Newly declassified documents proves Saddam tied to terrorists

[Socio]

Saddam tied to terrorists

Newly declassified documents captured in Iraq show that Saddam Hussein's regime had extensive ties with a variety of Islamist and other terrorist groups, in some cases dating back to the early 1990s. Saddam's Iraqi Intelligence Service (or Mukhabarat) established a working relationship with Egyptian Islamic Jihad, whose leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, later merged the group with al Qaeda, according to a new report by the Institute for Defense Analyses. In addition, the Mukhabarat trained scores of non-Iraqi Arabs to attack Israel. The new report contains copies of captured Iraqi documents that provide what may be the most detailed picture ever of Baghdad's support for terrorism.

In fact, the al Qaeda connection only scratches the surface of Saddam's terrorist ties. As Rowan Scarborough reported in this newspaper on Friday, the IDA report reveals that Saddam provided millions of dollars and arms to Palestinian terror groups and trained Palestinians in Iraqi terror camps.

Now maybe the anti-war, Bush lies mongers can STFU and we can concentrate on getting it done and getting the hell out, secure in the knowledge we had more than sufficient justification to be there in the first place.

 

[StageLeft]

I think you have a learning disorder. In any case

In fact, the al Qaeda connection only scratches the surface of Saddam's terrorist ties. As Rowan Scarborough reported in this newspaper on Friday, the IDA report reveals that Saddam provided millions of dollars and arms to Palestinian terror groups and trained Palestinians in Iraqi terror camps.

welcome to many years ago. This is not news. He paid $10k/pop, I think, to people who'd kill Israelis or something. How that relates to the reason for the war, an extensive WMD program, I have no idea and neither do you, but respect for reality doesn't seem to be one of your crutches, so continue on.

 

[cliftonite]

Originally posted by: Socio
Saddam tied to terrorists

Newly declassified documents captured in Iraq show that Saddam Hussein's regime had extensive ties with a variety of Islamist and other terrorist groups, in some cases dating back to the early 1990s. Saddam's Iraqi Intelligence Service (or Mukhabarat) established a working relationship with Egyptian Islamic Jihad, whose leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, later merged the group with al Qaeda, according to a new report by the Institute for Defense Analyses. In addition, the Mukhabarat trained scores of non-Iraqi Arabs to attack Israel. The new report contains copies of captured Iraqi documents that provide what may be the most detailed picture ever of Baghdad's support for terrorism.

In fact, the al Qaeda connection only scratches the surface of Saddam's terrorist ties. As Rowan Scarborough reported in this newspaper on Friday, the IDA report reveals that Saddam provided millions of dollars and arms to Palestinian terror groups and trained Palestinians in Iraqi terror camps.

Now maybe the anti-war, Bush lies mongers can STFU and we can concentrate on getting it done and getting the hell out, secure in the knowledge we had more than sufficient justification to be there in the first place.

All of this is justification for the war?

 

[Moonbeam]

It's even worse than that. Iraq had ties to even bigger terrorist nations, like the United States.

 

[NeoV]

um...yah, ok

Let's assume for one second that this 'report' is accurate.

It changes what exactly? So the mess that is Iraq now is ok because Saddam supported terrorist acts in Israel?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Socio
Saddam tied to terrorists

Newly declassified documents captured in Iraq show that Saddam Hussein's regime had extensive ties with a variety of Islamist and other terrorist groups, in some cases dating back to the early 1990s. Saddam's Iraqi Intelligence Service (or Mukhabarat) established a working relationship with Egyptian Islamic Jihad, whose leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, later merged the group with al Qaeda, according to a new report by the Institute for Defense Analyses. In addition, the Mukhabarat trained scores of non-Iraqi Arabs to attack Israel. The new report contains copies of captured Iraqi documents that provide what may be the most detailed picture ever of Baghdad's support for terrorism.

In fact, the al Qaeda connection only scratches the surface of Saddam's terrorist ties. As Rowan Scarborough reported in this newspaper on Friday, the IDA report reveals that Saddam provided millions of dollars and arms to Palestinian terror groups and trained Palestinians in Iraqi terror camps.

Now maybe the anti-war, Bush lies mongers can STFU and we can concentrate on getting it done and getting the hell out, secure in the knowledge we had more than sufficient justification to be there in the first place.

All this information was already known. Of course this in no way gives us sufficient justification to attack Iraq.

This has all been talked about and explained on here literally dozens (if not hundreds of times). I would explain it to you again, but I know that it wouldn't do anything to put even the slightest dent in what you think.

When I talk to people about Bush, everyone always notices that his approval ratings sit in the 20%'s somewhere. We always wonder who at this point could possibly still be supporting this mongoloid, and who could possibly still be supporting his retarded war? Now I know, it's people like you. You'll never change because you've already decided you're right.

 

[yuppiejr]

Originally posted by: Socio
Saddam tied to terrorists

Newly declassified documents captured in Iraq show that Saddam Hussein's regime had extensive ties with a variety of Islamist and other terrorist groups, in some cases dating back to the early 1990s. Saddam's Iraqi Intelligence Service (or Mukhabarat) established a working relationship with Egyptian Islamic Jihad, whose leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, later merged the group with al Qaeda, according to a new report by the Institute for Defense Analyses. In addition, the Mukhabarat trained scores of non-Iraqi Arabs to attack Israel. The new report contains copies of captured Iraqi documents that provide what may be the most detailed picture ever of Baghdad's support for terrorism.

In fact, the al Qaeda connection only scratches the surface of Saddam's terrorist ties. As Rowan Scarborough reported in this newspaper on Friday, the IDA report reveals that Saddam provided millions of dollars and arms to Palestinian terror groups and trained Palestinians in Iraqi terror camps.

Now maybe the anti-war, Bush lies mongers can STFU and we can concentrate on getting it done and getting the hell out, secure in the knowledge we had more than sufficient justification to be there in the first place.

I hope you brought your asbestos undies. 🙂

Thanks for sharing, the bored hippie boomer / college socialist train is heading this way to trash you up one side and down the other. We're past the point of logic and reason in this debate, the anti-war folks are more interested in hating anything war/Bush related regardless of what evidence you provide that could justify the action. It's sort of like arguing with a global warming zealot who is convinced there is no room for debate on the subject since Al Gore said so...

Anyway, thanks for posting - interesting read.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: yuppiejr

Originally posted by: Socio
Saddam tied to terrorists

Newly declassified documents captured in Iraq show that Saddam Hussein's regime had extensive ties with a variety of Islamist and other terrorist groups, in some cases dating back to the early 1990s. Saddam's Iraqi Intelligence Service (or Mukhabarat) established a working relationship with Egyptian Islamic Jihad, whose leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, later merged the group with al Qaeda, according to a new report by the Institute for Defense Analyses. In addition, the Mukhabarat trained scores of non-Iraqi Arabs to attack Israel. The new report contains copies of captured Iraqi documents that provide what may be the most detailed picture ever of Baghdad's support for terrorism.

In fact, the al Qaeda connection only scratches the surface of Saddam's terrorist ties. As Rowan Scarborough reported in this newspaper on Friday, the IDA report reveals that Saddam provided millions of dollars and arms to Palestinian terror groups and trained Palestinians in Iraqi terror camps.

Now maybe the anti-war, Bush lies mongers can STFU and we can concentrate on getting it done and getting the hell out, secure in the knowledge we had more than sufficient justification to be there in the first place.

I hope you brought your asbestos undies. 🙂

Thanks for sharing, the bored hippie boomer / college socialist train is heading this way to trash you up one side and down the other. We're past the point of logic and reason in this debate, the anti-war folks are more interested in hating anything war/Bush related regardless of what evidence you provide that could justify the action. It's sort of like arguing with a global warming zealot who is convinced there is no room for debate on the subject since Al Gore said so...

Anyway, thanks for posting - interesting read.

If idiots weren't flame proof they wouldn't be idiots.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: yuppiejr

I hope you brought your asbestos undies. 🙂

Thanks for sharing, the bored hippie boomer / college socialist train is heading this way to trash you up one side and down the other. We're past the point of logic and reason in this debate, the anti-war folks are more interested in hating anything war/Bush related regardless of what evidence you provide that could justify the action. It's sort of like arguing with a global warming zealot who is convinced there is no room for debate on the subject since Al Gore said so...

Anyway, thanks for posting - interesting read.

FART

 

[yuppiejr]

/lightmatch

 

[Deleted member 4644]

Let's just make ONE THING VERY CLEAR.

The United States of America, including the CIA, have extensive links (working relationships) to Islamic terrorist organizations too, esp dating back to the 1980s and 1990s.

If you look hard enough, you can find "proof" of ANYTHING.

But the REALITY is that Saddam never liked Islamic terrorists much, and generally suppressed them more than the average Arab leader. That is a FACT.

 

[Moonbeam]

Only a great and moral nation like the United States kills thousands of its soldiers and spends trillions to remove a bad guy like Saddam Hussein.

Either that or there's a lot of money to be made in war on the Republican side.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Socio

Now maybe the anti-war, Bush lies mongers can STFU and we can concentrate on getting it done and getting the hell out, secure in the knowledge we had more than sufficient justification to be there in the first place.

The Washington Times is an ultra right neocon propoganda dispenser with nothing to say and far too many words to say it.

Your Traitor In Chief is a lying piece of shit. He and his criminal cabal are guilty of murder, treason, torture and starting a fucking war based entirely on LIES that, to date, has cost the lives of 4,000 American troops, left tens of thousands more American troops wounded, scarred and disabled for life and squandered trillions of dollars of American taxpayers' money that COULD HAVE been used for REAL defense purposes in Afghanistan (you remember... the place where the REAL enemy is), along with REAL improvments in national security, needed upgrades for our infrastructure, including roads, bridges, power and fuel processing, education, medical needs and so very much more.

The only liars are those who still support this horrible war of LIES in Iraq, and it's well past time for them to STFU so we can get BACK to getting things done.

Is your nick short for Sociopath? :roll:

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Only a great and moral nation like the United States kills thousands of its soldiers and spends trillions to remove a bad guy like Saddam Hussein.

Either that or there's a lot of money to be made in war on the Republican side.

Just on the Republican side?

 

[Lemon law]

Newly declassified history books show that Reagan sold arms to the Contras and the Iranians. And funneled money, arms , and training to terrorists groups in Afghanistan. And GWB is funding various terrorist groups even as I write this post.

There is no doubt Saddam Hussein was a totally rotten human being. But in terms of sheer evil, I think the judgment of history will be than GWB was far far more rotten. And we do not even know the half of it yet.

 

[dphantom]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Newly declassified history books show that Reagan sold arms to the Contras and the Iranians. And funneled money, arms , and training to terrorists groups in Afghanistan. And GWB is funding various terrorist groups even as I write this post.

There is no doubt Saddam Hussein was a totally rotten human being. But in terms of sheer evil, I think the judgment of history will be than GWB was far far more rotten. And we do not even know the half of it yet.

Worse than someone who used poison gas on his own people??? :disgust:

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: dphantom

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Newly declassified history books show that Reagan sold arms to the Contras and the Iranians. And funneled money, arms , and training to terrorists groups in Afghanistan. And GWB is funding various terrorist groups even as I write this post.

There is no doubt Saddam Hussein was a totally rotten human being. But in terms of sheer evil, I think the judgment of history will be than GWB was far far more rotten. And we do not even know the half of it yet.

Worse than someone who used poison gas on his own people??? :disgust:

Actually, I don't think Bush is going to have been responsible for the same number of deaths, though if we break it down in a deaths per/year, I think the numbers more closely gel.

 

[fskimospy]

I also love the evolving nature of the war justifications by the apologists. The terrorist thing mirrors the WMD thing in a lot of ways.
It starts off...
1.) Saddam has WMD's and he's going to destroy us with them! (with chemical/biological dispensing remote controlled planes no less... hahaha) We must invade/capture/execute him!
2.) Saddam might not have had WMDs, but he had WMD programs! The war is still totally justified, invade/capture/execute!
3.) Saddam might not have had WMD programs, but he would have made some if the sanctions were lifted! The war is still totally justified, invade/capture/execute!

For terrorists:
1.) Saddam was trying to give WMDs to terrorists to destroy America! We must invade/capture/execute him!
2.) Saddam might not have been giving terrorists WMDs to destroy America, but he was working with Al-Qaeda to attack us! The war is still totally justified, invade/capture/execute!
3.) Saddam might not have been working with Al-Qaeda to attack us, but some people that eventually joined up with Al-Qaeda trained in his country for awhile, and he helped attack another country that we like with terrorists. The war is still totally justified, invade/capture/execute!

I can't wait to see what the debate is like in 2012 or so. I imagine it will be something like "Saddam's nephew was stealing cable! Invade!"

 

[UberNeuman]

Anyone willing to bet the OP will be soon posting about the spent shells left over from the first Iraq war as "WMD'S DISCOVERED IN IRAQ!"

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: dphantom
Worse than someone who used poison gas on his own people??? :disgust:

In the history of civilized countries, who would DO such a thing?

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: UberNeuman
Anyone willing to bet the OP will be soon posting about the spent shells left over from the first Iraq war as "WMD'S DISCOVERED IN IRAQ!"

Haha Maybe he can even send us to the amazon.com link for the Iraqi bomb maker book.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: Deleted member 4644
Let's just make ONE THING VERY CLEAR.

The United States of America, including the CIA, have extensive links (working relationships) to Islamic terrorist organizations too, esp dating back to the 1980s and 1990s.

If you look hard enough, you can find "proof" of ANYTHING.

But the REALITY is that Saddam never liked Islamic terrorists much, and generally suppressed them more than the average Arab leader. That is a FACT.

Bingo. That's the first thing that came to my mind. The US federal government has far more ties to al-Qaeda than Saddam ever did. They have far more WMDs, too (including the ones we supplied to Saddam).

Who do you think armed al-Qaeda and the Taliban in the 1970s/1980s? We helped put them into power in Afghanistan. Unfortunately our little ant-farm experiment backfired, and we had to go back in 2001 to fix our mistakes.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
I also love the evolving nature of the war justifications by the apologists. The terrorist thing mirrors the WMD thing in a lot of ways.
It starts off...
1.) Saddam has WMD's and he's going to destroy us with them! (with chemical/biological dispensing remote controlled planes no less... hahaha) We must invade/capture/execute him!
2.) Saddam might not have had WMDs, but he had WMD programs! The war is still totally justified, invade/capture/execute!
3.) Saddam might not have had WMD programs, but he would have made some if the sanctions were lifted! The war is still totally justified, invade/capture/execute!

For terrorists:
1.) Saddam was trying to give WMDs to terrorists to destroy America! We must invade/capture/execute him!
2.) Saddam might not have been giving terrorists WMDs to destroy America, but he was working with Al-Qaeda to attack us! The war is still totally justified, invade/capture/execute!
3.) Saddam might not have been working with Al-Qaeda to attack us, but some people that eventually joined up with Al-Qaeda trained in his country for awhile, and he helped attack another country that we like with terrorists. The war is still totally justified, invade/capture/execute!

I can't wait to see what the debate is like in 2012 or so. I imagine it will be something like "Saddam's nephew was stealing cable! Invade!"

Equally I love the ouright dismissal of anything that can justify the war. This debate is pointless because both sides will never cave. Saddam could be proven to be the second coming of Jesus and the pro-occupation crowd will dismiss him as a devil in disguise. And on the opposite side Saddam could be proven to be Bin Ladens lover and helped AQ blow up the twin towers and the anti-war crowd will dismiss it as too little too late.

Pointless really.

 

[cliftonite]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: eskimospy
I also love the evolving nature of the war justifications by the apologists. The terrorist thing mirrors the WMD thing in a lot of ways.
It starts off...
1.) Saddam has WMD's and he's going to destroy us with them! (with chemical/biological dispensing remote controlled planes no less... hahaha) We must invade/capture/execute him!
2.) Saddam might not have had WMDs, but he had WMD programs! The war is still totally justified, invade/capture/execute!
3.) Saddam might not have had WMD programs, but he would have made some if the sanctions were lifted! The war is still totally justified, invade/capture/execute!

For terrorists:
1.) Saddam was trying to give WMDs to terrorists to destroy America! We must invade/capture/execute him!
2.) Saddam might not have been giving terrorists WMDs to destroy America, but he was working with Al-Qaeda to attack us! The war is still totally justified, invade/capture/execute!
3.) Saddam might not have been working with Al-Qaeda to attack us, but some people that eventually joined up with Al-Qaeda trained in his country for awhile, and he helped attack another country that we like with terrorists. The war is still totally justified, invade/capture/execute!

I can't wait to see what the debate is like in 2012 or so. I imagine it will be something like "Saddam's nephew was stealing cable! Invade!"

Equally I love the ouright dismissal of anything that can justify the war. This debate is pointless because both sides will never cave. Saddam could be proven to be the second coming of Jesus and the pro-occupation crowd will dismiss him as a devil in disguise. And on the opposite side Saddam could be proven to be Bin Ladens lover and helped AQ blow up the twin towers and the anti-war crowd will dismiss it as too little too late.
Pointless really.

I am willing to bet that would turn out to be false.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: cliftonite

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: eskimospy
I also love the evolving nature of the war justifications by the apologists. The terrorist thing mirrors the WMD thing in a lot of ways.
It starts off...
1.) Saddam has WMD's and he's going to destroy us with them! (with chemical/biological dispensing remote controlled planes no less... hahaha) We must invade/capture/execute him!
2.) Saddam might not have had WMDs, but he had WMD programs! The war is still totally justified, invade/capture/execute!
3.) Saddam might not have had WMD programs, but he would have made some if the sanctions were lifted! The war is still totally justified, invade/capture/execute!

For terrorists:
1.) Saddam was trying to give WMDs to terrorists to destroy America! We must invade/capture/execute him!
2.) Saddam might not have been giving terrorists WMDs to destroy America, but he was working with Al-Qaeda to attack us! The war is still totally justified, invade/capture/execute!
3.) Saddam might not have been working with Al-Qaeda to attack us, but some people that eventually joined up with Al-Qaeda trained in his country for awhile, and he helped attack another country that we like with terrorists. The war is still totally justified, invade/capture/execute!

I can't wait to see what the debate is like in 2012 or so. I imagine it will be something like "Saddam's nephew was stealing cable! Invade!"

Equally I love the ouright dismissal of anything that can justify the war. This debate is pointless because both sides will never cave. Saddam could be proven to be the second coming of Jesus and the pro-occupation crowd will dismiss him as a devil in disguise. And on the opposite side Saddam could be proven to be Bin Ladens lover and helped AQ blow up the twin towers and the anti-war crowd will dismiss it as too little too late.
Pointless really.

I am willing to bet that would turn out to be false.

Oh jesus it was a hypothetical and you bothered to respond? Thank you for proving my point.