Ayman al-Zawahri addresses the American people

Kix · #31 (**permalink**) 12-24-2006, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by graybeard

Good point Marsh.There is probably a lot of truth in this statement. They knew they had no chance in a toe-to-toe battle with us, but felt they could win a war of attrition.

If that's the case, then why are they bringing so many weapons in from outside Iraq as everyone says they're doing? Or, are these some of the weapons that were removed from Iraq during the 5 months warning (October - March) that Saddam had prior to the invasion? Could it be that they're now filtering them back into Iraq for this pre-planned offensive? If you agree they might be, do you also believe that he could have moved other weapons such as WMD out of Iraq during that time as well? Or at least that he may have hidden them in underground bunkers all of which may still have not been located. That's a lot of time to hide/shift things, don't you think?

graybeard · #32 (**permalink**) 12-24-2006, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kix

If that's the case, then why are they bringing so many weapons in from outside Iraq as everyone says they're doing? Or, are these some of the weapons that were removed from Iraq during the 5 months warning (October - March) that Saddam had prior to the invasion? Could it be that they're now filtering them back into Iraq for this pre-planned offensive? If you agree they might be, do you also believe that he could have moved other weapons such as WMD out of Iraq during that time as well? Or at least that he may have hidden them in underground bunkers all of which may still have not been located. That's a lot of time to hide/shift things, don't you think?

Well, a lot would depend on who has possession of the caches. If most were buried in Anbar, the Sunni would most likely have control of them. If that were the case, Iran sending weapons to the Shia would make sense. There is no denying Iran is sending weapon to Iraq, but I doubt the Sunnis are the recipients of any of them.
I have a question concerning WMD. Wouldn’t you think, with the prospect of death hanging over their heads, one or some of the defendants on trial would want to plea bargain with the US? WMD for a lighter sentence perhaps.

Still Dizzy · #33 (**permalink**) 12-24-2006, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George O Well

Time to sit back and let the grown-ups take care of business for you.

Kerry, Kennedy, Burtha, Osama, Nancy, Hildabeast..............Yup! THAT is the A team.

freedomlover · #34 (**permalink**) 12-24-2006, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skinny Fatts

You are quite correct that in believing that some reps view the dems as the enemy, but some dems think the same of republicans. Such as the following quote from Joe Biden in '05:"I believe the Administration deliberately chose to take the worst-case scenario...and weave it into a whole cloth to convince the American people that Saddam Hussein either had or was on the verge of (having) nuclear weapons which he was nowhere near."

To include the word "deliberately" colors this quote just as we have been talking about. The President (regardless of party) has to make decisions based on the information he has. If one wants to say the President made lousy decisions and you disagree with them is one thing. To say he did this "deliberately" implies many things in the imagination that require clarification is quite another. In this case the burden of proof is on Mr. Biden to show deliberateness (if that's word). If he cannot then at least admit his irresponsibilty. The same goes for republicans. We as voters need to hold them accountable. The point of all this clap-trap is to say that both parties can and should disagree on some matters, but NEED to go to bed at night knowing we're on the same side.

Happy RamaHanaKwanzMas!!

I agree with you completely. And Happy RamaHanaKwanzMas to you too

Kix · #35 (**permalink**) 12-24-2006, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by graybeard

Well, a lot would depend on who has possession of the caches. If most were buried in Anbar, the Sunni would most likely have control of them. If that were the case, Iran sending weapons to the Shia would make sense. There is no denying Iran is sending weapon to Iraq, but I doubt the Sunnis are the recipients of any of them.
I have a question concerning WMD. Wouldn’t you think, with the prospect of death hanging over their heads, one or some of the defendants on trial would want to plea bargain with the US? WMD for a lighter sentence perhaps.

I really don't think the concept of plea bargaining means a whole lot to these folks. That's a western concept, even more specific to the U.S., don't you think?

graybeard · #36 (**permalink**) 12-24-2006, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kix

I really don't think the concept of plea bargaining means a whole lot to these folks. That's a western concept, even more specific to the U.S., don't you think?

Yes, but with the administration’s desire to locate WMD; I would think they would enlighten them to the concept.

Skinny Fatts · #37 (**permalink**) 12-24-2006, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George O Well

>>>Sorry, Skippy, but Ayman al Zawahiri has been playing rope-a-dope with you Republican clownies for the last 5 years. Time to sit back and let the grown-ups take care of business for you.

BWAAaaHAhahaaaAAAAAaaaaaaaaaa...HaaAh...Haa..(coug h, wheeze). George, there are no grown-ups in Washington.

Kix · #38 (**permalink**) 12-24-2006, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by graybeard

Yes, but with the administration’s desire to locate WMD; I would think they would enlighten them to the concept.

Remember though, we'd not only have to enlighten the ones who might roll over, but also the courts over there, since they'd actually be the one's having to make the offer. Well, except for the few we have at Gitmo from Iraq, but I think they've already tried that there and I don't think they're the kind that can be "enlightened" about much of anything if you know what I mean.

graybeard · #39 (**permalink**) 12-24-2006, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kix

Remember though, we'd not only have to enlighten the ones who might roll over, but also the courts over there, since they'd actually be the one's having to make the offer. Well, except for the few we have at Gitmo from Iraq, but I think they've already tried that there and I don't think they're the kind that can be "enlightened" about much of anything if you know what I mean.

Well, I am of the opinion that they were destroyed way prior to our invasion. I believe Saddam wanted to keep his enemies guessing and that is why he was so elusive in regards to WMD. I recall watching Powell present the case before the UN and saying” is that it, is that all we have?” hoping we were holding a trump card following the invasion. Never happened.

Kix · #40 (**permalink**) 12-24-2006, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by graybeard

Well, I am of the opinion that they were destroyed way prior to our invasion. I believe Saddam wanted to keep his enemies guessing and that is why he was so elusive in regards to WMD. I recall watching Powell present the case before the UN and saying” is that it, is that all we have?” hoping we were holding a trump card following the invasion. Never happened.

Yeah, I also recall a quick blip in the media about some satellite imagery showing what appeared to be heavy military traffic leaving Iraq into Syria in the months leading up to the invasion and a Gen. Georges Sada saying the same thing. That talk was quickly snuffed out of the media though for some reason and didn't resurface until the Jordanians arrested several people trying to sneak WMD into their country. Then that news too quickly vanished from public view. This is the only info I can find on that incident now and it's just a copied and pasted AP story on another message board.

I wish we'd gotten more info about all of that because I still have to wonder if and how much Saddam did move out of Iraq in that 5 month period. After all, he and his neighbors may not get along all that well with each other, but they all seem to have one goal shared by all of them; the conquest and/or destruction of Israel. So, if Saddam knew in advance that we wouldn't back down this time like we did before it seems to me that logic would compel him to hand whatever he had over to those who might possibly use it for its intended purpose.