurdistan, the International Crisis Group disclosed that U.S.-allied officials in the region have disputed a Baghdad-Ansar connection. "PUK officials, who stand most to gain from an Ansar-Baghdad collusion that might trigger U.S. intervention on the PUK's behalf, have stated that there is no evidence of such a link. Barham Salih [prime minister of the regional PUK government] . . . has said so repeatedly, emphasizing that the Iraqi Arabs fighting with Jund/Ansar are quite clearly anti-regime." 11 Mullah Krekar, the founder and head of Ansar, declared in 2001 that the objective of the Islamist movement in Kurdistan is "to bring down the Iraqi regime and replace it with an Islamic regime." http://www.winwithoutwarus.org/html/new_powell.response.htm See how the presence of this group in Iraq makes total sense as everyone knew they were already there? There has been no established connection that Hussein was the one helping these guys or training them however. But if you want to operate under a very lax burden of proof, then go ahead. Heck, maybe I can convince you the moon landing never happend. Now if youre going to argue that Hussein helped terrorists, again, thats obvious. He did, after all, offer money to the families of suicide bombers. But neither you nor the President nor or any of his cronies have yet to establish a link between Hussein and the terrorists were were supposed to be fighting after 9-11. As Das said, if were going to start invading countries that had terrorist, and I mean general terrorist, involvment, then we have a lot of invading to do. . You are Saddam Hussein, a ruthless, brutal, sadistic and paranoid whackjob in the middle east who rules his country with an iron fist. You've got spies everywhere to rout out any hint of militants in Iraq that could do you harm, now is it really remotely possible that you would not know of a fully armed, terrorist training camp with almost a thousand terrorists just 25 miles from your capital? I think not. If Saddam didn't want them there, they wouldn't have been there. I'm trying to bring clarity to the liberal claim that Iraq was not a training ground for terrorists when in reality, it was. I'm not sure exactly how many Marines comprise an entire expeditionary force, but all of the members of the 1MEF will confirm that the battle of Salman Pak against foreign terrorists did occur in Iraq at the time of the war, these are facts, not myths. Whether it was enough reason to go to war in retrospect is immaterial. Whether there are more terrorists in Iraq now than before is also immaterial. We are there now, and we must get the job done. I am not trying to make the case that Saddam had ties to 9/11, never said that nor implied it. If I remember correctly all the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi's anyways.
October 13, 200521 yr Saddam's ties (probably just watchful passivity) with a pee-wee, regional militia group is pretty inconsequential compared to the larger, more important military objectives in Iraq. I'm pretty sure, Ansar al-Islam, barely even factored into the decision to open up on Iraq. Attacking a hostile country who was aggressively pursuing a nuclear progam, who also has invaded two other countries > A Kurdish militia group with limited, regional reach. OR (if you like) Nuclear/biological warheads carried by al-Samoud missles > Irregular militia armed with Ak-47's, RPG-7's, and a few heavy mortars. Also, bin Laden absolutely HATES Saudi Arabia even though they share the same radicalized Wahabi-brand of Islam. Do you really think if al-Queda wanted to save Saudi Arabia from global scrutiny that they would have 15 of 19 hijackers be Saudi? Thier planners could have easily have spared them the trouble by sending black Sudanese or white Chechyns instead their strategy is to create havoc in the U.S./Saudi oil-for-protection alliance. Bin Laden and his ilk have been at odds with Saudi royalty (and Arab royalty in general) for a very long time, before al-Queda was even formed, when it was just a collection of veterans fresh out of the Afghan/Soviet conflict.
October 14, 200521 yr Iraq also used sarin gas on Kurdistan during their war with Iran...FYI Kurdistan is part of Iraq.
October 14, 200521 yr Iraq also used sarin gas on Kurdistan during their war with Iran...FYI Kurdistan is part of Iraq. And a part of Turkey, Iran and Azerbaijan. To be fair the Kurds in that region were openly hostile toward Saddam and allied with Iran against him in the Iran-Iraq war.
October 14, 200521 yr Iraq also used sarin gas on Kurdistan during their war with Iran...FYI Kurdistan is part of Iraq. And a part of Turkey, Iran and Azerbaijan. To be fair the Kurds in that region were openly hostile toward Saddam and allied with Iran against him in the Iran-Iraq war. They were his own people, allied against them or not. He used chemical weapons on them, and killed not only opposing militants, but innocent men, women, and children. To even try to make light of him using chemical weapons on civilians makes you lose all credibility.
October 15, 200521 yr Iraq also used sarin gas on Kurdistan during their war with Iran...FYI Kurdistan is part of Iraq. And a part of Turkey, Iran and Azerbaijan. To be fair the Kurds in that region were openly hostile toward Saddam and allied with Iran against him in the Iran-Iraq war. They were his own people, allied against them or not. He used chemical weapons on them, and killed not only opposing militants, but innocent men, women, and children. To even try to make light of him using chemical weapons on civilians makes you lose all credibility. A Kurd would probably spit in your face if you counted them as one of Saddam's people. All armies, including the U.S., kill innocent people during war, the loss of innocent civilian life is a cruel reality that is a intricate part of warfare, don't be so naive. If you have a sizeable militia movement in your country, whose fighters have created havoc behind your lines and created inroads for the country you are fighting to exploit, it is your responsibility to stamp that out. Don't get me wrong, I have a ton of respect for the peshmerga for taking on the biggest dog in the Middle Eastern yard (at the time) for thier autonomy, they are extremely brave and competant for thier means but I don't weep for the risks they take and the blood they've shed in trying to gain thier independence. My contention is that people like to make them out to be innocent, helpless victims who get gassed for no reason. Would things be different if Saddam sent armored divisions into those towns and simply shot up the place?
October 16, 200521 yr Iraq also used sarin gas on Kurdistan during their war with Iran...FYI Kurdistan is part of Iraq. And a part of Turkey, Iran and Azerbaijan. To be fair the Kurds in that region were openly hostile toward Saddam and allied with Iran against him in the Iran-Iraq war. They were his own people, allied against them or not. He used chemical weapons on them, and killed not only opposing militants, but innocent men, women, and children. To even try to make light of him using chemical weapons on civilians makes you lose all credibility. A Kurd would probably spit in your face if you counted them as one of Saddam's people. All armies, including the U.S., kill innocent people during war, the loss of innocent civilian life is a cruel reality that is a intricate part of warfare, don't be so naive. If you have a sizeable militia movement in your country, whose fighters have created havoc behind your lines and created inroads for the country you are fighting to exploit, it is your responsibility to stamp that out. Don't get me wrong, I have a ton of respect for the peshmerga for taking on the biggest dog in the Middle Eastern yard (at the time) for thier autonomy, they are extremely brave and competant for thier means but I don't weep for the risks they take and the blood they've shed in trying to gain thier independence. My contention is that people like to make them out to be innocent, helpless victims who get gassed for no reason. Would things be different if Saddam sent armored divisions into those towns and simply shot up the place? He didn't target militia...in the use of chemical weapons he blatently targeted civilians. Saddam was a monster, I have seen up close and personal the atrocities he has carried out, and you little man have no idea. The war in Iraq is justified, we should of never left the first time.
October 16, 200521 yr and you little man have no idea Unnecessary, immature, and undermines any point you may have had.
October 17, 200521 yr Iraq also used sarin gas on Kurdistan during their war with Iran...FYI Kurdistan is part of Iraq. And a part of Turkey, Iran and Azerbaijan. To be fair the Kurds in that region were openly hostile toward Saddam and allied with Iran against him in the Iran-Iraq war. They were his own people, allied against them or not. He used chemical weapons on them, and killed not only opposing militants, but innocent men, women, and children. To even try to make light of him using chemical weapons on civilians makes you lose all credibility. A Kurd would probably spit in your face if you counted them as one of Saddam's people. All armies, including the U.S., kill innocent people during war, the loss of innocent civilian life is a cruel reality that is a intricate part of warfare, don't be so naive. If you have a sizeable militia movement in your country, whose fighters have created havoc behind your lines and created inroads for the country you are fighting to exploit, it is your responsibility to stamp that out. Don't get me wrong, I have a ton of respect for the peshmerga for taking on the biggest dog in the Middle Eastern yard (at the time) for thier autonomy, they are extremely brave and competant for thier means but I don't weep for the risks they take and the blood they've shed in trying to gain thier independence. My contention is that people like to make them out to be innocent, helpless victims who get gassed for no reason. Would things be different if Saddam sent armored divisions into those towns and simply shot up the place? He didn't target militia...in the use of chemical weapons he blatently targeted civilians. Saddam was a monster, I have seen up close and personal the atrocities he has carried out, and you little man have no idea. The war in Iraq is justified, we should of never left the first time. First, I'm for the war so stop trying to persuade me or justify your position. That said, I am just trying to be as objective as possible in my support for the war without using the sexier more noble examples like Saddam gassing his "own people" and democracy in Iraq. Long-term, that region, which we and other countries are going to be entangled with for a very long time, is much safer with Saddam and his sons dead or encarcerated. For me it starts and ends there, Kurdish political representation and Iraqi democracy is just a happy residue.
October 17, 200521 yr and you little man have no idea Unnecessary, immature, and undermines any point you may have had. I called him naive about war, when he apparently is military, so a jab like that is fair game. Thank you for the assist though.
October 17, 200521 yr Author and you little man have no idea Unnecessary, immature, and undermines any point you may have had.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.