Subject:
|
Newsbits: (was Re: The War etc)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 1 Aug 2003 19:05:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
360 times
|
| |
|
|
Conflict ‘may have driven Muslims into arms of al-Qa’ida’
http://news.independent.co.uk/low_res/story.jsp?story=429482&host=3&dir=62
The war to topple Saddam Hussein may have damaged the campaign against
international terrorism by driving Muslims into the arms of al-Qa’ida, an
all-party committee of MPs said yesterday.
The Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee said al-Qa’ida remained a
“significant threat” to Britain, after hearing that the terrorist network may
still have the loyalty of more than 17,000 militants in up to 60 countries.
In a report that raises questions about an important part of the justification
for war, MPs said the campaign in Iraq might have “enhanced the appeal of
al-Qa’ida to Muslims living in the Gulf region and elsewhere”.
snip!
They said: “We cannot conclude that these threats have diminished significantly,
in spite of regime change in Iraq and progress in capturing some of the leaders
of al- Qa’ida. Those that remain at large, including Osama bin Laden, retain the
capacity to lead and guide the organisation towards further atrocities.
Al-Qa’ida has dangerously large numbers of foot soldiers and has demonstrated an
alarming capacity to regenerate itself.
Did war compromise al-Qaida hunt?
http://www.msnbc.com/news/945588.asp?0cv=CA01
A former national security official in the Bush administration tells NBC News
Senior Investigative Correspondent Lisa Myers the White House was warned that
the buildup against Saddam might provide a respite for Osama bin Laden and his
henchmen. “There were decisions made,” says Flynt Leverett, a former director at
the National Security Council in the Bush White House, “to take key assets,
human assets, technical assets, out of theater in Afghanistan in order to
position them for the campaign to unseat Saddam.” Leverett, a former senior
CIA analyst, talks with the professorial precision of an academic. “We see
today,” he says, “that al-Qaida has been able to reconstitute leadership cells
in the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region and it would seem in Eastern Iran.”
US debates bid to kill Hussein and avoid trial
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/213/nation/US_debates_bid_to_kill_Hussein_and_avoid_trialP.shtml
WASHINGTON -- Senior Bush administration officials are debating whether to order
military commanders to kill rather than capture Saddam Hussein to avoid an
unpredictable trial that could stir up nationalist Arab sentiments and embarrass
Washington by publicizing past US support for the deposed Iraqi dictator,
according to defense and intelligence officials.
Scientists Still Deny Iraqi Arms Programs
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A5497-2003Jul30?language=printer
No matter the circumstances, all of the scientists interviewed have denied that
Hussein had reconstituted his nuclear weapons program or developed and hidden
chemical or biological weapons since United Nations inspectors left in 1998.
Several key Iraqi officials questioned the significance of evidence cited by the
Bush administration to suggest that Hussein was stepping up efforts to develop
new weapons of mass destruction programs.
US expert promises WMD ‘surprises’
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3115035.stm
David Kay, a special adviser to the CIA, said solid progress was being made, but
would not be drawn on whether any actual weapons of mass destruction (WMD) had
been found.
snip!
A former chief weapons inspector at the UN, Mr Kay was sent to Iraq by the CIA
to lead the search for weapons of mass destruction.
He stressed that the search had switched from sites identified by the coalition
before the war as potential arms plants to areas picked out by Iraqis
themselves.
It’s fascinating how little we really know about Saddam -- our man in Iraq for
years!
You know what’s interesting about that last bit? For one, you have a former UN
weapons inspector, now a CIA man, digging for the goods to appease an
international audience -- and not Hans Blix backed by the U.N. Why should the
international community expect a CIA guy to deliver the undoctored evidence? You
have to admire the CIA, they did it right -- they hired an expert in weapons
detection to discover the sorts of the things that would and would not be
plausible to other weapons inspectors. Two, things being discovered now have
no relevance to what was known before the war. Knowledge is not retroactive --
Shrub did not know these things before he got the jones for Iraqi oil, he was
merely hoping that nobody would notice. Third, unless the evidence produced is
truly compelling and somehow tamper proof, without an international committee of
inspectors overseeing the process the findings will never be believed.
Get ready -- the circus is coming!
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Newsbits: (was Re: The War etc)
|
| (...) ??? Or it may not have. (...) ??? Or they may not have that. (...) ??? Or it might not have. (...) How exactly were they looking to draw their conclusions? This article is basically opinion. (...) Thank you for the warning, Doctor Spin. JOHN (21 years ago, 2-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: The War That Never Ends
|
| (...) Please explain with great specificity how the twin invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq have made us safer from terrorism. Of course, keep in my mind that there is much intelligence claiming the exact opposite of your probably false assertion (...) (21 years ago, 1-Aug-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
30 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
