1. Welcome to CowboysZone!  Join us!  Come on!  You know you want to!

No Iraq al-Qaeda Link

Discussion in 'Political Zone' started by Sasquatch, Mar 12, 2008.

  1. Sasquatch

    Sasquatch Lost in the Woods

    4,500 Messages
    155 Likes Received
    Another justification for the invasion of Iraq proves false.

    Report: No Saddam, al Qaeda link


    By WARREN P. STROBEL
    McClatchy Newspapers​
    WASHINGTON -- An exhaustive review of more than 600,000 Iraqi documents that were captured after the 2003 U.S. invasion has found no evidence that Saddam Hussein's regime had any operational links with Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda terrorist network.

    The Pentagon-sponsored study, scheduled for release this week, did confirm that Saddam's regime provided some support to other terrorist groups, particularly in the Middle East, U.S. officials told McClatchy Newspapers. However, his security services were directed primarily against Iraqi exiles, Shiite Muslims, Kurds and others he considered enemies of his regime.


    The new study of the Iraqi regime's archives found no documents indicating a "direct operational link" between Saddam's Iraq and al Qaeda before the invasion, according to a U.S. official familiar with the report.


    He and others spoke to McClatchy on condition of anonymity because the study isn't due to be shared with Congress and released before Wednesday.


    Arguments for invasion
    President Bush and his aides used Saddam's alleged relationship with al Qaeda, along with Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction, as arguments for invading Iraq after 9-11.


    Then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said in September 2002 that the United States had "bulletproof" evidence of cooperation between the radical Islamist terror group and Saddam's secular dictatorship.
    Then-Secretary of State Colin Powell cited multiple links between Saddam and al Qaeda in a watershed February 2003 speech to the United Nations Security Council. Almost every example Powell cited turned out to be based on bogus or misinterpreted intelligence.


    As recently as July, Bush tried to tie al Qaeda to the ongoing violence in Iraq. "The same people that attacked us on September the 11th is a crowd that is now bombing people, killing innocent men, women and children, many of whom are Muslims," he said.


    The new study, Saddam and Terrorism: Emerging Insights from Captured Iraqi Documents, was essentially completed last year and has been undergoing what one U.S. intelligence official described as a "painful" declassification review.


    It was produced by a federally funded think tank, the Institute for Defense Analyses, under contract to the Norfolk, Va.-based U.S. Joint Forces Command.


    Spokesmen for the Joint Forces Command declined to comment until the report is released. One of the report's authors, Kevin Woods, also declined to comment.


    Earlier studies
    Saddam, whose regime was relentlessly secular, was wary of Islamic extremist groups such as al Qaeda, although he gave some financial support to Palestinian groups that sponsored terrorism against Israel.
    According to the State Department's annual report on global terrorism for 2002 -- the last before the Iraq invasion -- Saddam supported the militant Islamic group Hamas in Gaza, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, a Syrian-based terrorist group.An earlier study, released by the Joint Forces Command in March 2006 and based on the captured Iraqi documents, found that a militia that Saddam formed after the 1991 Persian Gulf war, the Fedayeen Saddam, planned assassinations and bombings against his enemies. Those included Iraqi exiles and opponents in Iraq's Kurdish and Shiite communities.


    Other documents indicate that the Fedayeen Saddam opened paramilitary training camps that hosted "Arab volunteers" from outside of Iraq. What happened to the non-Iraqi volunteers is unknown, however, according to the earlier study.


    The new Pentagon study isn't the first to refute earlier administration contentions about Saddam and al Qaeda.


    A September 2006 report by the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded that Saddam was "distru****l of al Qaeda and viewed Islamic extremists as a threat to his regime, refusing all requests from al Qaeda to provide material or operational support."

    LINK
  2. zrinkill

    zrinkill Diamond surrounded by trash

    33,012 Messages
    728 Likes Received
    He was sponsoring terrorist and he needed to be taken out of power.
  3. ConcordCowboy

    ConcordCowboy Mr. Buckeye

    12,747 Messages
    2 Likes Received
  4. vta

    vta The Proletariat

    8,746 Messages
    5 Likes Received
    I hope this study wasn't too costly; I could have told them the same for free.
  5. Sasquatch

    Sasquatch Lost in the Woods

    4,500 Messages
    155 Likes Received
    Our president made a case for war that has turned out to be false on many levels yet people defend what in retrospect can only be poor judgment or deception?

    Saddam didn't NEED to go. He was not the "imminent" threat to the United States the administration claimed he was. We NEEDED to finish the job in Afghanistan and bring to justice those responsible for 9/11.
  6. ConcordCowboy

    ConcordCowboy Mr. Buckeye

    12,747 Messages
    2 Likes Received
    HELLO!
  7. Jordan55

    Jordan55 Active Member

    1,176 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Spilt milk at this point, the question now is how do we remove our troops without giving empowerment to Al-Queda or Iran.
    What are going to be the consequences of a quick exit strategy?
    Gentlemen we are in what is known as quagmire, now what is the best way out is the question.
  8. ConcordCowboy

    ConcordCowboy Mr. Buckeye

    12,747 Messages
    2 Likes Received
    I say stay there for 100 years till the job is done.
  9. iceberg

    iceberg detoxed Zone Supporter

    28,264 Messages
    1,291 Likes Received
    the titanic has sunk.
    ronald reagan is dead
    we still can't find jimmy hoffa.

    while we're bringing up old news, that is...
  10. iceberg

    iceberg detoxed Zone Supporter

    28,264 Messages
    1,291 Likes Received
    is iran a threat - are they at least listening now where saddam never did?

    it's quite possible iraq was never the ultimate goal but a step to that.
  11. zrinkill

    zrinkill Diamond surrounded by trash

    33,012 Messages
    728 Likes Received
    :laugh2:
  12. Hostile

    Hostile Tacos are a good investment Zone Supporter

    118,870 Messages
    2,647 Likes Received
    I wish we had finished off Bin Laden et al first. But I do not see why going into Iraq is a bad thing. I'm sorry, I just don't. Please don't try and explain it to me. I mean that. Please don't.
  13. Sasquatch

    Sasquatch Lost in the Woods

    4,500 Messages
    155 Likes Received
    Right on cue? :D
  14. iceberg

    iceberg detoxed Zone Supporter

    28,264 Messages
    1,291 Likes Received
    just like a dose of sassy negativity when someone says something good about our country. : )

    we *all* have our cues, sas.
  15. Jordan55

    Jordan55 Active Member

    1,176 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    That is not exactly what McCain said, All I'm saying that for every acton there is a reaction, this one needs to thought out throughly.
    We might get out and end up going back quicker then you think, Do you hand Irag over to Iran? Which essentially is what's going to happen.
    Future Consequences, we have to think ahead.
  16. Sasquatch

    Sasquatch Lost in the Woods

    4,500 Messages
    155 Likes Received
    And Al Qaeda provoked us into overreacting in a big way with the main beneficiaries of our Iraq policy being Al Qaeda, a resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan, and Iran.

    If only people had heeded that advice beforehand.
  17. Jordan55

    Jordan55 Active Member

    1,176 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Of course if Bush's predecessor, had taken Bin Laden out when he had mutiple chances this might be mute discussion at this point.
  18. BrAinPaiNt

    BrAinPaiNt Brotherhood of the Beard Staff Member

    61,051 Messages
    4,399 Likes Received
    Well I guess if there was no Bin Laden than the Bush crew could not have made the argument to go into Iraq...if that is what you are saying.
  19. Jordan55

    Jordan55 Active Member

    1,176 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Might not have been 9/11 to start with, which was followed up with the other chain of events.
    All this would be subjective of course, but cutting off the head of the serpent
    might have altered history, we probably wouldn't be in Afganistan or Iraq.
  20. Jordan55

    Jordan55 Active Member

    1,176 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Iceberg, what exactly is your point?
    Say it Man!
    Spit it out!
    Let's hear it

Share This Page