Add Reply
Related Information to Post War IraqPost War Iraq - Page 90 of 171
QUOTE Oh, the media certainly isn't - Page 90 - Politics, Business, Civil, History - Posted: 28th Mar, 2006 - 2:56am
Posts: 1362 - Views: 101498
versus 
So, now that the USA left Iraq can the country rebuild herself and become stable? Related Information to Post War Iraq
Post War Iraq - Page 90
Now here is an unexpected twist that makes you wonder about the 'support' Russia tends to give during wartime or anytime for that matter. I wonder, did they feel it necessary to give Saddam a fair fighting advantage as he did not have the technology of the US / UK forces:
Report: Russia Gave Iraq Details About War
WASHINGTON - Iraqi documents captured by U.S. forces in 2003 say Russian intelligence had sources inside the American military that enabled it to feed information about U.S. troop movements and battle plans to Saddam Hussein.
Ref. https://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060325/ap_on_..._pe/us_iraq_war
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 3231 
100%
Sponsored Links:
Iraq War Post
This is a very interesting bit of information. I've read several reports about the "Russian Link" to Saddam, and most of them detail the fact that much of the information Iraq received from the Link was actually inaccurate or false. It makes me wonder if it was a deliberate misinformation campaign used by the US.
International Level: Ambassador / Political Participation: 595 59.5%
Post War Iraq History & Civil Business Politics
What is also interesting is that Russia is vehemently denying all these allegations. So how do we believe? Did Russia really provide war intelligence to Saddam? Or did they provide false intelligence to assist the US led coalition? Or did the US make this false claim to bring Russia's intelligence into question? We may never find out. 
International Level: Envoy / Political Participation: 241 24.1%
Page 90 Iraq War Post
There is a lot more information contained in the referenced papers.
https://abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCo...=1734490&page=1
While this report covers the Russian activity, it also covers some things that various anti-war people insist didn't exist.
| QUOTE |
| "Osama bin Laden Contact With Iraq" A newly released prewar Iraqi document indicates that an official representative of Saddam Hussein's government met with Osama bin Laden in Sudan on February 19, 1995, after receiving approval from Saddam Hussein. Bin Laden asked that Iraq broadcast the lectures of Suleiman al Ouda, a radical Saudi preacher, and suggested "carrying out joint operations against foreign forces" in Saudi Arabia. According to the document, Saddam's presidency was informed of the details of the meeting on March 4, 1995, and Saddam agreed to dedicate a program for them on the radio. The document states that further "development of the relationship and cooperation between the two parties to be left according to what's open [in the future] based on dialogue and agreement on other ways of cooperation." The Sudanese were informed about the agreement to dedicate the program on the radio. |
The 9/11 commission reported this link as well. Yet various people still claim that there couldn't have been any link between the two.
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 854 85.4%
Iraq War Post
This doesn't prove there was a link between Saddam and Bin Ladenl. In the abc report, there were notes which clearly place this evidence in doubt. One of the documents was hand written with no official seal and the other was from an unreliable source.
| QUOTE |
| Editor's Note: The controversial claim that Osama bin Laden was cooperating with Saddam Hussein is an ongoing matter of intense debate. While the assertions contained in this document clearly support the claim, the sourcing is questionable - I.e., an unnamed Afghan "informant" reporting on a conversation with another Afghan "consul." The date of the document - four days after 9/11 - is worth noting but without further corroboration, this document is of limited evidentiary value. Editor's Note: This document is handwritten and has no official seal. The document does not establish that the two parties did in fact enter into an operational relationship. |
Infact, it is well known, and on the record, that Bin Laden despised Saddam. I've read interviews where he has quite bluntly admitted this. It is quite possible that some elements within the Iraqi government held talks with people associated with Bin Laden's group. I wouldn't be suprised if a lot of the countries in the Middle East had these meetings covertly.
I doubt we will ever know the truth of the Russian intelligence claims.
It is interesting to note that a lot of the deaths that are now occuring in Iraq appear to be from death squads within the Shiiite dominated Iraqi military. I have a feeling Iran could have a role to play in securing Iraq. I'm not sure if that is a good thing, but the US have realised this and now appear to be interested in holding talks with Iran at an offical level.
International Level: Negotiator / Political Participation: 453 45.3%
Post Date: 27th Mar, 2006 - 5:53pm / Post ID: #
NOTE: News [?]
Post War Iraq
Freed British Peace Activist Norman Kember Tells World Not to Forget Plight of "Ordinary Iraqi People"
The three recently freed kidnapped members of the Christian Peacemaker Teams have returned home. Last week, Norman Kember of Britain, and Canadians James Loney and Harmeet Singh Sooden were found after nearly four months in captivity. We play Kember's statement to the media shortly after arriving in London.
Ref. https://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/27/1450201
Post War Iraq - Page 90
Oh, the media certainly isn't biased. After all, these people were "found" just last week. Most other news stories say that they were freed.
US military members risked their lives to save these people. Not one of them have even acknowledged this fact! In fact, they immediately turned around and blamed the US military for the fact that they were kidnapped!
Now let's discuss the little message that they have offered here. "Don't forget the ordinary Iraqi people." I am reading more and more that the majority of Iraqi people, outside of the 4 provinces that Iran and Syria keep stirred up with terrorists, are quite happy that the US toppled Saddam. Of course, since almost all MainStream Media (MSM) members do all their reporting from the balconies of hotels, what do you expect to hear?
Laura Ingraham visited Iraq recently. She reports that almost every Iraqi person she spoke to expressed appreciation for the US military. Some members of the US Congress (including Democrats) have reported the same thing after their visits to Iraq. The internationally famous blog, "Iraq the Model" also reports some of this.
Finally one thing I would like to note. The "WAR" in Iraq ended in April 2003. All of the stuff since then has been terrorists that are recruited by, shipped in by, and supported by Iran, Syria, and other nearby countries to disrupt any possibility of a Democracy being formed in Iraq.
Why are these countries so worried about that possibility? Why is the MSM so complicit in supporting the aims and desires of the terrorists? Why do so many Democrats in the US literally want the US to fail in Iraq?
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 854 85.4%
Post War Iraq Politics Business Civil & History - Page 90
| QUOTE |
| Oh, the media certainly isn't biased. After all, these people were "found" just last week. Most other news stories say that they were freed. |
Actually the only report I have seen on this man was about him thanking the US military. I"m not sure how the US media have reported it but Australian media have all acknowledged it was because of a US military operation he was freed.
I certainly don't believe that you can blame the US military for a kidnapping. But what you can say is that Iraqis and insurgents involved in this violence do not want occupying forces in Iraq. This of course isn't the sole reason for violence.
Nighthawk makes an excellent point about the need for more journalists to report on the ground. Certainly there are a brave few who do this, but they are often labelled anti-American or sympathetic towards insurgents, which is nonsense.
There is no doubt the Iraqi people are happy Saddam has been removed, why wouldn't they be? Shiite dominate regions backed by Iran would also be happy the tyrant has gone. But the question that has to be asked, was removing one tyrant worth the loss of life of well over 100,000 people by conservative estimates. And, was the removal of one tyrant through force worth this mess Iraq now finds itself in? It's far worse now then it was under Saddam, which was pretty bad. And the world is NOT a safer place because of the Iraq invasion, I would argue the contrary.
To suggest the media is complicit in supporting the aims and desires of the terrorists is very unfair mate. You paint a rosy picture of Iraq where the media can only picture disaster. The truth is Iraq is a nightmare. It is now the most dangerous place in the world. This wasn't the goal of the coalition, but their gross mismanagement of the invasion and inability to secure the country has allowed this anarchy. An occupying force cannot wash its hands of the responsibility to secure and manage the country it occupies. The moment it does this it should leave.
Another mis-reported fact is that terrorists are doing all the killing. The majority of the killing that now occurs in Iraq comes from death squads within the Iraqi police and their military forces. These are forces that are managed by Iraqi officials, who are often trained or have to answer to Coalition forces. These death squads are fuelling Sunni reprisals, and vice versa, which is sparking fears of a sectarian civil war, something Iraq has never had.
I would like to draw attention to the Coalition's Commander in Chief George W Bush, who was just recently questioned by an American journalist about Iraq. (see transcript below)
These comments are remarkable for the President of the US or any country to make. They are riddled with lies and a strange take on history/reality.
Bush led a war/invasion in Iraq and now he is trying to link it with Afghanistan. He even said the Taliban, who were providing a safe haven for al-Qaeda, trained in Iraq!
It also parrots the tired old lie that Iraq tried to prevent Hans Blix's weapons inspection team from doing their job. The Swede has publicly scoffed at these claims. Bush also said Iraq wasn't disclosing its weapons program. We know they were, and we now also know they had NOTHING to disclose.
And then there is a suggestion he went to the UN Security Council? Isn't that the body he circumvented with a coalition of three countries (and token support from a few others), to wage this war "with or without" them?
Maybe this complete disregard for reality gives us a clue as to why Iraq has failed so dismally.
| QUOTE |
| HELEN THOMAS: I'd like to ask you, Mr. President, your decision to invade Iraq has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans and Iraqis, wounds of Americans and Iraqis for a lifetime. Every reason given, publicly at least, has turned out not to be true. My question is, why did you really want to go to war? From the moment you stepped into the White House, from your Cabinet -- your Cabinet officers, intelligence people, and so forth -- what was your real reason? You have said it wasn't oil -- quest for oil, it hasn't been Israel, or anything else. What was it? PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: I think your premise, in all due respect to your question and to you as a lifelong journalist, is that, you know, I didn't want war. To assume I wanted war is just flat wrong, Helen, in all due respect -- HELEN THOMAS: -- everything I've heard -- PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Excuse me, excuse me. No president wants war. Everything you may have heard is that, but it's just simply not true. My attitude about the defense of this country changed on September the 11th. We -- when we got attacked, I vowed then and there to use every asset at my disposal to protect the American people. Our foreign policy changed on that day, Helen. You know, we used to think we were secure because of oceans and previous diplomacy, but we realized on September the 11th, 2001, that killers could destroy innocent life. And I'm never going to forget it. And I'm never going to forget the vow I made to the American people that we will do everything in our power to protect our people. Part of that meant to make sure that we didn't allow people to provide safe haven to an enemy. And that's why I went into Iraq -- hold on for a second -- HELEN THOMAS: They didn't do anything to you or to our country. PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Look -- excuse me for a second, please. Excuse me for a second. They did. The Taliban provided safe haven for al-Qaeda. That's where al-Qaeda trained -- HELEN THOMAS: I'm talking about Iraq - PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Helen, excuse me. That's where -- Afghanistan provided safe haven for al-Qaeda. That's where they trained. That's where they plotted. That's where they planned the attacks that killed thousands of innocent Americans. I also saw a threat in Iraq. I was hoping to solve this problem diplomatically. That's why I went to the Security Council; that's why it was important to pass 1441, which was unanimously passed. And the world said, `Disarm, disclose, or face serious consequences' -- HELEN THOMAS: -- go to war -- PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: -- and therefore, we worked with the world, we worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world. And when he chose to deny inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did, and the world is safer for it. |
International Level: Negotiator / Political Participation: 453 45.3%
TOPIC: Post War Iraq