Posted on 11/13/2008 9:30:17 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Eclipsed by the election campaignining, this story slipped under the radar. Much has been said about the invasion of Iraq. Often there are claims that there were no weapons of mass destruction and no ties to Al Queda. In fact, most of the WMD claims that were made before the invasion turned out to be true. Iraq was not clean and innocent in regards to WMD, and the ties to Al Queda were wrongly dismissed.
One of those ties regard Saddam’s involvement with Al Queda groups like Ansar al Islam which no one disputes was present and active in the northern section of Saddam’s Iraq. Opponents of the war dismiss that tie by saying that if they weren’t in the part of Iraq that Saddam controlled, then they weren’t under his control. That’s a nice piece of rhetoric, and it’s good spin, but it’s ignorant of the fact that Ansar was the ONLY means of influence Saddam had in the North (that, and the threat of invading the north). He used Ansar as his proxy guerrilla force to attack his Kurdish enemies and impose his will in the North.
The point remains, Ansar and other Al Queda groups were inside Iraq in 2002, and the CIA knew it. They knew it because they sent extremely brave people there-into Iraq, and those people monitored the Al Queda until the Pentagon blew the opportunity to destroy the camps.
Charles “Sam” Faddis, who led a CIA team into northern Iraq following the 9/11 attacks, says the Pentagon’s “endless planning and delays” foiled a chance to wipe out a band of al Qaeda leaders who were fleeing American bombs in Afghanistan.
Faddis says the delays, beginning in 2002, also facilitated the escape of some “key” al Qaeda figures, including terrorist scientists who were working on chemical and biological weapons.“Some died, some are still on the run,” Faddis said in a telephone interview Tuesday, following his appearance on NPR’s Diane Rehm Show to promote a new book, Operation Hotel California: The Clandestine War Inside Iraq.
“The site was physically destroyed … but certainly the research wasn’t destroyed.”
To argue that the Pentagon “botched” this is to argue that there was something substantial to be botched. Admitting the US missed an opportunity to attack Al Queda in Iraq before 2002 is admitting that there was enough of an Al Queda presence in Iraq before the invasion to warrant military action.
Oh, I don't know. He did a pretty good job communicating his desire to give amnesty to any Mexican illegal alien who came across the border.
Speaking of which, do you really view his inability to communicate as a bigger failure than not securing the borders after the attacks on 9/11?
I find myself unable to converse on YOUR level of communication.
But I want you to continue posting....
I am just so amazed with YOUR incredible powers of persuasion, and so in awe of YOUR obvious inability to grasp facts, that I find it inconceivable that anyone here would ever doubt YOUR intellect.
YOUR command of the the written word is ...unique.
YOUR powers of capitalism is ...unique.
YOUR understanding of sarcasm is obvious, even before YOUR much anticipated reply.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the same yellow cake that was under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for over a decade?
LOL, yeah, that agency that Saddam totally deferred to the same way he totally deferred to pedophile Scott Ritter and all those UN inspectors... Sorry for the sarcasm, but keep in mind that Bush and the current Iraqi leadership believed that it was necessary to secretly get the stuff out of Iraq even after Saddam was long gone. That should say something.
FRegards,
LH
bookmark
ping
“Bush lied” bump
bookmark
The same applies on the crucial issue of Saddam's biological & chemical weapons (WMD) (which he used against the Kurds) being trucked into Syria in December of 2002, with the assistance of Putin's weather satellites.
The leftist geared mass media continues lying saying there were 'no WMD in Iraq', when the White House could have countered their lies, but then there was the issue of direct Kremlin involvement, thus nothing was stated to avoid a greater issue (the enemy behind the enemy).
I hope you'll refrain from saying that to any of our troops who have worked and sacrificed to make Iraq a success, regardless of what the media has portrayed.
That secrecy crap was really smart, wasn’t it.. It cost Bush his reputation and helped lead the U.S. to electing it’s first Marxist President.
Can this go in Breaking?
And he had the lives of thousands of our
heroes in his hands every moment of these
last 7 years, God blessedly free of any
homeland attacks, as well as protecting
plans, sources and methods.
Think!
On 2nd thought, why don’t you just be the
president for the WOT, since you know all
the facts behind the scenes, and you’re
apparently perfect.
People are quick to criticize President Bush for not divulging ALL about that, but it is for very serious security reasons that he does not.
There are still an awful lot of Americans in the region right now, as well as countless innocent citizens...
I, for one, am very glad our leadership has had the sense and decency to make our security a priority over their own popularity.
I don't see the next guy being that smart OR that considerate.
What do you mean "battle"? That implies that there were two sides fighting. It's not a battle when one side lies down and goes to sleep!
No story favorable to Bush or unfavorable to Obama slips under the radar. They’re simply ignored.
The BDS infection has reduced the IQ of so called conservatives, who have complete denial of the treason of the mediots and their power to lie and fool Americans, to the level of scum sucking bacteria.
People are quick to criticize President Bush for not divulging ALL about that, but it is for very serious security reasons that he does not.
There are still an awful lot of Americans in the region right now, as well as countless innocent citizens...
I, for one, am very glad our leadership has had the sense and decency to make our security a priority over their own popularity.
I don't see the next guy being that smart OR that considerate.
Obama’s fault!
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.