US Meets With Insurgents? (1 Viewer)

[GarzaUK]

LONDON - U.S. officials held secret talks in Iraq with the commanders of several Iraqi insurgent groups recently in an attempt to open a dialogue with them, a British newspaper reported Sunday.

The commanders "apparently came face to face" with four American officials during meetings on June 3 and June 13 at a summer villa near Balad, about 25 miles north of Baghdad, the Iraqi capital, according to The Sunday Times.

The Sunday Times said neither the Iraqi government nor U.S. officials in Baghdad would confirm its report about the talks.

Military officials in Baghdad did not immediately respond to a request by The Associated Press for comment on the Times article early Sunday morning.

The story, which quoted unidentified Iraqis whose groups were purportedly involved in the talks, said those at the first meeting included Ansar al-Sunnah Army, which has claimed responsibility for suicide bombings in Iraq and an attack that killed 22 people in the dining hall of a U.S. base at Mosul last Christmas.

Two others were Jaish Mohammed, or Mohammed's Army, and the Islamic Army in Iraq, which in August reportedly killed Italian journalist Enzo Baldoni, the newspaper said.

One of the Americans at the talks introduced himself as a Pentagon representative and declared himself ready to "find ways of stopping the bloodshed on both sides and to listen to demands and grievances," The Sunday Times said... continued

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050626/ap_on_re_eu/britain_iraq

If this is true then it is very interesting. It seems the administration has wised up and realized it can't defeat terrorism or the insurgency by force - which I've been saying all alone :2wave: lol.

I hope the US is in dialogue, for the sake of the Iraqi people.

 

[Tashah]

In my view, the US cannot maintain an indefinite military occupation of Iraq. Firstly, because the Iraqi people will not permit this sort of an open-ended scenario and secondly... because there will eventually come a point in time when the American public will no longer willingly accept the escalating number of US military deaths and casualties. Like it or not, the fact of the matter is that there is a distinct inverse correlation between political will and flag-draped coffins.

The only way to sunder this unending cycle of violence is through a comprehensive and meaningful dialogue between the sitting Iraqi government, the cadre of Iraqi insurgent forces, and the United States government in concert with the respective governments of the Coalition Forces.

I sincerely hope this is a kindling of light in what has so far been a very long and very dark tunnel to nowhere.

 

[MikeyC]

Well, though the insurgents may be evil, I am proud of the US for recognizing the value of talking. Maybe we can finally understand their true goals instead of assuming all they care about is killing Americans. I'm sure we'd like to believe that, but I think it's more likely that they have greater goals they wish to accomplish for themselves.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

No nation can negotiate with terrorists. For there is no way to make peace with those whose only goal is death.

Just a thought

 

[Connecticutter]

It seems the administration has wised up and realized it can't defeat terrorism or the insurgency by force.
I hope the US is in dialogue, for the sake of the Iraqi people.

You can't defeat terrorism by being nice to them. At least not these radical Islamic terrorists anyway.

The insurgency? Some of them will have to be dealt with by force, but of course there needs to be a reconciliation in order to unify Iraq. Some of these insurgents can be brought into the Iraqi system. So I don't think the Bush administration is saying that "Force is never the answer." Sometimes, force clearly is the answer. Just not in every case.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

So I don't think the Bush administration is saying that "Force is never the answer."

The Bush Amdin had previously said that we can never negotiate with terrorists.
Now, all of a sudden, they're wanting to (as Rove put it) "understand" them.

Go figure.

 

[Connecticutter]

But I recall Bush saying that not all insurgents are terrorists. So this doesn't neccesarily contradict their rule about not negotiating with terrorists.

 

[Squawker]

All the details haven't been explained yet, so it's all gossip at this point. They have been trying to get the Sunni involved in the new Iraqi government for some time.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Now Rumsfeld's rumor mongering

Rumsfeld: U.S. Met With Iraq Insurgents

When asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" about the report of the two meetings, Rumsfeld said, "Oh, I would doubt it. I think there have probably been many more than that."
"They're not going to try to bring in the people with blood on their hands, for sure, but they're certainly reaching out continuously, and we help to facilitate those from time to time."
"There's no one negotiating with Zarqawi or the people that are out chopping people's heads off," he said
​

Of course, just because they're not trying "to bring in the people with blood on their hands" doesn't mean that they're not dealing with them.

 

[akyron]

"The Sunday Times report, which quoted unidentified Iraqis whose groups were purportedly involved in the meetings, said the insurgents at the first meeting included the Ansar al-Sunnah Army, which claimed responsibility for suicide bombings in Iraq and a Christmas attack that killed 22 people in the dining hall of a U.S. base at Mosul.

But in its Internet statement, the group said that it hadn't meet with any "crusader or renegade" and said that jihad, "holy war," was the only way to retrieve the "grace and dignity" of the Muslim nation.

Two other groups mentioned were Mohammed's Army and the Islamic Army in Iraq, which in August reportedly killed the Italian journalist Enzo Baldoni, the newspaper said. The Islamic Army in Iraq denied any meeting with U.S. officials, saying on a Web site that "lies" were spread to cause division and sedition among the fighters."

"Ansar al-Sunnah Army said that even when the Americans leave, their associates in the Iraqi government would remain in Iraq and would be targeted."


You cannot talk to these guys but you look like the good guy for trying.
These guys are the product of Madrassas and no amount of logic and appeal will ever work. It has not worked in centuries and won't work now.
Even if some wanted to have peace talks their fellow jihadists would kill them for being slow to fight as it says to do in the Koran.

Qur’an 9:16 “Do you think you will get away before Allah knows who among you have striven hard and fought?”

 

[FiremanRyan]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050626/ap_on_re_eu/britain_iraq

If this is true then it is very interesting. It seems the administration has wised up and realized it can't defeat terrorism or the insurgency by force - which I've been saying all alone :2wave: lol.

I hope the US is in dialogue, for the sake of the Iraqi people.

if you can find one source that quotes the Bush Admin saying that they planned to defeat terrorism solely by force, or even all terrorism for that matter, ill do a backflip.

i dont see why this is even worth discussing. obviously, as larger, more organized insurgent groups arise, they would have to make some sort of contact with them. whether or not it helps, i guess we'll have to see. these people are beyond irrational.

this is probably about representation. in Iraq, most of these terror groups represent certain minorities within the country. what theyre literally saying is that if we allow them seats within the new Iraqi government, they will stop the terrorism.

 

[GarzaUK]

if you can find one source that quotes the Bush Admin saying that they planned to defeat terrorism solely by force, or even all terrorism for that matter, ill do a backflip.

i dont see why this is even worth discussing. obviously, as larger, more organized insurgent groups arise, they would have to make some sort of contact with them. whether or not it helps, i guess we'll have to see. these people are beyond irrational.

this is probably about representation. in Iraq, most of these terror groups represent certain minorities within the country. what theyre literally saying is that if we allow them seats within the new Iraqi government, they will stop the terrorism.

Enlighten me on how the US has dealed with stopping terrorism after 9/11 WITHOUT force? Hmm Intelligence - for protection, thats about it.

 

[GarzaUK]

Well, though the insurgents may be evil, I am proud of the US for recognizing the value of talking. Maybe we can finally understand their true goals instead of assuming all they care about is killing Americans. I'm sure we'd like to believe that, but I think it's more likely that they have greater goals they wish to accomplish for themselves.

I agree, you can't defeat terrorism by being nice to them, you can't defeat terrorism with warfare either.

You attack, they move somewhere else, regroup, then attack. That basically what the terrorists did over her in Belfast.

Fallijuah - yeah that city that was supposed to be safe and secure now since you invaded it. It has seen bombs galore in the past couple of weeks. Even though the US almost ruined the city, surrounded it, battered the terrorists to a pulp - the city still sees terrorism.

This should be enough evidence of the durability of terrorism.

Ultimately to fight terrorism, you need to wipe out the hatred that fills their recruitment line.