Al-Qaeda and the Iraq Occupation

[Joby]

Let's face it. The Iraq war has caused millions of moderate muslims to at least sypathize with anti-American forces.

My question is, does al-Qaeda really want us to leave?

It is their stated goal, and it would show them to be succesfull, but it would also get rid of their biggest recruiting tool. If the US were to leave, with at least a reasonable government in charge, and tried to repair broken fences, might it cause the large numbers moderate muslims who support al-Qaeda only because it fights the 'invader'-not because they wish to live under caliphs-to stop?

Certainly, al-Qaeda would try to rally anti-Israel anger, but that's judged by many experts to be less of a tool than anti-US Occupation anger.

Does al-Qaeda want us to stay in Iraq indefinitely, until we bleed to death?

 

[Joby]

DAMN! i messed up the poll...

...should have taken more computer classes...

 

[ProudAmerican]

AQ would like us to leave as soon as possible......

As War Over Leak Grips Washington, Al Qaeda Quails

By ELI LAKE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
September 27, 2006

WASHINGTON — On a day when much of the capital's attention was focused on leaked excerpts of an intelligence estimate report that suggested the Iraq war was creating more jihadists, the military quietly released an intercepted letter from Al Qaeda complaining that the terrorist organization was losing ground in Iraq.

The letter, found in the headquarters of Al Qaeda's leader in Iraq, Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi, after he was killed on June 7, was sent to Zarqawi by a senior Al Qaeda leader who signs his name simply "Atiyah." He complains that Al Qaeda is weak both in the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region and in Iraq.

A former jihadist who fought in Algeria in the 1990s, Atiyah appears from the text to be speaking for Al Qaeda's Shura Council — the group's decision-making panel chaired by Osama bin Laden. In the letter, he sharply criticizes Zarqawi's leadership, saying he alienated key allies necessary for the implementation of jihad in Iraq.

"Know that we, like all the Mujahidin, are still weak," he wrote in the letter dated December 11, 2005. "We are in the stage of weakness and a state of paucity. We have not yet reached a level of stability. We have no alternative but to not squander any element of the foundations of strength, or any helper or supporter."

http://www.nysun.com/article/40461



Thank you TOT for the above information.

 

[AcePylut]

Does al-Qaeda want us to stay in Iraq indefinitely, until we bleed to death?

NO, they want us to leave as fast as possible, so they can claim a huge victory, which will be a far better recruiting tool than anything they have. Sadly, nearly half of our politicans don't understand this, and even more sadly, nearly half of US citizens don't understand this.

The whole "Iraq is a cause celebre for recruiting" is a red herring, and the debate over it just displays the ignorance of both sides arguing that it is/isn't. The "cause celebre" for recruiting is the Koran and Iraq is the "excuse". i.e. if Iraq wasn't the excuse, then it would be something else. Like Afghanistan, or the "original"... Saudia Arabia... or Israel... and so on.

 

[Iriemon]

What did bin Laden declare and want? Jihad!

If you are the leader of an extremist radical movement, the best way you can get people to support your radical views is by creating an evironment where they feel threatened. The US attacking Iraq accomplished their goals beyond their wildest dreams! It was a stupid, immature, poorly thought out response by the Bush Administration that played right into their hands.

AQ may be "weakened" if you believe this is true, but the Muslim is inflamed against American, anti-American radical terrorst organization are growing by leaps and bounds, and they are getting their jihad.

Pulling out of Iraq, and removing that huge thorn in the Muslims pride, would be the *worst* thing that could happen to them.

If we pull out of Iraq, you will see more attempts at terrorist attacks by the extremist to try to goad us back into war with Muslims.

 

[The face of Jacob]

I love it when Muslims are talking about "occupation, occupation, occupation" from the morning till the evening.

In case you didn't know, Islam occupied 1/3 of the world by the power of the sword, forcing millions of people to believe in the travels of Mohamad on his magic flying horse from Mecca to Jerusalem.

Islam occupied parts of the land of Israel. They are the real occupiers. They stole 99% of the middle east and still want to occupy a small land which is the state of Israel and to throw all the non Muslims to the sea and this is what they are planning to do to the Europeans after.

Occupation?

Give me a break!

America went to Iraq to occupy it? what nonsence is this? America traveled thousands of miles and sacrificed thousands of her troops to occupy Iraq? or to remove the mad regime of her which threatened the free world?

Calling the American presence in Iraq in the name of "occupation" is nothing but complete nonsence!

 

[Calm2Chaos]

What did bin Laden declare and want? Jihad!

If you are the leader of an extremist radical movement, the best way you can get people to support your radical views is by creating an evironment where they feel threatened. The US attacking Iraq accomplished their goals beyond their wildest dreams! It was a stupid, immature, poorly thought out response by the Bush Administration that played right into their hands.

AQ may be "weakened" if you believe this is true, but the Muslim is inflamed against American, anti-American radical terrorst organization are growing by leaps and bounds, and they are getting their jihad.

Pulling out of Iraq, and removing that huge thorn in the Muslims pride, would be the *worst* thing that could happen to them.

If we pull out of Iraq, you will see more attempts at terrorist attacks by the extremist to try to goad us back into war with Muslims.

So your saying that moderate muslims are being pushed to groups like AQ by the US and the Iraq war? If this is true and moderate mulsims are taking on the cause of killing innocent people because of the war then they were never moderate to begin with and need to be dealt with in the same manner you deal with a rabid dog. If your leap of faith is a huge jump to murdering civilians by the truck load then your a diseasedmind that needs to be cut out. And if your willing to take that huge leap , better to get rid of you now. Because sooner or later your going to go to that side anyway, your just looking for the excuse

 

[talloulou]

What did bin Laden declare and want? Jihad!

If you are the leader of an extremist radical movement, the best way you can get people to support your radical views is by creating an evironment where they feel threatened. The US attacking Iraq accomplished their goals beyond their wildest dreams! It was a stupid, immature, poorly thought out response by the Bush Administration that played right into their hands.

AQ may be "weakened" if you believe this is true, but the Muslim is inflamed against American, anti-American radical terrorst organization are growing by leaps and bounds, and they are getting their jihad.

Pulling out of Iraq, and removing that huge thorn in the Muslims pride, would be the *worst* thing that could happen to them.

If we pull out of Iraq, you will see more attempts at terrorist attacks by the extremist to try to goad us back into war with Muslims.

I disagree. If you pull out of Iraq while there is still chaos and the government doesn't yet have full control then you have created an atmosphere where "jihad" can be successful and extremists groups can take Iraq back and oppress the populace. That would be incredibly stupid, short-sighted, and set up a history that will relate all our efforts in the area in vain.

 

[AcePylut]

What did bin Laden declare and want? Jihad!

If you are the leader of an extremist radical movement, the best way you can get people to support your radical views is by creating an evironment where they feel threatened. The US attacking Iraq accomplished their goals beyond their wildest dreams! It was a stupid, immature, poorly thought out response by the Bush Administration that played right into their hands.

AQ may be "weakened" if you believe this is true, but the Muslim is inflamed against American, anti-American radical terrorst organization are growing by leaps and bounds, and they are getting their jihad.

Pulling out of Iraq, and removing that huge thorn in the Muslims pride, would be the *worst* thing that could happen to them.

If we pull out of Iraq, you will see more attempts at terrorist attacks by the extremist to try to goad us back into war with Muslims.

The recent Israel/Lebanon war, and the fallout resulting from Israel's withdrawal, pretty much disproves everything you just said.

 

[AcePylut]

Correction: not so much "everything", but with respect to "pulling out would be the worst thing that could happen to AQ".

As in, the fallout of the most recent Israel/Lebanon flareup, and the face-gain by Hizbollah after the withdrawal, disproves that "pulling out would be the worst thing that could happen". That "stature gain" by Hizbollah is exactly what would be experienced by AQ, and pulling out would be the worst thing that could happen to the US.

 

[Iriemon]

Correction: not so much "everything", but with respect to "pulling out would be the worst thing that could happen to AQ".

As in, the fallout of the most recent Israel/Lebanon flareup, and the face-gain by Hizbollah after the withdrawal, disproves that "pulling out would be the worst thing that could happen". That "stature gain" by Hizbollah is exactly what would be experienced by AQ, and pulling out would be the worst thing that could happen to the US.

I don't agree that Israel's sitiuation with Palestine/Lebanon/Hezbullah is comparable to the US's situation in its "war" on terror -- not that I'm say there is not some relationship.

Also, I did not mean to imply there would be no negative consequences of a US pull-out of Iraq. Yes there will be. We are in a damned if you do or don't situation because of this colossal error. But long term it is in AQ's interest for the US to maintain forces in Iraq, IMO.

But your response would suppose that Israel's long term position would be better off if it occupied Southern Lebanon, which I would question.

 

[Joby]

The recent Israel/Lebanon war, and the fallout resulting from Israel's withdrawal, pretty much disproves everything you just said.

...what fallout? any atacks you know of we haven't headrd about?

 

[Joby]

Islam occupied parts of the land of Israel. They are the real occupiers. They stole 99% of the middle east and still want to occupy a small land which is the state of Israel and to throw all the non Muslims to the sea and this is what they are planning to do to the Europeans after.

Look, it's not there fault y'all got kicked out a long time ago.

You guys should have called a louder seatcheck. They obviously didn't get the message, or lost it, in the what....2000 years?

 

[AcePylut]

...what fallout? any atacks you know of we haven't headrd about?

The fallout being that Hizbollah exists, still calls for the destruction of Israel, it's stature has improved immensely, it hasn't given up it's weapons. Had Israel finished the job, none of this would be the case.

It's only a matter of time before Hizbollah does something, again.

 

[AcePylut]

I don't agree that Israel's sitiuation with Palestine/Lebanon/Hezbullah is comparable to the US's situation in its "war" on terror -- not that I'm say there is not some relationship.

Also, I did not mean to imply there would be no negative consequences of a US pull-out of Iraq. Yes there will be. We are in a damned if you do or don't situation because of this colossal error. But long term it is in AQ's interest for the US to maintain forces in Iraq, IMO.

But your response would suppose that Israel's long term position would be better off if it occupied Southern Lebanon, which I would question.

It may be a damned if you do, damned if you don't, however, I happen to believe that "it" would be far worse if we "did" (where did = pull out) than if we stay and finish the job.

I dispute that it's in AQ's interest for the US to stay in Iraq. The longer we stay, the more the population turns against AQ. LIke I believe I said earlier, the whole "Iraq is the cause celebre" is a red herring. If not Iraq, then Afghanistan, if not Afghanistan than Saudi Arabia.... and if none of those, the existance of Israel is the original and only cause celebre necessary.

I don't mean to imply that I support Israel in a "occupation of Southern Lebanon forever". My position is that Israel shouldn't have stopped until Hizbollah had been neutralized/eliminated/what-have-ya, which would allow the Lebanese Army to move in and take over.

It's apparent that the "ceasefire" resolution isn't worth the paper it's written on. NOt when the prime "mover" of the ceasefire (france), gets the ceasefire they want (with them in the lead) by saying they'll lead it with 2k troops, and then as soon as it's agreed upon, they turn around and say they're only going to send a couple hundred. Typical France. Yeah, Israel is following this resolution for the most part, but Hizbollah isn't, as evident by Nasrallah's recent "we aren't going to give up our weapons to the Lebanese military". And why would they, when France renigged on their committment about 2 seconds after the ink was dried.