Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iraq: Baathists 'disown al-Qaeda'(To open "Dialogue" With Iraq Government!)
ADNKronos International ^ | 8-22-07 | ADNKronos

Posted on 08/22/2007 9:56:13 AM PDT by tcrlaf

Baghdad, 22 August (AKI) - The leader of Iraq's banned Baath party, Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, has decided to join efforts by the Iraqi authorities to fight al-Qaeda, one of the party's former top officials, Abu Wisam al-Jashaami, told pan-Arab daily Al Hayat.

"AlDouri has decided to sever ties with al-Qaeda and sign up to the programme of the national resistance, which includes routing Islamist terrorists and opening up dialogue with the Baghdad government and foreign forces," al-Jashaami said.

Al-Douri has decided to deal directly with US forces in Iraq, according to al-Jashaami. He figures in the 55-card deck of "most wanted" officials from the former Iraqi regime issued by the US government.

In return, for cooperating in the fight against al-Qaeda, al-Douri has asked for guarantees over his men's safety and for an end to Iraqi army attacks on his militias.

Recent weeks have seen a first step in this direction, when Baathist fighters cooperated with Iraqi government forces in hunting down al-Qaeda operatives in the volatile Diyala province and in several districts of the capital, Baghadad.

Although the Baath party was officially banned after US-led forces in 2003 toppled the regime of Iraq's late president Saddam Hussein, its members have fought in the insurgency.

Until just a few months ago, former Baath party members were helping Islamists carry out terrorist attacks against US forces in Iraq.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: alqaedainiraq; alqeada; baathists; baathparty; iraq; terror
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 next last
To: tcrlaf
"Could we have another round of antacid for the Democrat side of the aisle please?"

DNC Daily Talking Points:

Iraq is a disaster.

We're losing in Iraq.

We can't win in Iraq.

The Surge can't work.

The Surge isn't working.

There's a civil war in Iraq.

The Surge isn't working that well.

The Surge is working but Iraq doesn't have a government.

Even if we win in Iraq we can't stay there forever!!!

Land shark!

21 posted on 08/22/2007 10:16:22 AM PDT by TigersEye (This is the age of the death of reason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Obadiah

Mental Health Clinics across America warned to prepare for an incoming surge of leftist Democrats with Exploding Head Syndrome!


22 posted on 08/22/2007 10:17:47 AM PDT by tcrlaf (You can lead a Liberal to LOGIC, but you can't make it THINK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Obadiah
He has got to be one of the ugliest people I have ever set eyes on.

Carolyn

23 posted on 08/22/2007 10:18:45 AM PDT by CDHart ("It's too late to work within the system and too early to shoot the b@#$%^&s."--Claire Wolfe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf
This is a very positive development.

I always that the so-called "de-Baathification" strategy was stupid.

If the Baathists make a deal with the ruling Shiite parties, Iraq will be well on the road to stability.

24 posted on 08/22/2007 10:18:46 AM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

A LOT of the attacks on American troops were done by Baathists/Criminal gangs PAID by Iran, AQ and others.

They were for sale to whomever had the highest dollar.

Now that things are changing on the ground, they see which side they need to be on. They may be murderous thugs, but they aren’t stupid...


25 posted on 08/22/2007 10:23:39 AM PDT by tcrlaf (You can lead a Liberal to LOGIC, but you can't make it THINK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf
A LOT of the attacks on American troops were done by Baathists/Criminal gangs PAID by Iran, AQ and others.

I seriously doubt Iran paid any Baathists. Do you have sources to support that contention?

That the Baathists cooperated in with AQ is certain, though, yes, and they attacked our guys numerous times.

Alliances change and shift constantly in that part of the world. Your enemey yesterday may be your ally today. That's the reality.

26 posted on 08/22/2007 10:32:06 AM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: moonman
Can the Baath party be trusted or is it anyone’s guess at this point?

No one in Iraq can be trusted.

Alliances there aren't based on trust, but on mutual self interest.

27 posted on 08/22/2007 10:36:21 AM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: moonman
Can the Baath party be trusted or is it anyone’s guess at this point?

No one who believes in the Koran can be trusted.

28 posted on 08/22/2007 10:37:11 AM PDT by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf; All
Its pretty sad when liberals and Democrats that have been cheerleaders for failure in Iraq don't even have support from a political party for sicko tyrants on there side being demagogues along with them. Instead this socialist structured government similar to Hitler, Stalin and Khmer Rouge has condemned Al Qaeda and not followed through helping Democrats in their wish to have another Vietnam.
29 posted on 08/22/2007 10:43:42 AM PDT by april15Bendovr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton
No one who believes in the Koran can be trusted.

I'd say most Baathists don't really believe it. They pretend to for political purposes, like many Democrats pretend to believe the tenants of Christianity. They'll make alliances with Islamic extremists when it's convenient, and then turn around and brutally massacre them when it suits them.

The bottom line is that no entity or group in that part of the world can be trusted, regardless of their devotion to Islam.

Historically, however, few alliances in any part of the world were based on trust.

30 posted on 08/22/2007 10:43:42 AM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SolidWood
Yes and it’s good to see the Baathists EARN reconciliation.
31 posted on 08/22/2007 10:44:02 AM PDT by Blue State Insurgent (FRee your mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: All
sorry meant their side not there side
32 posted on 08/22/2007 10:46:10 AM PDT by april15Bendovr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: april15Bendovr; Ernest_at_the_Beach

He finally realized that he cannot win against the US so he figured out to surrender in a “honorable” way by making peace with the Iraqi government.


33 posted on 08/22/2007 10:51:12 AM PDT by jveritas (God bless our brave troops and President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

“I always that the so-called “de-Baathification” strategy was stupid.”

The greatness of our country, and our military, is our ability to adapt. we thought that de-baathification would liberate the country, but uncovered a big sectarian split in the process.

The press has their panties in a bunch over the fact that some of the former sunni insurgents are now allies with us in getting Al Qaeda. Yet we never wanted to make enemies of any particular group, we simply want these groups to join the democratic process.
We dont have permanent enemies if they lay down their arms.

So this is positive, as it shows the unravelling of the insurgency.

“If the Baathists make a deal with the ruling Shiite parties, Iraq will be well on the road to stability.”

The main impediment to peace in Iraq is the fact that neither side has been so far willing to do so. The US is acting as honest broker between these factions. The baathists had previously thought by attacking the US the could regain power. But in the past year, the Iraqi Govt got strong enough, and shiite faction-based enough, for the Sunnis to see US as their ally not enemy in the brokering for power. All the Sunnis needed was proof that we could actually deliver on security ... and the ‘surge’ was the catalyst.


34 posted on 08/22/2007 11:10:58 AM PDT by WOSG ( Don't tell me what you are against, tell me what you are FOR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf
That’s it then. The insurgency is over.
35 posted on 08/22/2007 11:11:35 AM PDT by Blue State Insurgent (FRee your mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thrownatbirth
The King of Spades -(Correction) The SECOND-biggest target left. Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
36 posted on 08/22/2007 11:31:54 AM PDT by rfp1234 (Nothing is better than eternal happiness. A ham sandwich is better than nothing. Therefore...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

37 posted on 08/22/2007 12:04:58 PM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (NY Times: "fake but accurate")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf
This is Hugh and Series
38 posted on 08/22/2007 12:08:24 PM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (NY Times: "fake but accurate")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf
"AlDouri has decided to sever ties with al-Qaeda and sign up to the programme of the national resistance, which includes routing Islamist terrorists and opening up dialogue with the Baghdad government and foreign forces,"

This is big - really big. I've always believed that dissolving the Iraqi Armed Forces after the invasion was a huge mistake. If it holds true, it will be a HUGE step in defeating alQuaeda in Iraq.

Take THAT, Reid!
39 posted on 08/22/2007 1:54:14 PM PDT by reagan_fanatic (Ron Paul put the cuckoo in my Cocoa Puffs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rineaux
Some are tribe leaders who may have fought against coalition forces. Hopefully this does not bite us in the azz.

It makes sense to question the reliability of these tribes and militias coming in from the cold, but it also makes sense that they would do so. After seeing the US military close up, and Bush's implacable determination, they may just figure that the game is up. Better to stifle AlQaeda, establish an uneasy peace long enough for the Americans to (largely) go home, then see what differences need settling, without us OR Alqaeda in the mix.

40 posted on 08/22/2007 4:34:34 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson