Italian Guy
Milforum Hitman
dylan_infantry said:thank you for the compliment, are in the army if so witch country
dylan
I'm from Italy (...) but we can't go off-topic, man. PM me for further questions and I'll be more than happy to answer.
dylan_infantry said:thank you for the compliment, are in the army if so witch country
dylan
Missileer said:You're right, we should broaden our horizons.
CRIMES OF RECENT TIMES IN CANADA -Dr. Daya Hewapathirane, For Sinhalaya Worldwide
Roman Catholic and Christian religious residential school programs for the indigenous native children of Canada have existed in eight of the ten provinces of Canada for over 100 years until the 1970s. The indigenous children of these schools have been subjected to rape, beatings and emotional abuse by the Catholics and Christians who ran these schools. The children suffered and continue to suffer from the terrible effects of School abuse. The schools were run by Roman Catholic, Anglican Christian, Presbyterian Christian, and United Churches.
CanadianCombat said:What does this have to do with Canada going to Iraq.
Italian Guy said:Bin Laden was talking about the first Gulf War, the one with the UN brandmark and the approval of many Arab countries. Just like the London alqaidists don’t make any distinction between wars in Iraq and in Afghanistan, and exactly like Al Zarqawi never make it a problem to blow up the UN base in Baghdad killing 22 UN employees, Bin Laden doesn’t make any difference and believes it’s all part of the great war against the west and the moderate arab countries.
The Saddam defeated and abandoned by the other arab leaders (apart from Arafat) turned out to be a natural ally. Osama shared a common political plan with Saddam: Take over the whole arab world, chase the Americans and erase Israel.
But there’s more: It was Clinton the liberal, in 1998, who preemptively bombed a foreign country, Sudan, because it was developing together with Iraq chemical weapons to provide Al Qaeda. Richard Clarke, the then chief of anti-terrorism and today Bush’s archenemy, justified the bombings of the pharmaceutical facility of Shifa with these words: “The intelligence data link Bin Laden to the current responsibles of the factory, which are the Iraqi experts of nervine gas and Sudanese Islamic National Front”. On an email sent to the then National Security Advisor Sandy Berger, Richard Clarke wrote that the presence of those Iraqis was “probably a direct outcome of the Iraq- Al Qaeda agreement”.
Nobody would ever question that, back then.
Italian Guy said:Clinton’s Secretary of Defense, William Cohen, interrogated by the 9/11 Commission, confirmed last year that the Sudanese facility “had to do with Bin Laden and with the Iraqi chemical weapons plan leadership”.
The relationship between Saddam and Al Qaeda have been acknowledged by the 9/11 Commission as follows: “Bin Laden has looked for the possibility of a cooperation with Iraq when he resided in Sudan”. The bi-partisan Commission goes ahead: “In order to protect their own relations with Baghdad, the Sudanese arranged contacts between Al Qaeda and Iraq. A top rank officer from Iraq’s secret services went to Sudan three times, and met Osama Bin Laden in 1994. Bin Laden asked for large spaces for his training camps and assistance for weapons, but apparently Iraq never answered”.
Italian Guy said:More: “The contacts between Al Qaeda and Iraq went on also when Bin Laden went back to Afghanistan, but it doesn’ t seem like they brought to a collaborative relationship”. The Commission could not go any further with its inquiries because its task was only bound to 9/11, and this is why it doesn’t have “credible evidence that Iraq and Al Qaeda cooperated in the attacks against America”, which is the attack on the Twin Towers. But the Commission does have evidence of meetings, contacts and exchange of intelligence.
Italian Guy said:Today, one year after that report, more confirmations begin to flow in, and they are weirdly ignored by the American journalists, with the exceptions of Stephen Hayes, author of “The Connection”, and author of a long and detailed reportage on more recent developments published by the Weekly Standard. He was told that a US intelligence base in Iraq is analyzing more than one million pages confiscated in the secret services offices after Saddam’s fall. In some of the first checked documentations they found that, starting in 1992, the Iraqi regime considered Bin Laden as an asset of its own secret services. It has been read that Saddam protected and hid the Iraqi who admitted he had prepared the bomb for the 1993 WTC attack.
It can be found that Saddam accepted Osama’s request of broadcasting anti-Saudi propaganda on State-owned Iraqi National Tv.
Hudayfa Azzam, son of Bin Laden’s right arm, said that “before the Iraqi war Saddam open armedly welcomed Al Qaeda members which had entered the country in large numbers to arrange a network that would oppose the occupation”.
Italian Guy said:King Abdullah of Jordan repeatedly stated that before the war his goverment asked Saddam to turn over Zarqawi, Jordan citizen.
On 1998, February 3, twenty days before the total war declaration on America due to the sufferings caused “to the Iraqi people”, Al Qaeda number 2 man, Ayman al Zawahiri, went to Baghdad to meet with Iraqi leaders. According to the weekly US News and World Report, now confirmed by the documentations found in Baghdad, he was given 300,000 $. The 9/11 Commission added that it found evidence that a few days after Osama’s fatwa two Al Qaeda affiliates “went to Iraq and met with secret services officers”. From Baghdad papers new evidence appears that one of the two affiliates stayed in town from March 5 to 16, in room # 414 at Mansour Hotel. The 9/11 Commission wrote that “a few months later an Iraqi delegation went to Afghanistan to meet with the Taliban and also with Bin Laden”. According to the Commission these meeting were arranged by Al Zawahiri, “who had ties with the Iraqis”.
Zawahiri’s visit to Baghdad took place at the same time as one of the yearly Islamist meetings called Islamic People’s Conference, alike to those organized by the fundamentalist Hasan Al Turabi, architect of the Islamist Revolution in Sudan in 1989. The one of 1992 called for 500 Islamists to gather and transform Iraq into “the fortress of islamist jihad surrounded by atheist forces”. Saddam’s Islamist Conferences, started in 1983, regularly took place until the regime’s fall, and had the esplicit goal of involving laicists and islamists in the common fight against America. The Fourth Conference was opened by a message from Saddam depicting war with America as the war between “believers and infidels”. Saddam always tried to match the Islamic extremism with the arab-iraqi nationalism, since the Iran-Iraq war era.
Italian Guy said:All this exposes the fallacy of the “non-religious nature of Saddam’s regime”.
Italian Guy said:After the 1991 defeat, the rais insisted for a strong islamist breakthru of Iraq well visible in the rhetorics, such as the ongoing references to jihad and the writing inserted in the middle of the flag “Allah is great”. In the Baghdad Great Mosque, inaugurated in 2002, he had 650 Koran pages shown, along with 20 liters of his own blood donated in 20 years.
As a result of the Clinton’s bombings on Baghdad in December 1998, which went on for 4 days, Saddam sent his most trusted agent, Faruq Hijazi, to Afghanistan to meet Bin Laden. Newspapers from around the world wrote about it. Even Italian most important newspaper made headlines “Saddam Hussein and Osama made an agreement”. Newsweek quoted an arab agent who said “Very soon you are going to witness a large number of terrorist attacks worldwide aimed at Western targets, led by Iraqis”.
Italian Guy said:Information was convergent: Osama wanted to move to Baghdad. Richard Clarke wrote very clearly that had Osama been aware of American plans on Afghanistan he would have very likely fled to Iraq.
I'm sorry it's the first time I post something this long.
I am not going to touch the "democracy issue" in this thread. It was a non-starter from the beginning, and if the US government thinks that it can install a US style government based on the constitution that has been adopted, they will have to leave the troops there for at least 12 to 20 years.Italian Guy said:It wasn't mine. Those were the media, my friend. The media love to pick those aspects that can draw the people's attention and alarm. That is precisely what happened there. But no, terrorism was not necessarily related to AQ in that context, and the democracy issue proves it.
Italian Guy said:Pretty naive of you. You kind of figure the world works just like a single country does. It does not. The world does not work like Portugal or Kansas does.
Italian Guy said:See, the point here is I do not trust the UN nor do I trust any of its representatives, one of the wisest things the US ever did was not trusting the UN. And more and more people are starting to feel the same way around the world. You are not exactly talking to a huge UN fan.
Then please (you said: "Also, the Iraqis also got very cooperative in the final months as Hussein was desperate to avoid a war that he knew he could not win") do not forget what you hero Blix said on March 7, 2003:
Italian Guy said:Hans Blix reports to the UN Security Council. Blix said basically the same thing as he did in previous reports. Iraq has shown some progress, but has still not yet fully disarmed. Blix also filed a 173 page document with the Security Council which said that inspectors discovered an undeclared Iraqi drone, with a wingspan of 7.45 m (24 ft 5 in), suggesting an illegal range that could potentially threaten Iraq's neighbors with chemical and biological weapons.
And please remember France was sure Iraq had WMD's: On March 17, 2003 Chirac announced that his country would support U.S. troops if Iraq launched chemical weapons against U.S. forces.
Italian Guy said:Ummm, I did not think war was about blowing buses or deliberately killing civilians. You forget war and terrorism are two separate things.
Nope.Italian Guy said:Are we going to start a new thread on the Contras?
Nope. I never believed the legitimacy of those acts at all. The Sandinistas started as a broadly based group that was opposed to the US supported dictator Somoza. While they were supported by the Soviets at the time, I always felt that they were closer to a popular government than the thugs the US were supporting.Italian Guy said:And also, if you say so I believe you are explicitly recognizing the legitimacy of those US acts.
Italian Guy said:Third, Dean, neither Bush nor the neocons were in power at the time. Had they been in power THAT would have never happened. :thumb: Y'know the neocons in DC would be proud of you here. P.S. You forgot to say the government the Contras fought was cruel and non-Democratic. Otherwise you make it sound like you side with the Sandinistas who were, IN FACT (recent discoveries) funded by the Soviets.
Italian Guy said:As I stated above, the PLF had not to do with AQ of course, I just pointed out how tied Saddam was to terrorists. And terrorism (and NOT just AQ) was one of the 3 reasons to go to war.
Italian Guy said:I was there in 1997 and 2000, I flew into Toronto and visited AB and SK. I also enjoyed the company of a Quebecois girl before entering a serious relationship with a Saskatoonian. Great country :wink:
Go Harper :rock:
Italian Guy said:Only one thing: You say " War has been about hurting your enemy as much as is humanly possible. Civilians are a part of a country, (their most valuable resource) and attacking civilians has been fair game since...etc etc". Did the US try to kill as many civilians as humanly possible in Iraq 1991? What about Iraq 2003? What about Serbia 1999?
Italian Guy said:I noticed we agree with each other on many points and most of the times disagree on some minor approaches. You are an informed person, of course, and it's been a pleasure to exchange opinions with you on the topic.
Italian Guy said:I mean I'm right when I say the realists at the DoD or the White House in the 80's (though Reagan himself was hardly a realist- speaking in "doctrinal and ideological" terms) and back in the 60's and 70's did things that today's neocons reject and that today's neocons' approach is something entirely different than that.
Italian Guy said:This is why it misses the point to keep accusing W for something that is so far from the approach of his administrations. On the other hand, you're perfectly right when you say many people don't see the difference and couldn't care less if W or Condi disagree with what Brzezinski or Kissinger did or still say.
Anytime. And thank you.Italian Guy said:On most things, we argue on points whose sources are not clear about (did France really know? Then why did they say what they said? etc) and it merely becomes a matter of personal suspects or opinions.
As for the rest, considering your view on things, I believe you and I will find ourselves agreeing on 99 % of the things on the boards.
Thanks Dean.
Padre said:Anyway, lets put Canada aside for now, and debate why MALTA hasn't sent anyone to Iraq
Padre said:Anyway, lets put Canada aside for now, and debate why MALTA hasn't sent anyone to Iraq
Missileer said:Padre, do you remember the Peter Sellers movie "The Mouse That Roared"? If Malta won, they'd have to send aid to Iraq.:salute:
Italian Guy said:Having been to Monaco and Liechtenstein I was impressed by their amazing military achievements.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.