The proof that Saddam worked with bin Laden

[island911]

Per telegraph.co.uk/news

"The documents show that the purpose of the meeting was to establish a relationship between Baghdad and al-Qa'eda based on their mutual hatred of America and Saudi Arabia.

. . ."Baghdad clearly sought out the meeting.

[tabs]

I wonder what the Germans and Russians are going to say now? It's not that I always think the USA is right in what it does, because the USA has done some pretty *****ty things in the past and even in the present...but what a lot of my fellow countrymen don't get is that the USA is fighting for it's life...911 rocked the very core of this country economically....those people want to put their foot on our throat and kill us.....thats what Bin Laden said....."Kill Americans"......not just our troops or represenatives of the government.....but women, children and that Liberal guy sitting in his Living Room watching his TV...... What more does it take for Americans to wake up and realize it's us or them.....Now the question is who do you want to be driving your SUV?

[Neilk]

It sure took the CIA long enough to plant, ahem, I mean find those documents.

[island911]

GW has been way too confident about the link, even back around 9/11/01.
Seems to me, if there's something amiss, it is that the info, the CIA (or whomever) had about the link, was heldback from general distribution. Likely either because it would compromise moles, or the information was from so many aggragate sources, it just wouldn't fit as a sound-bite.

[widebody911]

Originally posted by tabs
What more does it take for Americans to wake up and realize it's us or them....

Ok, now take a deep breath, and tell us why it's us or them.

Wrong answers:

• "Our way of life"
• "Our standard of living
• "Our freedom"

[tabs]

The United States is the embodiment of the Western World....the concept of the seperation of Church and State vs theocracy.

Figure this scenerio....if a terrorist organization was able to set off a WMD in a major city in the USA or Europe every let say month or 6 months at more or less will....much like the suicide bombers in Israel are able to do except on a larger scale.......what would happen to the World economy.....the economy of the USA.....there simply would be no more economy...(the genius of the USA is the fact that assets are liquid, and without faith in the system there is no liquidity).....the world would be plunged into chaos....a veritable new dark ages....I think it was a Blair who said that there hasn't been a challenge to civilization like this since the age of piracy in the late 17th and early 18th century....that a lawless group can create havock and thus challenge the very fabric of civilization....in this case Western Civilization.....rule of law.... vs the rule of God as interpeted by men.....

This is by no means a definaitve answer but it is the best I can do at 2:30 AM..........

[tabs]

Originally posted by widebody911

• "Our way of life"
• "Our standard of living
• "Our freedom"

I don't get whats wrong with "Our"......vs Their way of life, their standard of living and their freedom.........I guess you have to get over feeling guilty that you have those things....somebody had to fight for, spend their lives working for those things and I am sure if you were the one who sacraficed for those things you would be more likely to appreciate that you have them...wouldn't want to give up what was so hard won...... like I've said before since 1945 it's been "Easy Street" for Americans...it has been a veritable Golden Age for America.....there hasn't been a major Depression or War thats threatened the very existance of the USA since then (wt the exception of the Cuban misle crisis) until now......

[CamB]

Yeah, but Tabs - its not threatening the US existence any where near as hard as the US response suggests it is. Remember, not much evidence of Saddam's WMD. Reasonably evidence to suggest the US was pretty hasty in its assessment of WMDs in Iraq. Also not much evidence those WMD would ever get used on Americans in America.

Besides, I would have though some of the Cold War stuff would have brought the US closer to lack of existence. Mind you, I was born in '75, so I didn't exzactly experience the cold war first hand (I was alive, but didn't notice or care).

[turbo6bar]

I feel it is us vs. them, because one well-planted attack on US soil could bring the US to its knees. Why? We are an open society and integrated to a great degree. If terrorists execute pinpoint strikes on select targets, the US could be damaged in a huge way. These targets could be infrastructure, financial, or population. In order to fend off such an attack on US soil, we either go after them, or we close our society, and in essence give up our freedoms to make it harder for the bad guys.

Do we really need another WTC to realize the threat existed and STILL exists today? If not by Saddam himself, perhaps by one of his croneys.

Jurgen

[tabs]

It doesn't even need to be a strategic target......just any middle to large downtown hometown USA..... once confidence in the security of the USA is threatened.....who is going to want to own a piece of property, a stock,or a bond....think of the value of the $$$$ bill.....it will plumet in value.

One of the consequence of 911 is that the insurance industry which made good on 911 BTW can't cover another 911 size attack.....they have asked the USA governemnt to act as the reinsuring agent for which they will pay a premium for... Thus they won't write policies on property....can any of you buy a house without insurance on it? I think not unless you pay cash and assume the risk yourself..... Now who has the cash to buy any Downtown Manhatten Office building? Get the idea...911 had wide ramifications

[Nabeel]

Originally posted by widebody911
Ok, now take a deep breath, and tell us why it's us or them.

Wrong answers:

• "Our way of life"
• "Our standard of living
• "Our freedom"

I agree that those three reasons are not why we are hated in some parts of the world, and attacked by terrorists. The folks in the Middle East and Muslim world could not care less about our 'way of life', 'standard of living', 'freedom', etc. They are pissed because we have military bases in their holy land, and because of what they deem an unfair and biased foreign policy in the region, particularly our staunch support of Israel. Does that mean terrorist attacks are somehow justified? Of course not. However, we as a nation might want to look at our actions in the global arena and figure out why they are so out-of-sync with the rest of the world's opinion, especially in the Muslim and Arab world.

[island911]

Originally posted by Nabeel
. . . Does that mean terrorist attacks are somehow justified? Of course not. However, we as a nation might want to look at our actions in the global arena and figure out why they are so out-of-sync with the rest of the world's opinion, especially in the Muslim and Arab world.

Let's see here. . .the "Muslim and Arab world" thinks it is fine to fly jets into US city-sized buildings, sprinkle anthrax around our country. . .and now you claim the US is "out-of-sync with the rest of the world's opinion." !?

Perhaps you should consider that the only thing the US has been "out-of-sync with" has been the brutality that these people use to gain their "warrior status."

[Nabeel]

Let's see here. . .the "Muslim and Arab world" thinks it is fine to fly jets into US city-sized buildings, sprinkle anthrax around our country. . .and now you claim the US is "out-of-sync with the rest of the world's opinion." !?

When did I say this? Don't put words into my mouth, I was talking about US foreign policy, not the beliefs and actions of some fanatics. Also, I seriously doubt the Muslim and Arab world in general finds terrorist attacks acceptable. Don' let a bunch of crazies fool you into believing they are all against us or condone those terrorists' actions.

Perhaps you should consider that the only thing the US has been "out-of-sync with" has been the brutality that these people use to gain their "warrior status."

Warrior status? Show me where in Islam one can acheive a 'warrior status.' Once again, the implication is that if someone does not agree with some of the USA's foreign policies, they are apologists for the terrorists. I'll reiterate- The terrorist attacks were by no means justified whatsoever.

What I'm saying is that many in the world do not agree with our foreign policy. Not just the Muslim/Arab regions, but the world as a whole. Does that mean they are right? No. Does that mean we are right? No. The answer, like so many things, probably lies somewhere in the middle of the two viewpoints. We should be better able to understand why there is a divergence of opinion, and, as the world leader we are, try and create a solution that will please the majority on both sides.

[Neilk]

Originally posted by island911
Let's see here. . .the "Muslim and Arab world" thinks it is fine to fly jets into US city-sized buildings, sprinkle anthrax around our country. . .

I don't think that the US gov't believes that Muslims were responsbile for the anthrax attacks but rather some disgruntled scientist. I saw an interesting [URL=http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=400805]article[/URL, which seems very believeable to me in light of the US unsuccessful attempts at finding WMD.

If you are really worried about our way of life, I think we should look internally at Herr Ashcrofts erosion of our civil liberties.

[island911]

Originally posted by Nabeel
When did I say this? Don't put words into my mouth, I was talking about US foreign policy, not the beliefs and actions of some fanatics.

When you talk about the "Muslim and Arab world " in context of terrorist attackers WITHOUT CLEARLY SEPARATING. . well, those fanatics are exactly who I think you are trying to say (some how) speak for the "Muslim and Arab world." Afterall, those fanatics are using the same "complianing-points" (ie military bases in their holy land, support of Israel)

You are in essence telling us to respect the fanatical words, and put into question our US foreign policy actions (as "out-of-sync.")

Originally posted by Nabeel
Warrior status? Show me where in Islam one can acheive a 'warrior status.'

Don't tell me you want me to believe that if 'warrior status' is not outlined in Islam, then it cannot be a goal of binLaden (or Saddam).
Just because binLaden is likely hidding under a rock, doesn't mean he wants to be unknown for his actions. (quite the contrary)

[island911]

Originally posted by Neilk
If you are really worried about our way of life, I think we should look internally at Herr Ashcrofts erosion of our civil liberties.

good point; though priorities put worrying about those whom are trying to kill us over those slippey-slopping away our civil liberties.

Start a thread on the subject and I'll back you up. But not if it interferes with priority one.

On the antrhax attacks, keep in mind part of binladens game is to hope he can have his enemies fight each other. Notice that he had the 9/11 panes filled with Saudi Arabians in hopes that the US would turn on the Suadis.

This game, of binladens, is more like chess, and less like checkers . . .. no matter how the left sees it.

[Nabeel]

When you talk about the "Muslim and Arab world " in context of terrorist attackers WITHOUT CLEARLY SEPARATING. . well, those fanatics are exactly who I think you are trying to say (some how) speak for the "Muslim and Arab world." Afterall, those fanatics are using the same "complianing-points" (ie military bases in their holy land, support of Israel)

Yes, the qualms are the same among the terrorists and the Arab?muslim world in general. However, assumed that most people could discern the difference between the terrorists and the populace in general. Notice in my original post I mentioned the world's opinion- not only the Muslim/Arab opinion- when I made my 'out of sync' comment.

Don't tell me you want me to believe that if 'warrior status' is not outlined in Islam, then it cannot be a goal of binLaden (or Saddam).

This is highly subjective I know, but I don't think Bin Laden's goal is to acheive an exalted status among Muslims worldwide. Instead, he is trying to rally Muslims for his cause. His cause being, as outlined in his speeches, getting rid of US precence in the middle east and the destruction of Israel. Since he is such a fundamentalist, 'backward' Muslim, I would assume he clings tightly to the religion's emphasis that no one but Allah and arguably the prophet Muhammad should be exalted above others. In his twisted, fundamentalist view of religion, the killing of innocents was deemed acceptable for what he considered to be the 'oppression' of Muslims worldwide.

Sadaam, on the other hand, clearly wanted to be worshipped and exalted by his people. He had little regard for religion, as evidenced by his mistresses, drinking of alcohol, and conspicuous conumption of luxuries. He only used religion when convenient to rally the Arab world around him, a task he failed at anyway. Unlike Sadaam, Bin Laden actually believed that what he was doing is what God condoned. He was very wrong, but that still technically makes him 'religious.'

[widebody911]

Originally posted by Nabeel

Sadaam, on the other hand, clearly wanted to be worshipped and exalted by his people. He had little regard for religion, as evidenced by his mistresses, drinking of alcohol, and conspicuous conumption of luxuries. He only used religion when convenient ...

I get it - Saddam was a Republican! So the real reason GW needed to take him out was to keep him off the ticket in '04!

As further proof - SH's most loyal minions were called the Republican Guard!

[tabs]

Originally posted by tabs
It's not that I always think the USA is right in what it does, because the USA has done some pretty *****ty things in the past and even in the present..

He...who is among you, is PERFECT cast the first stone......

and/or if you try and please everyone you wind up pleasing no one.......so you do the best you can with what you have to work with.........

This is the best I can do when describing the the decision making process concerning foreign policy......we could go many many posts when talking about decision making......and I wana be paid for my time on this one.......

So botomline I understand why the Arab/muslim World has a good reason to be suspecioius of the USA if not having downright hostility to absolute hate......... I think the Bush regime is trying to redress or at least rethink the USA attitude towards the Middle East......now it's on the front burner........and we are proceeding in a typicalily American way.....a very pragmatic block by block straightforward fashion.. in a very byzintine world......

[speeder]

Thom, and Nabeel, are right on this point. The larger Arab and Muslim world has greivances w/ the U.S., the most extreme or radical factions are the terrorists. Does this mean that anyone w/ the same grievances is a terrorist or supports their actions? No, definitely not. Not in Ireland, not in Mexico, not in Saudi Arabia.

Why is this important? Because it goes directly to the issue of our government lying to us, using a tragedy such as Sept. 11th for the most cynical reasons imaginable, or could the president really be that stupid?? The CIA certainly knew that 9/11 did not happen because, "they hate us for our freedom". As Nabeel correctly pointed out, they, (Arabs), could give a rat's ass about "our freedom". Do they send suicide bombers to Amsterdam? Ever been there? Talk about freedom! Additionally, many people in Saudi Arabia, (where the 9/11 highjackers came from), enjoy a standard of living way above the U.S. average.

No, the president stood before us and lied in the days after 9/11 in order to lay the groundwork for support of current policies. Remember, it is not the children of Senators or Halburton executives who will die in Iraq or other wars. It's the "heartland" people, good "salt of the earth" Americans who trust their Republican leaders. But having an informed public does not bode well for current policy makers, that's for sure.