We can’t take this any more.
Zarqawi emerging as self-sustained force-US intel
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s network of al Qaeda-linked insurgents is emerging as a self-sustaining force, despite repeated blows by U.S. forces and the reported death of his second-in-command, U.S. intelligence officials and other experts say.
The Zarqawi network, responsible for some of the Iraqi insurgency’s bloodiest attacks, has grown into a loose confederation of mainly native Iraqis trained by former Baath Party regime officers in explosives, small arms, rockets and surface-to-air missiles.
Since U.S. counter-insurgency assaults forced many of its operatives to exit Iraq’s cities, counterterrorism officials say al Qaeda has been trying to set up a safe haven for training and command operations in western Anbar province.
“The suggestion is that this has shifted from being a terrorist network to a guerrilla army,” said Vali Nasr, a national security affairs expert at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California.
“If this were not checked, the insurgents would become not only militarily more powerful, but politically more powerful. We’re definitely trying to deny that milestone to Zarqawi.”
“… a loose confederation of mainly native Iraqis trained by former Baath Party regime officers …”
So we’re fighting the Iraqis in Iraq so we don’t to fight them here? Were they planning on coming here? Did the CIA find a copy of Red Dawn in one of Hussein’s palaces? Or was it on his Netflix list. I guess that would be the difference betwee an “imminent” and a “gathering” threat.
If the US had pulled out of Viet Nam in 1965 instead of 1975, how would the resulting political landscape of Southeast Asia have been different?
I mean, beside the fact there would have been 50,000 fewer dead American troops?
How many more troops must be sacrificed to bring honor to the fallen in Iraq?
Fallen for what purpose? To salvage the reputations of wrong- headed demi-strategic Iraq Theater architects?
See? We told you there was a connection between Saddam and al Qaeda!
“We can’t take this any more.”
Then you clearly regret your support for Kerry and acknowledge you were totally wrong, then? Does it make you doubt your position now?
And not to quibble, but all you have is an out-of-context quote from one member of the Naval Post Graduate School and then (as the immotal Slim Pickens would have said) a whole sh*tload of quotes from those wonderful anonymous sources who are forever helping you guys make killer points. And the one verifiable quote given says that the Zarqawi force have not reached the status of being a guerilla army.”
Dugger, ‘It’ll be really bad if all the bad stuff happens’
Wow dugger. Can I come live in your world were Iraq is a golden paradise of peace, love, freedom and democracy?
Dugger –
I mean you do believe there is an insurgency in Iraq, right? That it isn’t just the figment of some anonymous source? Nasr’s quote also isn’t the first time its been reported that the majority of the insurgent are, indeed, home grown Iraqis with onyl 10 to 20 percent made up of foreign jihadists. Indeed, Nasr seems to be repeating previously available American military intel.
Say what you will about Kerry but let’s face it, during the election any position short of stay of the course was downright treasonable in the eyes of the right — and that’s the position that the media used to frame to campaigns. Now, of course, it’s all talk of phase outs and timetables and drawdowns. Kerry played it safe back then and he lost. For me at the time, the more important thing was this: Whether drawdown or stay or the course, it would be better to have someone competent in charge. Bush and Co. had had their chance and proved to me, and millions of others, that they were incapable of running one government, let alone two. The rest of the public, at least the swing voters that would have made the biggest difference, didn’t figure this out until Katrina. And now we’re stuck. What a wonderful world …
frame,
May I take it then that you regard the thread heading comment “We can t take this any more. , indicating some kind of significant milestone has occurred, as erroneous or unwarranted?
And yes I’ve seen quotes and believe that the majority of the “insurgo-jihadists” are Iraqis. A disproportionate share of the deadlier attacks, however, have been committed by the foreigners as I read it. None of this is news, however. The thrust of this ONE argument is that things are going to get worse IF the bad guys achieve guerilla army status – which they haven’t. Why then, AGAIN, can’t we take it any more. Is the specualtion too much to bear?
“any position short of stay of the course was downright treasonable in the eyes of the right”
Who says? Mindless hyperbole. I’ve never said this. Don’t recall any mainstream R saying this. Did Bush, Cheney, Rove, Frist? Or by the right do you mean you found somebody someplace who believes what you said. If it was regarded as treason why isn’t Denny Kunich or Nader in jail. Where are then the big headlines of then being condemned as traitors? Who’s prosecuting them? You exaggerated to make your point, didn’t you?
“Bush and Co. had had their chance and proved to me, and millions of others, that they were incapable of running one government, let alone two”
Sure. Too bad for you we live in a democratic republic and more mainstream Americans thought you and your buds wrong than right. They voted for Bush in the only poll that counts. The only.
Dugger
Dugger;
The only one that counts is the next one,
“You exaggerated to make your point, didn t you?”
Oh bullshit and you know it. The last presidential campaign was run entirely under the implicit — and often explicit — theme of “You’re either with us or your against.” Meaning either you’re with the Republican Party or you are against America. Kerry was repeatedly accussed of blaming America first, of giving hope to the terrorists just for suggesting that law enforcement might be more useful than invading a country that had nothing to do with 9-11. Kucinch’s were entirely marginalized in the Democratic Party stricken with fear that it might be accussed of being soft on terror, of not supporting freedom. Fear and initimidation are the hallmarks of this pack of political thugs and they’ve twisted patriotism time and time again to suit thier own ends.
You love to play the literalist when it comes to this kind of stuff because right up until someone does get arrested for disagreeing with policy, right up until someone does get publicly branded a traitor by this administration you can sit back and smuggly pretend like you don’t know what’s going on. It’s the same with your take on Iraq. How much more of this can you take, Dugger? Story after story, fact after fact that our mission over their is coming undone. The insurgents haven’t become a guerilla yet? Are you kidding me? This is how far you’ve lowered the bar? Everything’s cool until that happens? Ya right. If they ever do form a guerilla army I can hear you saying “Well they haven’t taken Baghdad yet. So why are you exagerating.”
You you strike me as a smart, thoughtful guy with a somewhat irritating sense of humor but a sense of humor nonetheless. You and my brother are very much the same. It just boggles my mind how you guys can lean back and make excuse after excuse for this administration. I really do hope it all works out well. I really hope we make it work. But what can you point to right now that’s working? The Constitution? The reconstruction? Security? Stability in the larger region? Less terrorism worldwide? What?
This is the competence, good faith and leadership you are supporting?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9524109/
Hey Dugger –
This work for you:
“The number of Iraqi army battalions that can fight insurgents without U.S. and coalition help has dropped from three to one, top U.S. generals told Congress yesterday, adding that the security situation in Iraq is too uncertain to predict large-scale American troop withdrawals anytime soon.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/29/AR2005092902085.html