The wingnuts and their puppetmasters within the administration, and yes even McSame, keep on telling us that the reasons for going to war in Iraq are now moot, old arguments, inconsequential to the fight with Al Qaeda we are currently embroiled in.
But there are a lot of troops in Iraq and a large portion of the population here in the States who firmly believe that we went into Iraq to fight the same people who flew planes in to the world trade center on 9/11 and that Saddam Hussein had assisted in or bankrolled or perhaps even helped plan the dastardly deed.
He, of course, did nothing of the sort and now an exhaustive report, based on 600,000 pieces of information captured after the fall of Saddam and created by the Pentagon (those commies) solidifies and memorializes these facts.
There was no operational ties between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, none, repeat, none.
There was no 'Al Qaeda in Iraq' until 2004, one year after the invasion...!
You know... at least Rumsfeld had some shred of dignity left and managed to bring his disgraced tenure to an end through humiliating resignation. Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz? All still stinking up the place.
(h/t) Attaturk - DFH
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Just for laughs, I went and Googled the original Iraq War Resolution of October, 2002. There are twenty-four reasons cited as cause for the eventual use of force against the Saddam Hussein regime. None of them were, "to avenge Saddam's operational role assisting al Qaeda in the attacks of 9/11".
If "there are a lot of troops in Iraq and a large portion of the population here in the States who firmly believe that we went into Iraq to fight the same people who flew planes in to the world trade center on 9/11 and that Saddam Hussein had assisted in or bankrolled or perhaps even helped plan the dastardly deed", those people are idiots.
Likewise, if one believes that the report you cite proves that he didn't, well perhaps his elevator doesn't go all the way to the top floor either.
There are millions of documents that have yet to be translated, and probably never will. There are probably millions more that were destroyed. Maybe Saddam and bin Laden collaborated and didn't document it!
How about this? The first Gulf War and its aftermath set into motion a series of events that culminated in the attacks of 9/11.
Hence, one can plausibly cite a cause and effect relationship between Saddam and 9/11. Not necessarily an operational, hands-on connection, but an historical one. Likewise, given our troubled realtionship with Saddam, and the whole post-war debacle, he certainly had motive and opportunity. It was common-sensical to suspect his involvement.
I'm always a little skeptical of articles written about a report that cite anonymous sources who tell us about the report before the actual report is even released. So we need to take the word of a leaker, who most likely has an agenda, about what the report says. I'd rather wait and read the report myself.
Funny what you see, though, if you read between the lines: "Other documents indicate that the Fedayeen Saddam opened paramilitary training camps that, starting in 1998, hosted "Arab volunteers" from outside of Iraq. What happened to the non-Iraqi volunteers is unknown, however, according to the earlier study."
Wonder who those "Arab volunteers" were?
You really are grasping at straws now!
I would imagine those 'other Arabs' were probably Palestinians.
As for the report, you are going to have to request one from the Pentagon. Unlike all other declassified Pentagon reports, they are not publishing this one on-line.
Go figure!
Post a Comment