Author Topic: The Iraq-Al Queda connection (Read 2851 times)

NUKE · « **Reply #45 on:** April 04, 2003, 04:19:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by straffo
I'm pretending that to preserve their interests in this region of Germany Two speaking English (one across the channel, one across the atlantic) country asked france to evacuate the Sarre.

And just after a strange party leaded by a almost as strange Autrichian started to grow ...

Ps : Should I recall that the Sarre was part of France before the 1870 war and what was the amount of the reparation France had to pay in 1871 ?
And that Wilson didn't want the France to get his own territory back ?

I guess that will be an insult to your historical knowledge.

Blame who you want....... France is responsible for France. France has demonstrated that it cannot take care of itself. France answers threats with treaties and words. Are you complaining that America and Britain didn't look out for France's national interests?

straffo · « **Reply #46 on:** April 04, 2003, 04:24:37 PM »

Accept your pa(rt of responsability that's all.

NUKE · « **Reply #47 on:** April 04, 2003, 04:30:22 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by straffo
Accept your pa(rt of responsability that's all.

We ( America) accept our responsabilities ...when will France accept theirs?

Vulcan · « **Reply #48 on:** April 04, 2003, 04:31:41 PM »

I posted a few articles on Al Ansar a month or two back.

In each it was described how Saddams regime allowed Al Ansar and Al Qaeda operatives to freely travel to and from that region. IE They would fly in from Pakistan and land at the Airport formerly known as Saddam International and ride on up there.

Saddams regime used Al Ansar against the Kurds; the Iraqi military supplies Al Ansar with weapons.

Apparently Saddam hates Islamic extremists, but he allowed Al Ansar to operate because they were brural in their attacks on the Kurds.

So officially its "we didn't know they're there'. But unofficially they are fully supported by the regime.

Straffo do a bit more research mate. Its not hard to find.

Pfunk · « **Reply #49 on:** April 04, 2003, 04:37:40 PM »

The territory of northern Iraq where the traces of ricin were detected is not under the control of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
Baghdad admitted to U.N. weapons inspectors in the 1990s that it had successfully weaponized ricin, botulinum and anthrax. There is no immediate evidence that suggests Saddam’s regime provided the easily produced toxins to Ansar al-Islam or al-Qaida.

-dead- · « **Reply #50 on:** April 04, 2003, 04:51:03 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hortlund
On the map, is Kirkuk and Irbil marked as Kurdish controlled? Are Kirkuk and Irbil Kurdish controlled? But I see what you mean ...If you cant trust maps made by CNN, who can you trust eh?

Well I think of CNN as pretty much the State Department's sister channel this time round... But I digress. If you look at the nice CNN map you'll see a long inroad into the area marked "controlled by Kurds" just where Kirkuk & Irbil are located. Kirkuk with it's oil fields was taken by Hussein's troops in 1991. Irbil, the capital of Kurdistan, on the other hand is controlled by the Kurds - according to Kurdistan Regional Government (it's where their Parliament building is - Here's a nice picture of it)- but I'm sure you'll come back with something along the lines of "How can you trust the KRG, the KDP and the PUK to tell you which bits they control?" All of which is a red herring as the Ansar Al-Islam is in no doubt on any map - it's in Kurd-held territory, on the Iran-Iraq border. Still if you feel you can't trust CNN's maps - here's the KRG maps:

You'll note the copyright date on the map above is 1992

crowMAW · « **Reply #51 on:** April 04, 2003, 05:34:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Vulcan
So officially its "we didn't know they're there'. But unofficially they are fully supported by the regime.

I don't deny that is a possibility. But experts in the field, including the CIA, are less convinced that they are "fully supported" by Saddam.

The PUK asserts that the link is there, but only circumstantially. One PUK official was quoted after the attempt on the PUK's leadership by Ansar, "who else but Saddam would have an interest in destabilizing a free Kurdistan." Well, for one, UBL...the PUK represent a secular government. The Ansar are Wahabbi'its and behave similar to the Taliban. They have their own interest in controlling Kurdistan.

BTW Vulcan, do you know if there is another international airport, ie port of entry, that travelers to Iraq are allowed to use when flying into Iraq? I'm less convinced that it is a case of intentionally turning a blind eye as it is ignorance as many travelers enter Iraq through Baghdad headed to other parts of the country, some for legitimate reasons and some with more evil intent. Consider the case of Canada...the US may need to consider the Canadian government as Al Qaeda conspirators as they tended to turn a "blind eye" to potential terrorist using their country as an entry point in order to cross the open border to the US.

Also, you realize that the Saddam International Airport was closed to all international flights until just a couple of years ago. And those camps have been there for many years as evidenced by their complexity.

Nash · « **Reply #52 on:** April 04, 2003, 05:45:10 PM »

I take issue with that. Canada doesn't turn a blind eye to potential terrorists using our country as a port of entry. We struggle just as hard as the US in maintaining the integrity of our borders, but it's certainly a difficult task and I think the US can appreciate that fact (as *none* of the 9/11 terrorists came through the Canadain border.... *all* came through the US's own).

Vulcan · « **Reply #53 on:** April 04, 2003, 09:06:21 PM »

So what you're saying is Saddam, who so brutally put down uprisings in the south, gassed his own people, and committed numerous other atrocities has had trouble dealing with a small group of terrorists in the North who coincidentally are fighting the Kurds and the 'west'.

And that Saddam who has ordinary people arrested and their tongues ripped out for slandering him has trouble arresting these terrorists as they travel through Baghdad?

yeah right

crowMAW · « **Reply #54 on:** April 04, 2003, 09:12:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nash
I take issue with that. Canada doesn't turn a blind eye

No insult was intended, but rather sarcasm over Vulcan's comment...the "blind eye" was in quotes to indicate that it is not an intentional act on the Canadian government's part. Just as our own Customs did not intentionally turn a "blind eye" and let known terrorists into our own country.

crowMAW · « **Reply #55 on:** April 04, 2003, 09:32:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Vulcan
So what you're saying is Saddam, who so brutally put down uprisings in the south, gassed his own people, and committed numerous other atrocities has had trouble dealing with a small group of terrorists in the North who coincidentally are fighting the Kurds and the 'west'.

Well, he seems to have had a hard time dealing with the Kurds on the whole. I'm sure the location of the Ansar enclave being deep in Kurd controlled territory and bordering Iran is no accident. To get to them Saddam would have to get past the PUK and then Ansar could flee into Iran, where Saddam fears to tread.

But no, that is not what I said. You state that in order for them to exist in his country, then they must be conspiring. That is BS. Your logic would mean that since the US government allowed Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman to freely come and go into NYC and knew he had created a terrorist cell in NYC, then the US government must have conspired with him to set the bomb in the WTC in 1993.

BTW, what does the fact that Saddam "so brutally put down uprisings in the south, gassed his own people, and committed numerous other atrocities" have to do with whether or not he has perfect information about people, who may be Ansar members, coming and going into Iraq?

Vulcan · « **Reply #56 on:** April 05, 2003, 12:01:31 AM »

The difference is the Al Ansar move freely within Saddam controlled Iraq.

The Kurds have stated that they've captured Iraqi equipment in the hands of Al Ansar, and that Al Ansar have received training from the Republican Guard.

If you believe in a dictatorship such as Iraq that active terrorists can move through the mainstream areas without Saddam and his cohorts knowing then I have a bridge you might be interested in buying.

straffo · « **Reply #57 on:** April 05, 2003, 03:11:47 AM »

Vulcan can you poing me a source for this affirmations ?

I never heard of such a complicity between Iraq and Ansar Al-Islam.

I thing crowmaw covered enought your 1rst question and I'm to lazy to start translating the fight for influence UPK PPK ... have done in this region.

straffo · « **Reply #58 on:** April 05, 2003, 03:16:59 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
We ( America) accept our responsabilities ...when will France accept theirs?

I'm waiting to see an article showing how Wilson screwed up and how the US didn't win WWI.
US did participate (as we call them : "mieux vaut tard que jamais ...") and this Wilson acted like a SOB which is pretty normal for a complete dumb idiot.

Horlund I'm still waiting your scientific demonstration.

lord dolf vader · « **Reply #59 on:** April 05, 2003, 08:08:34 AM »

"There were Swedes fighting for the allies straffo"

hortand

would you care to compair numbers of sweeds serving on the other side?

you throwing around with us or aginst us. in the second biggest with nobody country on earth. how many relatives you had die in wars ? i have several . willing to bet straffo also has.

you havent paid the price to walk the walk you push off on us.