Pre-War Iraq/Al-Qaeda link found

[MobBoss]

Yeah. I remember Reagan using that when he backed Saddam against Iran and Bin Laden against the Soviets. So we went into Iraq because Saddam and bin Laden were acting like Reagan? Maybe I should become a war supporter then.

Uhhh. We never backed Saddam and Iran vs the soviets. We did send the Muj's some Stinger missiles in Afghanistan. We havent supported Iran since the Shah left there prior to Reagan.

Maybe you should study more.

 

[jameson]

Uhhh. We never backed Saddam and Iran vs the soviets. We did send the Muj's some Stinger missiles in Afghanistan. We havent supported Iran since the Shah left there prior to Reagan.

Like JollyRoger clearly stated, the US backed Saddam against Iran (insert obligatory Rumsfeld picture here) and backed the Mujahedeen against the Russians, not just with some spare stingers but with hundreds of millions of dollars, stingers and other arms, plus training and logistics. And you sent Rambo .

Anyway, evidence for that link is a whole lot clearer than what we have connecting Saddam to Osama - 1 or 2 alleged meetings, tops. Some documents selectively released by a US government which keeps tons of other documents classified - maybe because they don't fit the assumption that Iraq and Al Qaeda were connected ? If they had something more substantive to prove that, we surely would have heard about it by now - after all, the US's been in control of Iraq for three years now.

 

[JollyRoger]

Uhhh. We never backed Saddam and Iran vs the soviets. We did send the Muj's some Stinger missiles in Afghanistan. We havent supported Iran since the Shah left there prior to Reagan.

My post clearly stated he backed Saddam vs. Iran (the enemy of our enemy)

and bin Laden (who fought on the side Reagan supported - Afghanistan) vs. the Soviets (another enemy of our enemy).

Maybe you should study more.

Maybe you should read more carefully.

 

[MobBoss]

My post clearly stated he backed Saddam vs. Iran (the enemy of our enemy)

and bin Laden (who fought on the side Reagan supported - Afghanistan) vs. the Soviets (another enemy of our enemy).



Maybe you should read more carefully.

I agree. I could have sworn that "against" was an "and". My bad on that one.

However, all the more reason to believe that the saying has truth to it.

I still dont see it as being beyond the realm of possibility to think that Saddam and Al-qaeda were in communication together to conspire vs the west.

 

[JollyRoger]

I still dont see it as being beyond the realm of possibility to think that Saddam and Al-qaeda were in communication together to conspire vs the west.

And I still don't see enough of a documented connection between the two to justify a ground invasion of Iraq.

 

[Sidhe]

And I still don't see enough of a documented connection between the two to justify a ground invasion of Iraq.

And you're not alone, there is no evidence, I'm sure we'd of seen it by now.

I agree. I could have sworn that "against" was an "and". My bad on that one.

However, all the more reason to believe that the saying has truth to it.

I still dont see it as being beyond the realm of possibility to think that Saddam and Al-qaeda were in communication together to conspire vs the west.

Some evidence would be nice, not just opinion, actual direct evidence, no? nm. Go on making speculative posts we'll all agree that they are nothing more than wishful thinking.

 

[GinandTonic]

In all fairness even Sadams buddies were surprised when he didnt have WMD.

And I'll belay the shinn fain us fundrairaising for a more apropriate thread.

 

[The Yankee]

Uhhh. We never backed Saddam and Iran vs the soviets. We did send the Muj's some Stinger missiles in Afghanistan. We havent supported Iran since the Shah left there prior to Reagan.

Maybe you should study more.

Iran was certainly scared of the Soviets in the Shah's days, going all the way back to the 19th century when Britain and Russia thought Central Asia was a giant chessboard.

Still, it's not like we gave nothing to Iran. We did sell a few arms to Iran, for hostages, part of the whole Iran-Contra funfest.

I do have my doubts that Hussein would really cooperate with al-Qaeda, given his secularist state, he certainly wouldn't want to be a target of religious fundamentalists. In all this time, the best evidence we can come up with, if it is evidence, are tiny pieces here and there that are also subject to debate. It'd be nice if we had some proof that was absolute.

 

[Kayak]

I do have my doubts that Hussein would really cooperate with al-Qaeda, given his secularist state, he certainly wouldn't want to be a target of religious fundamentalists. In all this time, the best evidence we can come up with, if it is evidence, are tiny pieces here and there that are also subject to debate. It'd be nice if we had some proof that was absolute.

I don't think short tern goals would be out of the question though, do you? You are right some proof either way would be very nice.

 

[The Yankee]

Well, as it stands now, all is said is that a meeting with bin Laden in Sudan about a decade ago took place, if true. If that's evidence of a working relationship, then any time American and Soviet diplomats met, they'd be in cohorts as well.

For short-term...it'd have to be very short term, one or two operations maybe, Kayak. At that time, there was the Khobar Towers attack...but we've linked that with Iran.