Al-Queda trying to get fighters in Syria to unite to make Syria an Islamic State

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by dadx4, Oct 12, 2013.

  1. dadx4
    Offline

    dadx4 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    30,166
    Likes Received:
    707
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Gainesville, Fl
    Ratings Received:
    +2,080
    [​IMG]

    In an audio message Friday, the leader of al-Qaida urged jihadis in Syria to unite, an appeal likely aimed at rival affiliates of his terror network operating in the country.

    Ayman al-Zawahri said fighters must "rise above organizational loyalties and party partisanship" and unite behind the goal of setting up an Islamic state. He suggested he will not impose unity, saying that "what you agree upon will also be our choice."
  2. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,534
    Likes Received:
    4,091
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +6,085
    Wow! Terrorist groups wanting to unite for an Islamist state...that's news /eye-roll
  3. BobbyFischer
    Offline

    BobbyFischer New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2013
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +7
    Pepe Escobar was talking about the al-Qaeda component of the Syrian rebels in a column that ran in the Asia Times Online on February 14, 2012. Israel would rather have al-Qaeda running Syria than Assad according to Escobar. The mercenary jihadis/AQ in Syria are under the control of Prince Bandar bin Sultan of Saudi Arabia, whose mother is Syrian sunni. Pepe Escobar's reporting is well known in the Middle East. Google "pepe asia" if you want to read his columns. I've corresponded with him and can tell you that some of his information comes directly from the head of intelligence for Hezbollah. Pepe's analysis is very good and not distorted by Jewish power (unlike the U.S. media).
  4. vertigo0923
    Offline

    vertigo0923 night owl mod VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    39,889
    Likes Received:
    3,962
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    sec country
    Ratings Received:
    +5,698
    mbwoohahahhahaaha!:Dr_Evil:
  5. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    35,038
    Likes Received:
    2,841
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +6,031
    They sound like Union bosses minus the religiosity..
  6. BobbyFischer
    Offline

    BobbyFischer New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2013
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +7
    Obama's policies in the region are a joke. The U.S. has been propping up the Syrian National Council (SNC) and the so-called Free Syrian Army (FSA), hoping that they could bring "democracy" to Syria under a Muslin Brotherhood (MB) unbrella. The SNC and FSA are collapsing as some of us were warning would happen months ago. They were the weakest links. The hardcore mercenary jihadis are well-financed and have fought Americans in Iraq. Their Chechen component gained experience fighting the Russians. These liver-eating sharia lovers hate the apostate shi'ite-dominated government in Iraq as much as the secular Assad regime. They operate with direction from Ayman Zawahiri and Saudi Prince (and nephew of the King) Bandar bin Sultan. What they want is a Talibanized "Syriastahn." Does this sound like the U.S. is promoting "democracy" in Syria? We're empowering al-Qaeda and their pals and destroying a country with a secular government, just like we did in Libya. All that's missing is the "humanitarian bombing" of the people resisting al-Qaeda under the doctrine of "responsibility to protect."
  7. vertigo0923
    Offline

    vertigo0923 night owl mod VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    39,889
    Likes Received:
    3,962
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    sec country
    Ratings Received:
    +5,698

    this sounds like a whole lot of supposition and no fact. all opinion. and oh, i've tried. i'd ask for proof, but am pretty sure there is absolutely none.

    p.s. didn't we "destroy a country with a secular government" in iraq? how come bush's policies in the area weren't a "joke".
  8. BobbyFischer
    Offline

    BobbyFischer New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2013
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +7
    Believe whatever you want.
    Bush Iraq and Afghanistan policies were a disaster and a strategic defeat for the United States.
  9. dadx4
    Offline

    dadx4 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    30,166
    Likes Received:
    707
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Gainesville, Fl
    Ratings Received:
    +2,080
    Are you implying that Saddam Hussein was part of a secular government? REALLY?
  10. VAg8r1
    Offline

    VAg8r1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    5,970
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +174
    REALLY. Saddam Hussein's Baathist government was secular. Baathism is a secular movement. It's almost an Arabic version of communism. While [the real] Hussein was a blood thirsty despot who murdered hundreds of thousands of his own people, used chemical weapons and started two wars, he was not an Islamic fanatic. In fact, after [ the real] Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990, Osama bin-Laden offered to provide al-Qaeda fighters to Saudi Arabia as part of the effort to evict to evict Hussein's Iraqi troops from Iraq.
  11. gatorpa
    Offline

    gatorpa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,157
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    East Coast of FL
    Ratings Received:
    +370
    I thought Al-Queda was dead? Or on the run, which was it? I guess they are running to Lybia and Syria.
  12. SECund2nun
    Offline

    SECund2nun Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    6,585
    Likes Received:
    159
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +921
    They always magically seem to show up in whatever country we want to drone bomb or invade....

    If we ever have a fall out with Canada and want to bomb them you can bet a squad of the terrorists will show up there :D
  13. gatorev12
    Offline

    gatorev12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Messages:
    11,873
    Likes Received:
    340
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,751
    Iraq was a strategic win by almost every accounting...and I'd say Afghanistan was 50-50. A strategic success in denying a central hub for al qaeda and other jihadist groups--while decimating them militarily ...but a loss in terms of nation-building a friendly, functional central govt.
  14. BobbyFischer
    Offline

    BobbyFischer New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2013
    Messages:
    60
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +7
    First let me say that having read several of your posts before signing up here and I know that you're very smart, you're patriotic and you talk straight. That said, here's my take: The Iran and Afghanhstan wars cost the U.S. $6-12 Trillion. That's $80-160 thousand dollars for an American family of four. Napoleon's Grand Arme'e was defeated by disease that erupted from a lack of clean water. In Iraq and Afghanistan the U.S. paid dearly for clean water and diesel. In Afghanistan the cost of diesel went as high as $2000/gallon (when taking into account all the costs to get it to the front lines), and our front line troops were consuming on average up to 20 gallons of diesel per day. Diesel was needed to purify water for the troops. The U.S. had troops supported by a very long supply line tail. The costs of our engagement far exceeded the benefits. In Afghanistan, al-Qaeda left a dozen years ago. In Iraq al-Qaeda is ascendant and sniping at a shi'ite government. We killed over 120K Iraqis and lost 4500 men and women. How did that help America? America's standing in the world relative to China has been diminished.
  15. fairfaxgator
    Offline

    fairfaxgator New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,734
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +7
    Wow. Really. A win win for Haliburton and others who want to profit from war.
  16. GatorBen
    Online

    GatorBen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    7,190
    Likes Received:
    629
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,477
    He without question was. It certainly wasn't a nice one by any stretch of the imagination, but it was secular, and probably one of - if not the most - secular states in the region.

    You may be confusing pan-arabism and ultranationalism (both of which Ba'athism clearly embraces) with religiosity, which it did not. Ba'athism is a funky fusion of Soviet communism with a neo-fascist revolutionary nationalism and governing style, but a theocracy it is not.

    EDIT: It's also a little strange to be asserting that Syrian Ba'athism is secular and could be converted to an Islamic state through revolution, while insisting that Iraqi Ba'athism was a religious movement. They're the same political movement, and while Saddamist Ba'athism in Iraq had some differences from Syrian Ba'athism, they're both quite secular.
  17. MichiGator2002
    Online

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    16,983
    Likes Received:
    856
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +3,769
    What I don't get is why contemporary American leftthink is that removing secular-ish Middle Eastern dictators that are hostile to us for the apparent purpose of installing a friendlier regime is "bad" (the basic theory of Iraq and even Afghanistan), but that removing secular-ish Middle Eastern dictators friendly or neutral to us and letting them be replaced by people that hate us is "good" (Egypt, Libya, Syria if Assad ever falls).

    What about infinity TIMES infinity?

Share This Page