Gunco Forums banner

1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
President for Life Field Marshall Doctor Bluedog D
Joined
·
1,604 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/9FA18AFB-F2C9-4678-8E6A-3595D91B83A1.htm
[font=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]An interesting phenomenon is taking place today in the Iraqi city of Falluja.

[/font]


For months now, the Bush administration had been building up the image of a massive network of foreign terrorists using Falluja as a base for their terror attacks against targets associated with the interim government of Iyad Allawi and the US military which backs him.

One name appeared in western media accounts, over and over again: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a wanted Jordanian turned alleged "terror" mastermind. Almost overnight, Zarqawi's terrorist group, al-Qaida Holy War for Iraq, expanded its operations across the width and breadth of Iraq.

Al-Zarqawi was everywhere, his bombers striking in Mosul, Baghdad, Samarra, Najaf, Baquba, Ramadi and Falluja. Islamist websites published accounts of al-Zarqawi's actions, and the western media, together with western intelligence services, ran with these stories, giving them credibility. The al-Zarqawi legend, if one can call it that, was born.


The problem is, there is simply no substance to this legend, as US marines are now finding out. Rather than extremist foreign fighters battling to the death, the marines are mostly finding local men from Falluja who are fighting to defend their city from what they view as an illegitimate occupier. The motivations of these fighters may well be anti-American, but they are Iraqi, not foreign, in origin.


There is, indeed, evidence of a foreign presence. But they were not the ones running the show in Falluja, or elsewhere for that matter. As a result, the US-led assault on Falluja may go down in history as the tipping point for the defeat of the US occupation of Iraq. The January 2005 elections are now very much in doubt, and anti-coalition violence has erupted throughout Iraq (including from sources claiming to be aligned with - no surprise - Abu Musab al-Zarqawi).

Reflecting back, one cannot help but wonder if al-Zarqawi was used as a lure to trap the Americans into taking this action. On the surface, the al-Zarqawi organisation seems too good to be true. A single Jordanian male is suddenly running an organisation that operates in sophisticated cells throughout Iraq. No one man could logically accomplish this. But there is an organisation that can - the Mukhabarat (intelligence) of Saddam Hussein.

A critical element of this resistance was to generate chaos and anarchy that would destabilise any US-appointed Iraqi government
According to former Iraqi intelligence personnel I have communicated with recently, the Mukhabarat, under instructions from Saddam Hussein, had been preparing for some time before the invasion of Iraq on how to survive, resist and defeat any US-led occupation of Iraq. A critical element of this resistance was to generate chaos and anarchy that would destabilise any US-appointed Iraqi government.


Another factor was to shift the attention of the US military away from the true heart of the resistance - Saddam's Baathist loyalists - and on to a fictional target that could be manipulated in an effort to control the pace, timing and nature of the US military response.

According to these sources, the selection of al-Zarqawi as a front for these actions was almost too easy. The Bush administration's singling out of al-Zarqawi prior to the war, highlighted by Colin Powell's presentation to the Security Council in February 2003, made the Jordanian an ideal candidate to head the Mukhabarat's disinformation effort.

The Mukhabarat was desperate for a way to divert attention from the fact that it was behind the attacks against Iraqi civilians. Iraqis killing Iraqis would turn the public against the resistance. It needed a foreign face, and al-Zarqawi provided it. A few planted CD disks later, and the al-Zarqawi myth was born.

In its attempts to use the al-Zarqawi myth to distract and defeat the US military and the interim government of Iyad Allawi, the Mukhabarat is engaged in a dangerous game. In embracing the al-Zarqawi myth, the Mukhabarat has engaged the forces of Islamist activism to a degree never before seen in modern-day Iraq.

Having created a fiction, there is a potential danger of it becoming a reality
According to my contacts, the goal in creating a foreign Islamist face for the violence taking place in Iraq is to get the Iraqi populace to turn away from Iyad Allawi and the US military as a source of stability, and endorse the return of the Baathists (under a new guise, to be sure), who would then deal with the Islamists by shutting down an operation the Mukhabarat thinks they control.


But engaging these activists may not be without cost. Having created a fiction, there is a potential danger of it becoming a reality. Al-Zarqawi may not be the real force behind the anti-US resistance in Iraq, but many now, in Iraq and throughout the Muslim world, believe him to be.

Having created this giant the Mukhabarat may not be able to control it. The real danger in Iraq is not the inevitable defeat of the United States and the interim government of Iyad Allawi, but the fact that the longer it takes for the United States to realise that victory cannot be achieved, the more emboldened the Islamists become.

Right now, the Mukhabarat controllers of the al-Zarqawi network think themselves clever as they watch the US military play into their hands through the destruction of Falluja, and the futile search for a phantom menace.

But the tragedy that is the war in Iraq is far from over, and it may very well be that it is al-Zarqawi and his followers, and not the Baathist Mukhabarat, who will have the last laugh. And, as always, it will be the people of Iraq who will pay the price.

Scott Ritter was a senior UN arms inspector in Iraq between 1991 and 1998. He is now an independent consultant.



 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,690 Posts
I kind of missed the "aid and comfort" part. Sounds like he's just debunking some myths perpetrated by the Bushies.

FYI, no longer have a link, but some time ago the Pentagon itself debunked the notion of the Iraqi insurgence being largely fought by foreign fighters, citing the actual and rather small numbers of foreign fighters the US military had killed or captured. I guess we should go after the Pentagon on treason charges, too?

There indeed are some foreign fighters in Iraq, but the way the Bush Administration presents it is reminiscent of the bunk that used to be put out about race riots in US cities being solely the work of "outside agitators".
 

·
President for Life Field Marshall Doctor Bluedog D
Joined
·
1,604 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Sounds like he's just debunking some myths perpetrated by the Bushies.
Smeg, based on the above statement, you are making my point. Does Ritter acuse the Bushies?

And Smeg, One special request: Please Identify and reconcile the glaring contradiction set forth particularly herein:
The Mukhabarat was desperate for a way to divert attention from the fact that it was behind the attacks against Iraqi civilians. Iraqis killing Iraqis would turn the public against the resistance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,063 Posts
Dzerzhinsky said:
I kind of missed the "aid and comfort" part. Sounds like he's just debunking some myths perpetrated by the Bushies.

FYI, no longer have a link, but some time ago the Pentagon itself debunked the notion of the Iraqi insurgence being largely fought by foreign fighters, citing the actual and rather small numbers of foreign fighters the US military had killed or captured. I guess we should go after the Pentagon on treason charges, too?

There indeed are some foreign fighters in Iraq, but the way the Bush Administration presents it is reminiscent of the bunk that used to be put out about race riots in US cities being solely the work of "outside agitators".
Yep this admin likes to use "boogeymen" such as Al-Zarquari, Bin Laden, Saddam Hussien, Kim Il Sung, Michael Moore, etc. to keep uninformed or more appropriately misinformed Americans paranoid and xenophobic thinking that there is some sort of swarthy turbaned fellow hiding under his porch just waiting to dirty bomb Suburbanshitstain, USA. and thereby supporting whatever folly they wish to pursue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,690 Posts
bluedog, I don't quite understand how saying that it appears that he's debunking the Bushie "foreign fighters" myth makes you point. Can you explain? And my question of just how this provides aid and comfort to the enemy remains a bit of a mystery to me.

And regarding the contradiction posed by his allegation that the Mukhabarat has also perpetuated the foreign fighter myth for its own purposes, I don't quite see where there's a contradiction - just an irony that both the Mukhabarat and a lot of Bushies each, and for much different reasons, would like to believe that the Iraqi insurgency largely serves as a battleground between US forces and foreign terrorists.

Further mystery: Attributing this disinformation to the Mukabarat is also providing aid and comfort to the enemy?

FYI, the schtick with the Mukhabarat does speak to something I've wondered about: Seems to me that the Iraqi insurgency has killed an awful lot more Iraqis than Americans, and that doesn't seem to be something that would especially endear them to the Iraqi people.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,690 Posts
Cephus said:
Somebody seems to have forgoten that he was paid by the other side to debunk what ever came up If memory serves me right somewere around 150,000 can't remember but it came from the middleast Think one of the sudais Boy I wish I could find that.
Alas, even I have to concede that most US publishing houses would offer at least a $150K advance to him for a book debunking US policy.
 

·
President for Life Field Marshall Doctor Bluedog D
Joined
·
1,604 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I see DB fell for this too. Guys, consider this:
Iraqis killing Iraqis would turn the public against the resistance.
If the above statement is true, why on god's green earth would Bush and the neo-con "boogeymen" (thanks DB, I guess both sides use the same tactics) prop up the Al-Zarquari straw man?
 

·
President for Life Field Marshall Doctor Bluedog D
Joined
·
1,604 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
no takers?
 

·
President for Life Field Marshall Doctor Bluedog D
Joined
·
1,604 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Smeg or DB, unless one of you guys respond, I am gonna A. conclude that you are whooses, and B. go see if I can lure Vampire out with this one. He may call me a [email protected]$sucking motherF*&%er, but at least he'll debate.
 

·
Mystic Knight of the Sea
Joined
·
13,384 Posts
Bluedog,

Don't be luring her over here. We don't need any of that. :eek:
 

·
President for Life Field Marshall Doctor Bluedog D
Joined
·
1,604 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
No, I was gonna post this over there. Not a link here, just the original article.
This is a great article for calling out the Bush Bashers and blame America crowd. The reaction to the alleged "myth" is to lay it a Bush's feet, but that is logicly irreconsilable with the excerpt I separarted out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,413 Posts
Having seen both sides of the facts I would have to go with the admin on these issues. Michael Moore and Scott Ritter or anything UN based is not a relibale source considering the wide ranging oil for food scandal.

I would concede that the Bush admin has made mistakes, but are they producing these videotapes of Bin Laden admitting he is behind this stuff? Al Zawquari? (sp) Beheadings? The training camps and other stuff linked to Al-Q in Iraq?

They paying of $25,000 dollars to suicide bomber families in Palestein from Saddam.

Gassing the Kurds, Shia's, and Iranians? Invading Kuwait? Shooting at our planes daily during the embargo? Not proving to inspectors that he did not have WMD if he was so innocent?

There really should be an argument about whether Saddam need to be taken out and whether or not he was put of the terror alliance.

This reminds of the people who argued that the Concentrations camps prior to our involvement were made up by the evil Jews trying to control the world circa 1937-1938.

I guess I live in Suburbistan, but I don't see things that way. The left has been telling us to think globally for years and as person on the right I feel that we must make sacrifices to help more people become free. I guess I'm naive?
 

·
Mystic Knight of the Sea
Joined
·
13,384 Posts
The way I see it, we have enough situations to blame on Bush Bush without having to bash him for things that aren't true.

I'll give him a big part of the blame for holding our Marines back in Fallujah. But there is little doubt the insurgents are financed, equipped, and backed by countries such as Syria and Iran.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,690 Posts
Cephus said:
... Dizzy you see I wish you could
get the facts straight about what we have and haven't found there
I do keep in touch with some people that are over there...
Well, if they found the weapons of mass destruction that we cited as our primary reason for invading, please ask them to quit keeping it a secret. Bush would dearly like to announce that they have been found.
 

·
Mystic Knight of the Sea
Joined
·
13,384 Posts
Dzerzhinsky said:
Well, if they found the weapons of mass destruction that we cited as our primary reason for invading, please ask them to quit keeping it a secret. Bush would dearly like to announce that they have been found.
Does anyone on the far left think that WMDs never existed? I surely think not. But, the only way we would ever find them is to continue the war on into Syria and Iran. And, there is little doubt in my mind that is going to happen - probably sooner than later.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,690 Posts
Bluedog said:
...If the above statement is true, why on god's green earth would Bush and the neo-con "boogeymen" (thanks DB, I guess both sides use the same tactics) prop up the Al-Zarquari straw man?
First, Bluedog, you seem to be presuming that I am in fundamental agreement with what this article says. I just said it was a suprisingly balanced anti-American article.

That said...

The two are not mutually exclusive. The article points out that propping up that straw man serves the nefarious political purposes of both the evil Americans and the indiginous insurgents: The former to create a Goldstein-like figure (c.f. Orwell's "1984"), an "outside agitator" similar to those to whom conservatives liked to attribute responsibility for the race riots of the 60's here in the states - the latter to distance themselves from the consequences of slaughtering their own countrymen. Politics indeed do make for strange bedfellows. Although the fantasy of Bush and Al Zarquari in the sack together is too kinky even by my standards.
 

·
President for Life Field Marshall Doctor Bluedog D
Joined
·
1,604 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
But why would Bush need an outside agitator? If he blames the bathist reistance for the care bombings and murders, than the true car bambers and true murderers would loose the support of the population which sustains them, right? Bush's only need is to turn the Iraqis against the TRUE enemy. Now Ritter's revelation may have merit, that the true terrorists are largely Bathists, but: Bush has not crated Zarquari, and Bush has NO incentive to misleae the Iraqis as to who the REAL bad guys are. Therefore, I detect some knee jerk extrapulation going on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,063 Posts
Bluedog said:
I see DB fell for this too. Guys, consider this:

If the above statement is true, why on god's green earth would Bush and the neo-con "boogeymen" (thanks DB, I guess both sides use the same tactics) prop up the Al-Zarquari straw man?
As I already stated, to further their agenda. You dont seem to read very well.

And as far as "calling people out" goes, keep that juvenile crap over at the roadhouse.

:kick:
 
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Top