Saddam is clueless on terrorism

[arnegrim]

You'd think he'd have it down a bit better...

Saddam also complained that he had no fresh clothes and had been deprived of shower and exercise facilities. "This is terrorism," he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20051206/ap_on_re_mi_ea/saddam_trial_58

 

[Rygel]

The guy hid in a rat hole an he's complaining about that?

 

[Zoot]

Do people still believe that hid-in-a-rathole story?

 

[TheReasoner]

You'd think he'd have it down a bit better...



http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20051206/ap_on_re_mi_ea/saddam_trial_58

Arnegrim, Saddam did not have anything to do with the terror organizations he was accused of being in league with.

The USA did though...

 

[quantumspirit]

Arnegrim, Saddam did not have anything to do with the terror organizations he was accused of being in league with.

The USA did though...

maybe that's why Saddam is clueless about it, because he never actually had connections to alQaeda.

 

[arnegrim]

Saddam did have connections with terrorists... and it could be argued that he was one himself.

Al-Qaeda is not the end-all of terrorism...

 

[Rygel]

Arnegrim, Saddam did not have anything to do with the terror organizations he was accused of being in league with.

The USA did though...

You mean that ones that praised Saddam Hussein as a hero?

 

[TheReasoner]

You mean that ones that praised Saddam Hussein as a hero?

Care to provide evidence ?

 

[TheReasoner]

Saddam did have connections with terrorists... and it could be argued that he was one himself.

Al-Qaeda is not the end-all of terrorism...

Wether he did or not is slightly beside the point. He was accused specifically of dealings with Al Qaeda and Ansar Al Islam. Both of these hated Saddam. And even arranged terrorist attacks on his regime, which they labeled as infidel.

Care to prove these connections?

 

[ACougar]

Saddam was in charge of terrorist organizations which waged war against Iranian forces and interests. MEK and others fought against primarily against Iran and Israel also to a lesser extent. Saddam sponsored terrorism, we sponsored terrorism (Cuba is easiest example,)

Saddam did have connections with terrorists... and it could be argued that he was one himself.

Al-Qaeda is not the end-all of terrorism...

 

[Alarum]

You mean that ones that praised Saddam Hussein as a hero?

Like the Al Qaeda, which called a jihad against him?

 

[Rygel]

Care to provide evidence ?

I'll buy you a clue.



There's a couple million hits there. Hope that helps.

Like the Al Qaeda, which called a jihad against him?

And for you the terrorist training camp in Iraq

I found a PBS interview about Salman Pak. Apparently, they trained Afghanis there.

Here's 54,000 more clues.

Enjoy.

 

[MaryS]

Like the Al Qaeda, which called a jihad against him?

And in other old news, Italy was an official ally of Germany in WWII until they decided Germany was the worse enemy.
It's also interesting that Osama bin Laden, who supposedly was an enemy of Saddam in the past, was standing up for him by condemning our actions in Iraq in a tape before the 2004 elections.

The "enemy of my enemy is my friend" works for both sides.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/gunning/interviews/mylroie.html
PBS Frontline Interview with Laurie Mylroie, counter-terrorism advisor for Clinton discusses the 1993 WTC bombing and Iraq's ties to that and Al Qaeda.


Jim Fox, then head of the New York FBI himself believed that Iraq was behind the Trade Center bombing. Why? Because he recognized that the Muslim extremists were not capable of carrying out this plot on their own. There was something major behind it. Two, there were Iraqis all around the fringe of the plot. One of those Iraqis, Abdul Rachman Yasin, came from Baghdad before the bombing, returned to Baghdad afterwards.

The bombing occurred on the second anniversary of the Gulf War ceasefire approximately, and the Gulf War was not a distant memory at the time. People had it very vividly in their minds. The defendants themselves -- Mahmud Abu Halima, an Egyptian -- believed that Iraq was behind the Trade Center bombing, and understood perfectly well what had happened

 

[TheReasoner]

I'll buy you a clue.



There's a couple million hits there. Hope that helps.



And for you the terrorist training camp in Iraq

I found a PBS interview about Salman Pak. Apparently, they trained Afghanis there.

Here's 54,000 more clues.

Enjoy.

Thanks. I am not too convinced though... You can find heaps of sites stating the world is flat, and providing evidence to support it too. Many sites claim the moon was never visited by Americans, and so on.
I'm sorry, to convince me you'll have to provide some more acknowledged sources to back your claims. Ofcourse, I am very open to the possibility of Saddam working with terrorists. On some level or another most nations do. The USA founded, funded and to a part ran the Mujahedeen, Norway is openly working with the Tamil Tigers - albeit in peace processes. Thus, it could rightly be claimed that both our respective nations have dealings with terrorists.
Now, this is not about neither the US nor Norway, but I feel this is worth mentioning as I believe it is relevant to show that democratic nations also have dealings with these people. It is unlikely that any and all nations have never had dealings of some sort with organizations labeled terrorists by one or more nations. Ofcourse, terrorist can be a relative term. For instance the resistance here during WW2 was labelled terrorists by the Germans. Which they were, however this was just peanuts - and morally defendable compared to what 'organizations' like Al Qaeda, Ansar Al Islam, and the Mujahedeen have done and do.

It is highly unlikely that a nation like Iraq has no ties to terrorists.
What the ties are, and to what organizations, now that is another case entirely. As Saddam was considered an infidel by both organizations he was accused of being in league with, I doubt it is true that he was.

So... Am I in league with terrorists as an individual? Well, I am a member of a political party who backs the opposition in Prussia (Europe's last despotism), which in turn is an illegal party there - naturally. So I don't know, but it is not impossible that I am by Prussian definitions a terrorist of sort. Even though the opposition use no weapons and are by international standards a pretty decent party. But in the eyes of the despot, what my political party does is propaganda terrorism against his regime - or so I would guess.

My point is; What is a terrorist? Who defines what a terrorist is? The despot in Prussia? The occupying forces in an invaded country? The individual himself? Mass media?
Who will fall under the label of terrorism, and why?
Me, I would say that any organization who targets civilians to spread fear is a terrorist organization. An organization that targets infrastructure or military goals is not. Did Saddam have dealings with terrorists by these definitions? Possibly. I will not rule that out. Nor will I rule out that he helped train them. But does this in itself validate an invasion? If so, then an invasion of the USA is also valid and called for.

This is a difficult topic to discuss, or can be - if you start poking around in history, politics, and definitions.

 

[whatbogsends]

And in other old news, Italy was an official ally of Germany in WWII until they decided Germany was the worse enemy.
It's also interesting that Osama bin Laden, who supposedly was an enemy of Saddam in the past, was standing up for him by condemning our actions in Iraq in a tape before the 2004 elections.

The "enemy of my enemy is my friend" works for both sides.

So, Bin Laden's condemnation of the US' actions in Iraq, after Saddam was in custody somehow tie Saddam to Al Qaeda?

Certainly, the US invading Iraq put terrorists on the side of many Iraqi nationalists. However, the fact that the response to our action forced two enemies to align isn't proof that they were aligned prior to our invasion.

 

[applepowerpc]

This Iraq preemptive war kind of reminds me of the Israeli "preemptive strikes" in 1967. Israeli started mobilizing for the Six-Day War, and their Arab neighbors noticed the troop movements, so they responded by stationing troops on their borders themselves. Then Israel surprise-attacked Pearl Harbor style, and pointed out how they were being threatened by the Arab neighbors' troop movements. A classic cause-and-effect deception.

Same thing with the Iraq/Al Qaeda link.

 

[Alarum]

And for you the terrorist training camp in Iraq

I found a PBS interview about Salman Pak. Apparently, they trained Afghanis there.

You mean another one of those facilities named by defectors seeking asylum? That's where we got our WMD data. Excuse me if I find the sources lousy, at best.

Here's 54,000 more clues.

Enjoy.

Here's nearly two million clues for you!

 

[ACougar]

So Saddam was supporting "good" terrorists with funding and training (those who struggled against Iran) and "bad" terrorists with funding (those who struggled against Israel) and he had laboratories where he at one time researched WMD, of course he only used WMD while he was an ally of the United States. I guess it wasn't convenient to make a big fuss about gassing Iranians and Kurds at the time.

What nation doesn't research WMD? What nation doesn't train commandoes on how to assume control of an airplane? What nation doesn't train with allied forces from other nations? Conjecture and speculation masquerading as evidance.

I'll buy you a clue.



There's a couple million hits there. Hope that helps.



And for you the terrorist training camp in Iraq

I found a PBS interview about Salman Pak. Apparently, they trained Afghanis there.

Here's 54,000 more clues.

Enjoy.