Downloading: Justice (15%)

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/me...erg/index.html

Now, I believe one "Gnarf" owes me an apology for questioning my faith in justice.

[Timber Loftis]

Al-Zarqawi, a 37-year-old Jordanian, has a $10 million reward on his head. The U.S. government contends he has a longstanding connection to al Qaeda and is a close associate of Osama bin Laden. He is accused of organizing terrorists to fight U.S. troops in Iraq on behalf of al Qaeda. He is also believed to have plotted the killing of U.S. diplomat Laurence Foley, who was gunned down in 2002 outside his home in Jordan.

As I've said before, if Iraq was not involved with A.Q. prior to the war, it's certainly the hot spot to find A.Q. members now. Like moths to a flame. From an internal security perspective, starting a war somewhere in the middle east was not a bad idea -- if their members are busy fighting troops over there, they aren't busy bombing Americans over here.

[shamrock_uk]

Heh, that's a very interesting argument TL, don't think i'd ever heard that before. I guess it makes sense too, in a fatalistic kind of way. But still, fighting your troops in Iraq didn't stop the terrorists in Spain. I think there are plenty of loosely affiliated groups that will be more than willing to take up the slack.

[ 05-21-2004, 02:41 PM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

[johnny]

I never understood why they brought up a connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq. It's highly unlikely the two had something cooking together, the only thing they had in common was their hatred for the west. Al Qaeda being fundamentalistic Islamic, and Iraq being close to Stalinistic, and not so very Islamic, hated eachothers guts just as much as they hated the west.

[Timber Loftis]

I don't know about that Johnny. There were definite rumors that Saddam had opened channels of communications with A.Q. Now, whether those rumors were substantiated by unreliable sources (like Chilabi - spelling??) that we now know wanted to encourage the war or by reliable sources, I don't know -- and I guess we never will. However, it wasn't only assumption/conjecture/fantasy. I think that on review, however, it should have been apparent that the connection was tenuous at best.

But, many educated Republicans I know still take it as bedrock fact that Saddam was in bed with A.Q.

I will say the Feyadeen got cozy with A.Q. real quick after the war was lost -- in interesting co-inkydink if ever I saw one.

[Timber Loftis]

Hey Meister of the Whack, note that if it's still only downloading at 15%, Justice is SLOW. Maybe justice needs a new modem.

[shamrock_uk]

Originally posted by johnny: I never understood why they brought up a connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq. It's highly unlikely the two had something cooking together, the only thing they had in common was their hatred for the west. Al Qaeda being fundamentalistic Islamic, and Iraq being close to Stalinistic, and not so very Islamic, hated eachothers guts just as much as they hated the west.

There really wasn't any link. Saddam went to great lengths to squish anything like that, and the Ba'th party is fundamentally a secular one nowadays. The pentagon never actually said that they were linked, but kept using both of them in the same sentences and of course the connection was made.

A survey done of US troops in Iraq found that over 50% (i will dig out the exact percentage and a source later) thought Saddam did September 11th

[johnny]

Just curious..... would Al Qaeda be more on the Shia side, or on the Sunny side ? Or are they a faction completely different then any other ?

[Timber Loftis]

Forecast says Sunni one day, turning to Shi'ite another, Johnny.

The current established link re: the beheading is between A.Q. and the Baathist Feyadeen.

[shamrock_uk]

Originally posted by johnny: Just curious..... would Al Qaeda be more on the Shia side, or on the Sunny side ? Or are they a faction completely different then any other ?

A difficult question, there are plenty of factions within Islam, although I think probably more in Christianity. Sunni Muslims are the most orthodox and could maybe be loosely compared with Catholics in that literature and doctrine play an important part as well as the holy texts themselves. So for example, whereas lots of the Catholic faith is built around the early church and the writings of people like St. Aquinas and St. Augustine, the Sunni's also draw on the decisions and writings made after the death of Muhammad.

In terms of religious dedication (however misplaced) I would therefore place them more in the Sunni camp, and certainly they have been implicated by the Americans in a few anti-Shia explosions, although how reliable this accusation is I find unclear.

Certainly both Sunni and Shi'i moderates distance themselves from Al-Qaida, so that doesn't particularly help. I got fed up hearing some people say that the Qu'ran was a peaceful book and others use it for suicide bombings, so I'm reading it myself at the moment, and so far have found nothing that would condone any such action. If that were the case, then they're either nutters using religion as an excuse, or they're deluded into interpreting the text in a perverted way. But there's still plenty to go yet, I'll let you know when i'm finished...luckily it's not as long as the Bible!