SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: thames_sider who wrote (100492)6/6/2003 5:25:22 AM
From: D. Long  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Yep. But there's nothing to do with terrorism there, and that's the point I'm making... the terrorist connection is at best past and irrelevant. I'm sure we could depend on Rumsfeld etc. to mention anything credible and relevant - if there were such.

It's very convenient of you to continue to ignore the Zarqawi connection. Doesn't fit your picture?

wesh.com

-----------------------------------------------------------

Iraq and terrorism go back decades. Baghdad trains Palestine Liberation Front members in small arms and explosives. Saddam uses the Arab Liberation Front to funnel money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers in order to prolong the Intifada. And it's no secret that Saddam's own intelligence service was involved in dozens of attacks or attempted assassinations in the 1990s.


But what I want to bring to your attention today is the potentially much more sinister nexus between Iraq and the al-Qaida terrorist network, a nexus that combines classic terrorist organizations and modern methods of murder. Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist network headed by Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, an associated collaborator of Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida lieutenants.

Zarqawi, a Palestinian born in Jordan, fought in the Afghan war more than a decade ago. Returning to Afghanistan in 2000, he oversaw a terrorist training camp. One of his specialities and one of the specialties of this camp is poisons. When our coalition ousted the Taliban, the Zarqawi network helped establish another poison and explosive training center camp. And this camp is located in northeastern Iraq.

You see a picture of this camp.

The network is teaching its operatives how to produce ricin and other poisons. Let me remind you how ricin works. Less than a pinch - image a pinch of salt - less than a pinch of ricin, eating just this amount in your food, would cause shock followed by circulatory failure. Death comes within 72 hours and there is no antidote, there is no cure. It is fatal.

Those helping to run this camp are Zarqawi lieutenants operating in northern Kurdish areas outside Saddam Hussein's controlled Iraq. But Baghdad has an agent in the most senior levels of the radical organization, Ansar al-Islam, that controls this corner of Iraq. In 2000 this agent offered al-Qaida safe haven in the region. After we swept al-Qaida from Afghanistan, some of its members accepted this safe haven. They remain there today.

Zarqawi's activities are not confined to this small corner of northeast Iraq. He traveled to Baghdad in May 2002 for medical treatment, staying in the capital of Iraq for two months while he recuperated to fight another day.

During this stay, nearly two dozen extremists converged on Baghdad and established a base of operations there. These al-Qaida affiliates, based in Baghdad, now coordinate the movement of people, money and supplies into and throughout Iraq for his network, and they've now been operating freely in the capital for more than eight months.

Iraqi officials deny accusations of ties with al-Qaida. These denials are simply not credible. Last year an al-Qaida associate bragged that the situation in Iraq was, quote, "good," that Baghdad could be transited quickly.

We know these affiliates are connected to Zarqawi because they remain even today in regular contact with his direct subordinates, including the poison cell plotters, and they are involved in moving more than money and material.

Last year, two suspected al-Qaida operatives were arrested crossing from Iraq into Saudi Arabia. They were linked to associates of the Baghdad cell, and one of them received training in Afghanistan on how to use cyanide. From his terrorist network in Iraq, Zarqawi can direct his network in the Middle East and beyond.

We, in the United States, all of us at the State Department, and the Agency for International Development - we all lost a dear friend with the cold-blooded murder of Mr. Lawrence Foley in Amman, Jordan last October, a despicable act was committed that day. The assassination of an individual whose sole mission was to assist the people of Jordan. The captured assassin says his cell received money and weapons from Zarqawi for that murder.

After the attack, an associate of the assassin left Jordan to go to Iraq to obtain weapons and explosives for further operations. Iraqi officials protest that they are not aware of the whereabouts of Zarqawi or of any of his associates. Again, these protests are not credible. We know of Zarqawi's activities in Baghdad. I described them earlier.

And now let me add one other fact. We asked a friendly security service to approach Baghdad about extraditing Zarqawi and providing information about him and his close associates. This service contacted Iraqi officials twice, and we passed details that should have made it easy to find Zarqawi. The network remains in Baghdad. Zarqawi still remains at large to come and go.

As my colleagues around this table and as the citizens they represent in Europe know, Zarqawi's terrorism is not confined to the Middle East. Zarqawi and his network have plotted terrorist actions against countries, including France, Britain, Spain, Italy, Germany and Russia.

According to detainee Abuwatia (ph), who graduated from Zarqawi's terrorist camp in Afghanistan, tasks at least nine North African extremists from 2001 to travel to Europe to conduct poison and explosive attacks.

Since last year, members of this network have been apprehended in France, Britain, Spain and Italy. By our last count, 116 operatives connected to this global web have been arrested.

The chart you are seeing shows the network in Europe. We know about this European network, and we know about its links to

Three of those he identified by name were arrested in France last December. In the apartments of the terrorists, authorities found circuits for explosive devices and a list of ingredients to make toxins.

The detainee who helped piece this together says the plot also targeted Britain. Later evidence, again, proved him right. When the British unearthed a cell there just last month, one British police officer was murdered during the disruption of the cell.

We also know that Zarqawi's colleagues have been active in the Pankisi Gorge, Georgia and in Chechnya, Russia. The plotting to which they are linked is not mere chatter. Members of Zarqawi's network say their goal was to kill Russians with toxins.



To: thames_sider who wrote (100492)6/6/2003 7:46:14 AM
From: Hawkmoon  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
Yep. But there's nothing to do with terrorism there, and that's the point I'm making... the terrorist connection is at best past and irrelevant. I'm sure we could depend on Rumsfeld etc. to mention anything credible and relevant - if there were such.

Uh Thames? Have you forgotten 1441? Iraq was not Afghanistan... Iraq was fought because the US was fed up with being required to contain Saddam's government while every other state in the region was undermining those efforts (violating the sanctions).

It was fought on the basis that there were strong indications that Saddam was continuing to violate the cease fire agreement (mobile biological laboratories are a violation).

GWBushJr. didn't go to the UN to claim that we should overthrow Saddam based solely upon terrorism.

BTW, our stance on enforcing UN resolutions would sound less hypocritical, more consistent, if we tried enforcing 242 and its many successors. Just a thought...

Have you looked at the UN charter recently? Chapter VII resolutions, such as the one against Iraq, are BINDING (ie: must be enforced, no nation can violate them, even your grandma can't violate them, No, not even if you say pretty please, with sugar on top, Well of, maybe if you cut me in for a cut of the profits so long as we keep it really quiet)..

But the resolutions regarding Israel are based upon Chapter VI, and are NON-BINDING since they are based upon the principle that ALL PARTIES must negotiate, arbitrate, and resolve their dispute peacefully... As we've seen, no particular party is obligated to abide by those resolutions (don't have to do it, wouldn't be prudent, they other guys are being mean, I can't trust the other side, maybe if they give me a cookie, or I want billions in economic and military assistance in exchange for being such a hardass)..

jcpa.org

What you should spend more time pondering Thames, IMO, is why so many goverments in Europe seemed so hell bent upon preserving Saddam's regime, given the brutality and corruption that has been revealed.

Mmm, yes, the PNAC agenda. Rebuild the ME be selective colonisation, for the good of the world (or at least that portion of it subservient to the US).

I guess you feel no obligation towards ending the authoritarian corruption in that region? Did you favor maintaining dictatorships in Latin America as well??

The region needs to be politically reshuffled. The demographics demand it since the population of some Arab nations consists of 50% children under 18. There is a population "bomb" getting ready to explode in the region, and neither Europe or the US will be able to avoid the effects of that (just as the US finds Mexicans flooding across our southern border scrambling to find jobs).

And annex the oil supply, of course.

For one, there's no way the US will be involved in annexing Iraqi oil. But let's say we entertain your dysfunctional logic, let me ask this question...

From whom have we annexed the oil??

1). From the Iraqi people who saw LITTLE benefit from its proceeds??

2). Or from Saddam, the guy who spent Iraq's oil wealth building incredibly decadent palaces and paying off his support base while the rest of Iraq was left to fend for itself???

While you obviously believe it's number 1... The reality is that it is number 2.

And you chose number 1 because you, like many others, wish to bias your analysis with your own political bias, as opposed to analyzing the actual reality.

In sum, there are any number of reasons that should have justified the overthrow of Saddam's regime. It just so happens that the UN resolution 1441, and Iraq's continuing defiance of previous resolutions, provided a legal context in which to carry out the job.

And to be quite frank, there are many other countries around the world that could use some regime change.. Governments that are butchering and oppressing their people
on a daily basis... (Congo?, Liberia?)

But in those cases we lack the legal pretext through the UN.

I guess we just differ on what our responsibilities are with regard to trying to better the lives of people around the world. You seem content to hide behind legalistic principles, permitting brutal regimes to continue repressing their own people, while at the same time threatening their neighbors. I, on the other hand, seek to effect positive change whereever the opportunity avails itself.

And no.. I don't feel we have an obligation to step in an overthrow every despotic regime. But we have an obligation to pressure those governments for political and economic change.. using economic sanctions that hit them in their pocket books.. The military should be left as a last option, as in Iraq.

Hawk