Page 25 of 64 FirstFirst ... 15232425262735 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 250 of 638

Thread: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS[W:452]

  1. #241
    Sage
    flogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Wokingham, England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    11,938

    Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    But the Iraq thing wasn't primarily about terrorists. It was because Saddam was resisting the Security Council Resolution. Much better reason than the nationality or place of residence of the hit men.
    So why were your armed forces not informed ? They clearly viewed the whole Iraq operation as retribution for 9/11 judging by the chalked messages on their bombs and shells as did the vast majority of your civilians. This deception was deliberately fostered by the Bush administration in order to facilitate the conflict

    https://sgadaria.expressions.syr.edu...ff_Kushner.pdf

    Very soon after 9/11 it was established that the attackers were in fact Saudi and were financed by Saudi's. Where has been the subsequent US response to this ?

  2. #242
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 09:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    But the Iraq thing wasn't primarily about terrorists. It was because Saddam was resisting the Security Council Resolution. Much better reason than the nationality or place of residence of the hit men.
    The problem joG is that the earliest Bush administration claims were in fact about terrorists, terrorism, WMD's, connections between Saddam Hussein and OBL and al Qaeda, which nicely wove Saddam Hussein into the 9/11 attacks for which he had no connection whatsoever. It was only after failure to immediately harness the support they wanted for an invasion of Iraq, that other issues, unrelated to 9/11, but easier to demonstrate as true, such as gassing the Kurds, UN resolution violations and other human rights violations, were brought into the fray. But the accusations of Saddam's connections to AQ/OBL and terrorism were never dropped, and hyperbolic rhetoric continued to flow from the WH. Things like "do we have to wait for the smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud over a US city" continued to pour out, despite the fact that Saddam Hussein had neither the inclination, nor the means to produce such an event.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  3. #243
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 09:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    Anyone that tied it to 9/11 in any but a cursory way was not paying much attention.
    And sure. Everyone knows that the bin Ladens and their kids' friends are Saudi. So?
    Which means that the entire Bush administration was not paying attention.

    The war that began March 19, 2003, was justified to the country by alarming claims that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and connections to al-Qaida terrorists.

    How the Bush administration sold the Iraq war | MSNBC
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  4. #244
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:41 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,113

    Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

    Quote Originally Posted by flogger View Post
    So why were your armed forces not informed ? They clearly viewed the whole Iraq operation as retribution for 9/11 judging by the chalked messages on their bombs and shells as did the vast majority of your civilians. This deception was deliberately fostered by the Bush administration in order to facilitate the conflict

    https://sgadaria.expressions.syr.edu...ff_Kushner.pdf

    Very soon after 9/11 it was established that the attackers were in fact Saudi and were financed by Saudi's. Where has been the subsequent US response to this ?
    You don't think the soldiers read decent newspapers?

  5. #245
    Sage
    flogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Wokingham, England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    11,938

    Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    You don't think the soldiers read decent newspapers?
    So are you inferring your own armed forces were actually too dumb to understand why they were fighting Iraqis instead of Saudis then ?

  6. #246
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:41 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,113

    Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    The problem joG is that the earliest Bush administration claims were in fact about terrorists, terrorism, WMD's, connections between Saddam Hussein and OBL and al Qaeda, which nicely wove Saddam Hussein into the 9/11 attacks for which he had no connection whatsoever. It was only after failure to immediately harness the support they wanted for an invasion of Iraq, that other issues, unrelated to 9/11, but easier to demonstrate as true, such as gassing the Kurds, UN resolution violations and other human rights violations, were brought into the fray. But the accusations of Saddam's connections to AQ/OBL and terrorism were never dropped, and hyperbolic rhetoric continued to flow from the WH. Things like "do we have to wait for the smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud over a US city" continued to pour out, despite the fact that Saddam Hussein had neither the inclination, nor the means to produce such an event.
    There were vague suppositions and speculation. But that was never official opinion or named as casus belli and anyway let drop, when it turned out to be incorrect. I can remember the discussion quite well.

  7. #247
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:41 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,113

    Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Which means that the entire Bush administration was not paying attention.

    The war that began March 19, 2003, was justified to the country by alarming claims that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and connections to al-Qaida terrorists.

    How the Bush administration sold the Iraq war | MSNBC
    I can remember well before the invasion that the connection to al Qaeda was dropped as there was no evidence and because logic spoke against it. It may be that people could have missed that, if they were not interested and did not follow things. But anyone with an iota of interest knew the government had dropped that idea months earlier.

  8. #248
    Sage
    flogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Wokingham, England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    11,938

    Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    There were vague suppositions and speculation.
    It was a darned sight more than that !

    "The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda: because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda," Bush said after a Cabinet meeting. As evidence, he cited Iraqi intelligence officers' meeting with bin Laden in Sudan. "There's numerous contacts between the two," Bush said.

    Bush Defends Assertions of Iraq-Al Qaeda Relationship (washingtonpost.com)

    But that was never official opinion or named as casus belli and anyway let drop, when it turned out to be incorrect.
    So you disbelieve your own presidents words from 2004 ?

    I can remember the discussion quite well.
    Nonsense. The US armed forces were sent into combat on the basis of a known lie tying AQ with Iraq

  9. #249
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:41 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,113

    Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

    Quote Originally Posted by flogger View Post
    It was a darned sight more than that !

    "The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda: because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda," Bush said after a Cabinet meeting. As evidence, he cited Iraqi intelligence officers' meeting with bin Laden in Sudan. "There's numerous contacts between the two," Bush said.

    Bush Defends Assertions of Iraq-Al Qaeda Relationship (washingtonpost.com)



    So you disbelieve your own presidents words from 2004 ?



    Nonsense. The US armed forces were sent into combat on the basis of a known lie tying AQ with Iraq
    Actually, there were a number of meetings at relatively high levels and at least one high level al Qaeda officer -I forget his name of hand- was treated in Bagdad. But that was all, though true, too vague to stick. So yes, at the beginning there was speculation, but it ebbed. I cannot remember that 9/11 was an issue in Bush's speech to the General Assembly or at all at that stage of developments. So, yes there were contacts. But no they were not the casus belli.

  10. #250
    Sage
    flogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Wokingham, England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    11,938

    Re: Iraqi forces losing 'will to fight' against ISIS

    Quote Originally Posted by joG View Post
    Actually, there were a number of meetings at relatively high levels and at least one high level al Qaeda officer -I forget his name of hand- was treated in Bagdad.
    Nonsense AQ and the Hussein regime were in fact the bitterest of enemies and never had any such ties. These stories were fabrications

    But that was all, though true, too vague to stick. So yes, at the beginning there was speculation, but it ebbed. I cannot remember that 9/11 was an issue in Bush's speech to the General Assembly or at all at that stage of developments. So, yes there were contacts. But no they were not the casus belli.
    Given no evidence of such contacts has ever emerged in the subsequent decade I think we can put these down to the Whitehouse disinformation machine and the Pentagon was subsequently forced to agree

    http://edition.cnn.com/2008/US/03/13/alqaeda.saddam/

Page 25 of 64 FirstFirst ... 15232425262735 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •