There are several Links between Iraq and Al Qaeda according to reports.

[kathybrn]

I know some on this discussion are sympathetic to saddam. I hope there arent too many that are sympathetic to al qaeda here. But you never know.

I found this and was wondering what you all think? Is saddam helping terrorists/extremests?

http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/09/25/us....eda/index.html

[Clandestine]

First off, lets stop offending people here by linking opposition to an invasion as sympathy for Saddam. One can be opposed to both you know.

As for this report, I am dubious of much of what CNN reports given the fact that its CEO is an ardent supporter of Bush and the Republican party and has often reported slanted news to bolster the President's cause.

Gleaning evidence from captives as a valid source of info? yeah right. Beaten out of them by our boys in Guantanemo more likely (to which im sure they'd say whatever we wanted to hear to end the questioning) and as has been pointed out in at least one other thread, this claimed link has largely been dismissed as little more than rumour.

[kathybrn]

Thank you for your opinion, but I will have to tell you that I feel that if people are offended by what I say its their choice to do so. I cant take responsibility for what someone thinks is offensive.

Everyone has their own opinion about that as well.

I was using that article as an example, Ive seen others. I just wanted some opinions other that what I see in news and other places.

So you think what the detainees said was tortured out of them? I dont believe that.

[Greenhat]

Originally posted by Clandestine
Gleaning evidence from captives as a valid source of info? yeah right. Beaten out of them by our boys in Guantanemo more likely (to which im sure they'd say whatever we wanted to hear to end the questioning) and as has been pointed out in at least one other thread, this claimed link has largely been dismissed as little more than rumour.

You really don't have the slightest clue, do you?

[Clandestine]

No of course not, theyre all laying about in the sun and fun of Cuba playing mini golf.

What we believe is more or less irrelevant as far as that goes, Im only suggesting that given no credible evicence to this fact from any sources other than media reports which are sketchy at best, there is insufficient proof to make any certifiable link between Saddam and Al Queda. Doing so, however, is making political capital for the Bush administration in the attempt to swing waning international and apparently domestic support for invasion.

Its so transparently calculated it makes me want to shake people who can't seem to understand political thinking in this context. When opinion wanes, increase the stakes. That's what this incessant ratcheting up of issues and claims to "hot new evidence" amounts to, nothing more.

[kathybrn]

Originally posted by Clandestine
No of course not, theyre all laying about in the sun and fun of Cuba playing mini golf.

I believe their quality of life has actually improved in U.S. custody. We all know what they would be doing if they werent there.

Also they arent in Cuba.

So your opinion would be a no there is no link?

[Clandestine]

Im saying that no credible link has been proven. Claims by Iraqi exiles and captured prisoners isnt exactly above suspicion.

Greenhat, proabaly about as much of a clue as you possess.

[kathybrn]

Clandestine, I dont know you but I read Greenhats posts here and elsewhere. I think you should pay attention. He knows of what he speaks.

[kathybrn]

Also, I havnt seen anything that proves they are linked or disproves it.

I dont know what to think about it.

[Greenhat]

Originally posted by Clandestine
Im saying that no credible link has been proven. Claims by Iraqi exiles and captured prisoners isnt exactly above suspicion.

Greenhat, proabaly about as much of a clue as you possess.

That has already been proven to be untrue. Or would you like to discuss grounding the Israeli Air Force in more detail?

[Clandestine]

Greenhat is repleat with self aggrandising criticisms of anyone who doesnt accept his narrow scope of militaristic analysis.

I deal with his ilk on a daily basis in NATO circles and get an ear full of rhetoric that would even make his points pale by comparison.

Since he presumes to know the extent of my professional understanding of geo-politics when he himself as as teachable as a brick wall ill decline to adopt his view thank you very much.

[Greenhat]

Originally posted by Clandestine

Since he presumes to know the extent of my professional understanding of geo-politics when he himself as as teachable as a brick wall ill decline to adopt his view thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Chamberlain

[Clandestine]

Ahhh another mindless reaction? How quaint!

[Greenhat]

Originally posted by Clandestine
Ahhh another mindless reaction? How quaint!

Just likening you to another self-proclaimed statesman with similar views of the world...would think you would like the comparison.

[Clandestine]

Not particularly thank you anyways. Chamberlain's rant against war with Hitler's Germany is far less valid than today's argument against rushing in to invade Iraq. The arguments for action then were much more compelling and factual as well, than the current list of unsubstantiated allegations used to justify further attrocities in Iraq at our hands.

WWII was not a unilateral attempt to invade a single country simply to impose a regime change in the name of democracy (which ive already pointed out is utter hypocrisy in itself).