Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,789 Year: 4,046/9,624 Month: 917/974 Week: 244/286 Day: 5/46 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   War in Iraq, is there a point?
FairWitness
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 308 (235642)
08-22-2005 5:15 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Yaro
08-22-2005 11:20 AM


Why we are fighting in Iraq.
We are fighting the war in Iraq because more than anyone else in the Middle East, Saddam Hussein & his regime were a direct threat to the security of the United States of America & the entire region of the Middle East. He did have aggressive, malevolent intentions to dominate the region, spread terrorism to our country & allies, aided & assisted al Qaeda, including the attacks on 9/11/2001 (more evidence is being uncovered all the time to prove these connections). The terrorist attacks of 9/11 would have continued & escalated as time progressed. American children, women, old men and businessmen died on 9/11, innocent civilians going about their daily peaceful lives, bothering no one. These barbaric, murderous Islamics came to our soil & perpetrated this atrocity. We did not attack them. However, now that they have attacked us, we must go after them, seek them out on their own soil & exact revenge for our murdered citizens. Lest they think they can do this again with impunity. Let theirs be the children who are not safe in their beds at night, for it shall not be America's children. Our way of life is peaceful, but they wanted a fight & they got one. And we will stay & fight until we have vanquished the enemy. Because we will not be safe until we do vanquish them. Better we fight them over there, than sit on our duffs, wring our hands, wimp out & wait to be attacked again. That's not the American way, is it? NO, I THINK NOT.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Yaro, posted 08-22-2005 11:20 AM Yaro has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Chiroptera, posted 08-22-2005 5:27 PM FairWitness has replied
 Message 34 by Yaro, posted 08-22-2005 5:40 PM FairWitness has replied
 Message 44 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 6:28 PM FairWitness has not replied

FairWitness
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 308 (235651)
08-22-2005 5:45 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Chiroptera
08-22-2005 5:27 PM


Re: Why we are fighting in Iraq.
You would prefer to have MORE American children killed? You would rather have our children scared at night? This war must be fought & the Islamic fundamentalists are the ones who declared war, not the United States of America. Let the Islamic terrorists feel the full weight & pay the full price for the evil they have unleashed, not the innocent children of America. You can't find fault with that. These animals will kill every last one of us if we don't fight them, don't you understand what we're up against?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Chiroptera, posted 08-22-2005 5:27 PM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Chiroptera, posted 08-22-2005 5:47 PM FairWitness has replied

FairWitness
Inactive Member


Message 37 of 308 (235653)
08-22-2005 5:49 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Yaro
08-22-2005 5:40 PM


Re: Why we are fighting in Iraq.
Certainly. Anyone interested in learning what's going on in Iraq can read any number publications to back up my claims. I have no desire to list them all here, so you can pick them apart, & let the assault on my character & intelligence begin. Suffice it to say I can back up my views & opinions with hard data & facts.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Yaro, posted 08-22-2005 5:40 PM Yaro has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Chiroptera, posted 08-22-2005 5:51 PM FairWitness has replied
 Message 40 by Yaro, posted 08-22-2005 6:00 PM FairWitness has not replied

FairWitness
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 308 (235656)
08-22-2005 5:58 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Chiroptera
08-22-2005 5:47 PM


Re: Why we are fighting in Iraq.
I wasn't leveling an accusation at you, simply asking a question in response to your comment about my post. War is a horrible reality of life & I wish with all my heart that we did not have to be fighting at all. However, unless we all wish to convert to Islam, which I most certainly do not, we must fight. I'm not willing to surrender our way of life to evil, so if that means that the evil-doers' offspring must endure war wrought by their parents, so be it. Their parents' barbaric way of life & evil decisions are to blame for their miserable circmstances, not the USA.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Chiroptera, posted 08-22-2005 5:47 PM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 6:35 PM FairWitness has replied
 Message 80 by Chiroptera, posted 08-22-2005 9:11 PM FairWitness has replied

FairWitness
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 308 (235659)
08-22-2005 6:04 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Chiroptera
08-22-2005 5:51 PM


Re: This is too good to be true!
No, I am pro-war, all the way. I'm just not going to get into a posting contest about where all my information comes from. If you are truly pro-war, then you already KNOW all this information yourself. You don't need me to tell you where to get any of this information, the fact that you want me to enumerate where my information comes from, & that I am making the pro-war side look stupid reveals your true beliefs.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Chiroptera, posted 08-22-2005 5:51 PM Chiroptera has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Yaro, posted 08-22-2005 6:07 PM FairWitness has replied

FairWitness
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 308 (235671)
08-22-2005 6:35 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by Yaro
08-22-2005 6:07 PM


Re: This is too good to be true!
Yes, of course. But I am not interested in ad hominem attacks on my character or intelligence, if you get my drift. This is the first time I've posted on this forum. I was asked to drop in here by a friend who frequents this site. She thought I could add to the discussion about why we're in Iraq.
It's not very complicated in my estimation. We are under attack by Islamic fundamentalists who have decided to spread their brand of fanatical "religion" to the far corners of the globe. They want to impose their religion on all peoples throughout the world. Any & all of us who oppose them are to be killed. We, the American people, choose to defend ourselves & our way of life.
That is what this war is about.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Yaro, posted 08-22-2005 6:07 PM Yaro has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 6:46 PM FairWitness has replied

FairWitness
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 308 (235673)
08-22-2005 6:41 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by nator
08-22-2005 6:15 PM


Re: Another Tack
Nation building never works??????? Tell that to modern day Japan & Germany.
And any campaign statements made by President Bush regarding nation building pertained to Haiti, the former Yugoslavia, etc. The war against terrorism in the aftermath of 9/11 is an entirely different matter and you darn well know it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 6:15 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 7:01 PM FairWitness has replied
 Message 55 by FairWitness, posted 08-22-2005 7:21 PM FairWitness has not replied

FairWitness
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 308 (235674)
08-22-2005 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by nator
08-22-2005 6:35 PM


Re: Why we are fighting in Iraq.
Oh please!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 6:35 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 6:48 PM FairWitness has replied

FairWitness
Inactive Member


Message 52 of 308 (235683)
08-22-2005 7:05 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by nator
08-22-2005 6:35 PM


Re: Why we are fighting in Iraq.
This was printed in the Wall Street Journal over a year ago. I could post literally dozens of articles like this from numerous websites, sir. Are you willing to accept this as evidence?
PRINT WINDOW CLOSE WINDOW
REVIEW & OUTLOOK
Saddam's Files
New evidence of a link between Iraq and al Qaeda.
Thursday, May 27, 2004 12:01 a.m.
One thing we've learned about Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein is that the former dictator was a diligent record keeper. Coalition forces have found--literally--millions of documents. These papers are still being sorted, translated and absorbed, but they are already turning up new facts about Saddam's links to terrorism.
We realize that even raising this subject now is politically incorrect. It is an article of faith among war opponents that there were no links whatsoever--that "secular" Saddam and fundamentalist Islamic terrorists didn't mix. But John Ashcroft's press conference yesterday reminds us that the terror threat remains, and it seems especially irresponsible for journalists not to be open to new evidence. If the CIA was wrong about WMD, couldn't it have also missed Saddam's terror links?
One striking bit of new evidence is that the name Ahmed Hikmat Shakir appears on three captured rosters of officers in Saddam Fedayeen, the elite paramilitary group run by Saddam's son Uday and entrusted with doing much of the regime's dirty work. Our government sources, who have seen translations of the documents, say Shakir is listed with the rank of Lieutenant-Colonel.
This matters because if Shakir was an officer in the Fedayeen, it would establish a direct link between Iraq and the al Qaeda operatives who planned 9/11. Shakir was present at the January 2000 al Qaeda "summit" in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, at which the 9/11 attacks were planned. The U.S. has never been sure whether he was there on behalf of the Iraqi regime or whether he was an Iraqi Islamicist who hooked up with al Qaeda on his own.
It is possible that the Ahmed Hikmat Shakir listed on the Fedayeen rosters is a different man from the Iraqi of the same name with the proven al Qaeda connections. His identity awaits confirmation by al Qaeda operatives in U.S. custody or perhaps by other captured documents. But our sources tell us there is no questioning the authenticity of the three Fedayeen rosters. The chain of control is impeccable. The documents were captured by the U.S. military and have been in U.S. hands ever since.
As others have reported, at the time of the summit Shakir was working at the Kuala Lumpur airport, having obtained the job through an Iraqi intelligence agent at the Iraqi embassy. The four-day al Qaeda meeting was attended by Khalid al Midhar and Nawaz al Hamzi, who were at the controls of American Airlines Flight 77 when it crashed into the Pentagon. Also on hand were Ramzi bin al Shibh, the operational planner of the 9/11 attacks, and Tawfiz al Atash, a high-ranking Osama bin Laden lieutenant and mastermind of the USS Cole bombing. Shakir left Malaysia on January 13, four days after the summit concluded.
That's not the only connection between Shakir and al Qaeda. The Iraqi next turned up in Qatar, where he was arrested on September 17, 2001, six days after the attacks in the U.S. A search of his pockets and apartment uncovered such information as the phone numbers of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers' safe houses and contacts. Also found was information pertaining to a 1995 al Qaeda plot to blow up a dozen commercial airliners over the Pacific.
After a brief detention, our friends the Qataris inexplicably released Shakir, and on October 21 he flew to Amman, Jordan. The Jordanians promptly arrested him, but under pressure from the Iraqis (and Amnesty International, which questioned his detention) and with the acquiescence of the CIA, they let him go after three months. He was last seen heading home to Baghdad.
One of the mysteries of postwar Iraq is why the Bush Administration and our $40-billion-a-year intelligence services haven't devoted more resources to probing the links between Saddam's regime and al Qaeda. In his new book, "The Connection," Stephen Hayes of The Weekly Standard puts together all of the many strands of intriguing evidence that the two did do business together. There's no single "smoking gun," but there sure is a lot of smoke.
The reason to care goes beyond the prewar justification for toppling Saddam and relates directly to our current security. U.S. officials believe that American civilian Nicholas Berg was beheaded in Iraq recently by Abu Musab al-Zarkawi, who is closely linked to al Qaeda and was given high-level medical treatment and sanctuary by Saddam's government. The Baathists killing U.S. soldiers are clearly working with al Qaeda now; Saddam's files might show us how they linked up in the first place.
Copyright 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
PRINT WINDOW CLOSE WINDOW

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 6:35 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 7:21 PM FairWitness has replied
 Message 61 by Monk, posted 08-22-2005 7:40 PM FairWitness has replied

FairWitness
Inactive Member


Message 53 of 308 (235684)
08-22-2005 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by nator
08-22-2005 7:01 PM


Re: Another Tack
Because Saddam Hussein hated the USA, possessed the technology for developing WMD, if not the actual weapons themselves (although we've not yet found them), & wanted to bring us down. He wasn't beneath jumping into bed with terrorists to do it, and we've uncovered all kinds of evidence that he did just that. You don't want to accept that or believe that, any no amount of evidence I post here will convince you otherwise, so why should I bother arguing th point further with you? Perhaps we should just disagree on this point & move on to anouther issue.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 7:01 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 7:27 PM FairWitness has replied

FairWitness
Inactive Member


Message 54 of 308 (235685)
08-22-2005 7:13 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by nator
08-22-2005 6:48 PM


Re: Why we are fighting in Iraq.
I did post an article from the WSJ.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 6:48 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 7:39 PM FairWitness has not replied

FairWitness
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 308 (235687)
08-22-2005 7:21 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by FairWitness
08-22-2005 6:41 PM


Re: Another Tack
What would you call the elections they held in Iraq, a failure? How about the Constitution they're drafting, is that another failure? It is the height of ignorance to call these two FACTS, these two monumental achievements, failures. They are huge successes in NATION BUILDING, & whether it works or not remains to be seen. You are a very negative person to call it a failure before the Iraqi people have even had a chance to make their new found freedom & democracy a chance to work. They deserve that chance & I thank God you do not have the power to take that chance away from them. You need to read some books about the power of positive thinking. "Whether you think you can accomplish something or you think you can't, you're right either way.-Henry Ford"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by FairWitness, posted 08-22-2005 6:41 PM FairWitness has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 7:37 PM FairWitness has not replied

FairWitness
Inactive Member


Message 58 of 308 (235694)
08-22-2005 7:33 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by nator
08-22-2005 7:21 PM


Re: Why we are fighting in Iraq.
Because he's a crafty diabolical terrorist. Give the devil his ude for heaven's sake, he did pull off the attacks on 9/11, after all. He no longer has the freedom of movement he once had, he cannot go anywhere without being afraid of being captured. It's only a matter of time. I have close friends in the government responsible for thwarting terrorist attacks & believe me when I tell you, they're on the job. The American people would be astonished at the number of terrorist attacks that had been uncovered & stopped since 9/11/2001. Our government is protecting us as well as they can, & there's probably going to be another attack, but they have managed to stop a lot of them so far. Who cares whether we've captured bin Laden or not? He's just one piece of the puzzle, a very large piece, but not the whole piece by a any means.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 7:21 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 7:43 PM FairWitness has replied

FairWitness
Inactive Member


Message 65 of 308 (235701)
08-22-2005 7:48 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by nator
08-22-2005 7:27 PM


Re: Another Tack
Let's see what you have to say about these.
Reprinted from NewsMax.com
Saturday, April 17, 2004 2:10 p.m. EDT
King Abdullah: Al-Qaida WMDs Came From Syria
Jordan's King Abdullah revealed on Saturday that vehicles reportedly containing chemical weapons and poison gas that were part of a deadly al-Qaida bomb plot came from Syria, the country named by U.S. weapons inspector David Kay last year as a likely repository for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.
"It was a major, major operation. It would have decapitated the government," King Abdullah told the San Francisco Chronicle. Jordanian officials estimated that the death count could have been as high as 20,000 - seven times greater than the Sept. 11 attacks.
King Abdullah said that trucks containing 17.5 tons of explosives had come from Syria, though he took pains not to implicate Syrian President Bashir Assad in the al-Qaida plot, saying, "I'm completely confident that Bashir did not know about it."
In his testimony before Congress last year, weapons inspector Kay said U.S. satellite surveillance showed substantial vehicular traffic going from Iraq to Syria just prior to the U.S. attack on March 19, 2003.
While Kay said investigators couldn't be sure the cargo contained weapons of mass destruction, one of his top advisers described the evidence as "unquestionable."
"People below the Saddam-Hussein-and-his-sons level saw what was coming and decided the best thing to do was to destroy and disperse," said James Clapper in comments reported by the New York Times on Oct. 29. Clapper heads the National Imagery and Mapping Agency.
Israeli intelligence has long believed that after the U.S. delayed invasion plans to allow U.N. weapons inspectors time to search for Iraq's WMDs, Saddam moved the banned weapons to Syria, the only other country ruled by the Ba'ath Party.
On April 1, Jordanian officials announced the arrest of several terrorist suspects, saying they were still hunting for two cars filled with explosives.
Five days later, the State Department revealed that the attackers were linked to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian-based terrorist considered to be one of al-Qaida's most dangerous. One of Zarqawi's targets was the U.S. Embassy in Amman.
By Saturday morning European news services were quoting an unnamed Jordanian official, who revealed that the al-Qaida plotters planned to use weapons of mass destruction in the foiled attack.
"We found primary materials to make a chemical bomb which, if it had exploded, would have made nearly 20,000 deaths ... in an area of one square kilometre," the official told Agence France-Press.
Another operation planned by the network was to use "deadly gas against the US embassy and the prime minister's office in Amman," he added.
A car belonging to the al-Qaida plotters, containing a chemical bomb and poisonous gas, was intercepted just 75 miles from the Syrian border.
Reprinted from NewsMax.com
Saddam Confidant Linked to al-Qaida Group
NewsMax.com Wires
Thursday, Oct. 30, 2003
WASHINGTON — A top aide to Saddam Hussein is believed to be working with an al-Qaida-linked terrorist group to coordinate attacks in Iraq, says a senior defense official.
Two captured members of Ansar al-Islam have identified Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri as a force behind some of the attacks, the official said Wednesday, speaking on condition of anonymity.
It is the first solid evidence of links between remnants of Saddam's regime and the non-Iraqi fighters responsible for at least some of the attacks on U.S. forces and their Iraqi allies, the official said.
Pentagon officials say Ansar al-Islam, which operated in northern Iraq before its camp was destroyed during the war, poses one of the greatest threats in Iraq. Military commanders have said they believe hundreds of non-Iraqi fighters from Ansar have entered Iraq to fight the U.S.-led occupation, many of them through neighboring Iran.
Al-Douri is No. 6 on the most-wanted list of 55 Iraqis and was vice chairman of Saddam's Revolutionary Command Council. He was one of Saddam's few longtime confidants and his daughter was married to Saddam's son Odai, who was killed in a raid by U.S. forces in July.
NBC News first reported the al-Douri link to Ansar al-Islam Tuesday night. Asked Wednesday about the report, Pentagon spokesman Larry Di Rita said he did not know anything about it.
Attacks on American troops have surged this week to about 33 a day, up from 26 per day last week and 15 per day in early September. A series of car bombings in and near Baghdad this week killed more than three dozen people.
The New York Times reported Thursday that President Bush wanted to speed plans for putting Iraqi security forces on the streets of Baghdad and other areas where Americans have come under attack. The report, attributed to unidentified military and administration officials, said plan would mean arming 18- and 19-year-old Iraqis for security duty after only a few weeks of training.
U.S. officials have been searching for months for suspected links between Saddam loyalists and foreign fighters such as Ansar members. Bush and other U.S. officials have said they believe the bombings in Baghdad Monday were the work of Saddam loyalists, foreign fighters or both.
Pentagon officials say the Baghdad bombings, four explosions in different parts of the city in less than an hour, showed a level of sophistication they had not seen before. Di Rita said the bombings indicated coordination "at least at the regional level."
The defense official who discussed the al-Douri link said he did not know if the al-Douri-Ansar alliance was responsible for the Baghdad bombings. He said military officials don't know to what extent al-Douri was coordinating attacks with Ansar.
Earlier this month, American forces captured a top associate of al-Douri in the town of Baqouba north of Baghdad.
U.S. officials have said for at least two months they suspect al-Douri of coordinating attacks on Americans but had not previously linked him to Ansar.
Biowarfare
U.S. officials say Ansar al-Islam has links to al-Qaida and has experimented with producing crude biological and chemical weapons. The group operated in a small section of northern Iraq surrounded by Kurdish-controlled areas which were outside Saddam's control.
Kurdish officials have long alleged that Saddam's government helped Ansar, but U.S. officials have said they haven't yet found definitive proof of that.
2003 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Is America prepared for the next war?
Al-Qaeda
War on Terrorism
Bush Administration
Saddam Hussein/Iraq
GOP lawmaker: Saddam linked to 9/11
N.C. representative says 'evidence is clear'
NEW YORK (CNN) -- A Republican congressman from North Carolina told CNN on Wednesday that the "evidence is clear" that Iraq was involved in the terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001.
"Saddam Hussein and people like him were very much involved in 9/11," Rep. Robin Hayes said.
Told no investigation had ever found evidence to link Saddam and 9/11, Hayes responded, "I'm sorry, but you must have looked in the wrong places."
Hayes, the vice chairman of the House subcommittee on terrorism, said legislators have access to evidence others do not.
Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, said that Saddam was a dangerous man, but when asked about Hayes' statement, would not link the deposed Iraqi ruler to the terrorist attacks on New York, the Pentagon and Pennsylvania.
"I haven't seen compelling evidence of that," McCain, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told CNN.
On Tuesday night, President Bush mentioned the September 11 attacks five times during his address on the war in Iraq, prompting criticism from congressional Democrats. (Full story)
The 9/11 commission, appointed by Bush, presented its final report a year ago, saying that Osama bin Laden had been "willing to explore possibilities for cooperation with Iraq" at one time in the 1990s but that the al Qaeda leader "had in fact been sponsoring anti-Saddam Islamists in Iraqi Kurdistan, and sought to attract them into his Islamic army."
The 520-page report said investigators found no evidence that any "contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational relationship."
"Nor have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United States," it said.
President Bush said in September 2003 that "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11 [attacks]."
Nevertheless, Hayes insisted that the connection between al Qaeda and Saddam and "folks who work for him" has been seen "time and time again."
"Nobody disputes 9/11," Hayes said. "They would do it again if not prevented."
Find this article at:
Error
SAVE THIS | EMAIL THIS | Close
Check the box to include the list of links referenced in the article.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by nator, posted 08-22-2005 7:27 PM nator has not replied

FairWitness
Inactive Member


Message 74 of 308 (235723)
08-22-2005 8:49 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Monk
08-22-2005 7:40 PM


Re: Why we are fighting in Iraq.
See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil ... until they fly jets into more buildings, then what will they say?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Monk, posted 08-22-2005 7:40 PM Monk has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Monk, posted 08-22-2005 9:19 PM FairWitness has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024