Thread: al qaeda takes control of town

of course US troops will run them out (if they haven't left already), but doesn't this FINALLY make it clear that this is an absurd misadventure?

Insurgents Assert Control Over Town Near Syrian Border
Zarqawi's Forces Kill U.S.-Allied Iraqis And Impose Strict Law, Witnesses Say

By Ellen Knickmeyer and Jonathan Finer
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, September 6, 2005; Page A20

BAGHDAD, Sept. 5 -- Fighters loyal to militant leader Abu Musab Zarqawi asserted control over the key Iraqi border town of Qaim on Monday, killing U.S. collaborators and enforcing strict Islamic law, according to tribal members, officials, residents and others in the town and nearby villages.

Residents said the foreign-led fighters controlled by Zarqawi, a Jordanian, apparently had been exerting authority in the town, within two miles of the Syrian border, since at least the start of the weekend. A sign posted at an entrance to the town declared, "Welcome to the Islamic Republic of Qaim."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...090500313.html

Originally Posted by PeaceBlondie

ray, I'm confused. Is al qeda linked to Zarqawi? If there's virtually no credible evidence that al-qeda, al-Quaeda, or Al Kaieda's mother were originally linked to Saddam Hussein's Baathist party, and virtually no clear evidence that supporters of al-qeda were in Iraq - and if they are in Iraq now - it begs two or more questions.

1) Why would al-qeda want to be in Iraq now, since they couldn't get in before?
2) If the Coalition forces are any good at doing crowd control and perimeter control, how did the al-qeda forces get in?
3) Or, could it be that the invasion of Iraq inspired lots of Iraqis who were already in country, to become insurgents?

hey pb :smile: .

you're confused? get in line.

zarqawi 'pledged allegiance' to bin laden approx. a year or two ago, and is reportedly using iraq as a training ground for jihadists---with the added 'bonus' of killing the US soldiers that are walking around with targets on their backs.

from what i've read, the syrian border is quite porous (probably because of a lack of troops), so insurgents have little difficulty crossing back and forth. rummy et al have said that the majority of the insurgents are foreign nationals, but i'm not sure why we should start believing them now--considering the four years of lies they have told us.

a couple of links....

http://abcnews.go.com/International/...=872112&page=1

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...668306,00.html

has anyone seen a recent report on this incredible story?

Originally Posted by PeaceBlondie

ray, I'm confused. Is al qeda linked to Zarqawi? If there's virtually no credible evidence that al-qeda, al-Quaeda, or Al Kaieda's mother were originally linked to Saddam Hussein's Baathist party, and virtually no clear evidence that supporters of al-qeda were in Iraq - and if they are in Iraq now - it begs two or more questions.

1) Why would al-qeda want to be in Iraq now, since they couldn't get in before?
2) If the Coalition forces are any good at doing crowd control and perimeter control, how did the al-qeda forces get in?
3) Or, could it be that the invasion of Iraq inspired lots of Iraqis who were already in country, to become insurgents?

http://www.nationalreview.com/docume...0402121818.asp
Here is the letter is a link to the letter proporteldy from Abu Musab to UBL (he does pledge alligance Bin Laden)

Dicatators by their very nature keep strict control of a country. Al Qaeda can now enter the country at will. They want to be there becuase Iraq is the new theatre of jihad. UBL

Qaim remained under the sway of Iraq's most radical Islamist group, said former residents who had moved to the provincial capital, Ramadi.

They confirmed reports that al-Qaida in Iraq had formed an alliance with a Sunni Arab tribe, the Karabla, which supplied fighters and local knowledge. The rival Sunni Albu Mahal tribe sided with the government, leading to clashes.

US military officials said al-Qaida in Iraq launched multiple attacks on Sunday against US and Iraqi targets in Hit, 85 miles west of Baghdad, killing at least 12 people, including 11 civilians. A roadside bomb killed two US troops yesterday.

An internet statement purportedly from the group also claimed responsibility for a roadside bomb which killed two British soldiers near Basra on Monday.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story...564000,00.html

in case you're wondering where the 4Rs (resident radical right-wing reactionaries) are on this thread, you'll find that they tend to stay away from topics like this one. but i suppose this is probably too tough to stomach--an entire iraqi town in the hands of bin laden's man in iraq.

but c'mon fellas, don't be afraid. here, have an


i guess they're too busy smearing (aka swift-boating), and shifting blame on the katrina thread.

Originally Posted by raycarey

in case you're wondering where the 4Rs (resident radical right-wing reactionaries) are on this thread, you'll find that they tend to stay away from topics like this one. but i suppose this is probably too tough to stomach--an entire iraqi town in the hands of bin laden's man in iraq.

No....it's because you're a stupid fekking idiot. That is all

right. you know as well as i do, that once they get chased out of town 'a', they'll just move over to town 'b' because there isn't a large enough "coalition" presence.

imagine how demoralizing that must be for the military personnel who are in iraq. i'd ask you how you would feel if you were in that situation, but.....

anyway, even with this poor planning and implementation (and one could argue dereliction of duty) rummy is still sec. of defense.