Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent


Reply
 
Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-25-2004, 03:56 PM   #1
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Default War in Iraq has strengthened terrorism

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/...in619467.shtml

Despite losses around the world, al Qaeda has more than 18,000 potential terrorists, and its ranks are growing because of the conflict in Iraq, a leading think tank warned Tuesday.
Gee how do you say-

"I told you so"
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 04:19 PM   #2
ShardmoonVer.1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 7,457
I say, you are an idiot. Seen many planes flying into American buildings lately? Nope. Of course the numbers of confirmed terrorist have gone up, we are in their kitchens and identifying their dumbasses at a record pace.
__________________
If you don't have something good to say about some one, say it loud.
ShardmoonVer.1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 04:30 PM   #3
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Seen many planes flying into American buildings lately?
Gee I didn't see them flying into airplanes before 9/11 either but that didn't mean there weren't any.
Oh and you can call me an idiot all you want. I didn't issue this report. I am just parlaying the information to you.
Lesson to be learned here- going to war with Iraq has not helped the war on terror. If you hardheaded, warmongering cons would listen to anyone with any opposing viewpoints instead of throwing caution to the wind perhaps this kind of report wouldn't be necessary.

Last edited by bumbleroot; 05-25-2004 at 05:29 PM.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 05:12 PM   #4
crimsonedge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 767
Ok if you want to believe that report and embrace it as damning evidence, here is another report from the same source that you must accept since the source is so accurate and beyond reproach:

Conclusion


In conclusion, war, sanctions and inspections have reversed and retarded, but not eliminated Iraq’s nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and long range missile capacities, nor have they removed Baghdad’s enduring interest in developing these capacities. The retention of WMD capacities by Iraq is self-evidently the core objective of the regime, for it has sacrificed all other domestic and foreign policy goals to this singular aim. It has retained this single objective, and pursued it in breach of the ceasefire and UN Security Council Resolutions that brought a conditional end to the 1991 Gulf War. Over more than eleven years the Iraqi regime has sought to evade its obligations and undermine support for the sanctions and inspections regime meant to eliminate its WMD capacities and contain its ambitions. Iraq has fought a relatively successful diplomatic war of attrition. It is worth recalling that the international debate 18 months ago was centred on how sanctions against Iraq might be relaxed, and inspections concluded with some dispatch in light of the dwindling willingness to support the containment policy developed in 1991.



Today, after four years without inspections, there can be no certainty about the extent of Iraq’s current capacities. A reasonable net assessment is that Iraq has no nuclear weapons but could build one quickly if it acquired sufficient fissile material. It has extensive biological weapons capabilities and a smaller chemical weapons stockpile. It has a small force of ballistic missiles with a range of 650km, that are capable of delivering CBW warheads, and has prepared other delivery methods for CBW, including manned aircraft and UAVs. Sooner or later, it seems likely that the current Iraqi regime will eventually achieve its objectives.



In compiling this Strategic Dossier, the IISS has sought to put the best available facts on this difficult issue before the wider public. This Strategic Dossier does not attempt to make a case, either way, as to whether Saddam Hussein’s WMD arsenal is a casus belli per se. Wait and the threat will grow; strike and the threat may be used. Clearly, governments have a pressing duty to develop early a strategy to deal comprehensively with this unique international problem.

http://www.iiss.org/news-more.php?itemID=88
crimsonedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 05:32 PM   #5
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Nice try but you forgot to mention that this was from 1998 information
Since Iraq forced inspections to end in December 1998, it has become more difficult to learn about its activities and assess its capabilities.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 05:53 PM   #6
Zelgadis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 2,693
Send a message via ICQ to Zelgadis Send a message via AIM to Zelgadis Send a message via MSN to Zelgadis Send a message via Yahoo to Zelgadis
Who exactly do we safely believe when it comes to terrorist number reports and what not? Do we have a safely protected man that is sent down to terrorist HQ where all the terrorists line up so they can be counted for information knowledge? O.o
__________________
Chamzel's Site
PSN Name - Cham-Zel

Serving one day at a time, for four-to-six years at a time.
Zelgadis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 05:57 PM   #7
crimsonedge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 767
It was from 2002 but thanks for playing.

The IISS Strategic Dossier, Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction: A Net Assessment was published on Monday 9 September 2002, and pressconferences were held in Brussels, London and Washington DC that morning.
crimsonedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 05:57 PM   #8
ShardmoonVer.1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 7,457
Never ever argue facts with Bumble, he can make them up way faster than you can discredit them. The only thing he does faster is ignore them.
__________________
If you don't have something good to say about some one, say it loud.
ShardmoonVer.1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 06:06 PM   #9
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
The report was created in 2002 and it states that the info was based upon 1998 info because they had no way of knowing what info was out there. Hence the info is conjecture.
And as far as bringing up facts, you cons talk a great game but never, ever have a single example of me making up a fact. So if you are game Shard I have over 2600 posts here. Start finding one where I made up facts. And since I know you can't, I might as well tell you to shut your fucking mouth up now so I don't have to do it later.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 06:14 PM   #10
crimsonedge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 767
Read the whole report bumble, you are wrong.
crimsonedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 06:35 PM   #11
ShardmoonVer.1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 7,457
You have made 2 threads today alone where you have chopped up sources to support your position. I guess I could go all the way back to yesterday to look for more, but why bother?
__________________
If you don't have something good to say about some one, say it loud.
ShardmoonVer.1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 07:34 PM   #12
Koss
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 273
Lol, Bumble. Even if that was/is true there is one big factor of importance that you seem to ignore. That difference being we're fighting in THEIR backyard and not ours.

One thing the US administration has done right over the recent years was taking the fight to them instead of waiting for them to come back at us. Funny thing is.. how many other countries have taken the initiative and are "actively" battling terrorist w/o the US taking the first step? Virtually none. Most countries have and continue to look at "securing thier borders." Which does absolutely NOTHING, since terrorist will and often do penetrate borders.

And I am curious as to where they get their terrorist headcounts from. hehe
__________________
--The Holy Trinity--
Koss 70 Prelate of Rodcet Nife
Yizzyen 67 Coercer
Ruktuuk 63 Warrior of Rallos Zek

--Lead Singer for The Holy Trinity--
Cadgar 70 Herald

Resilience
Koss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 08:27 PM   #13
Maximus Faticus
Registered User
 
Maximus Faticus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,291
How do you qualify to become "a leading think tank?"
Maximus Faticus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 09:24 PM   #14
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by ShardmoonVer.1
I say, you are an idiot. Seen many planes flying into American buildings lately?
How many planes did you see flying into American buildings prior to 9/11, Kiebler?
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." —Monty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 09:27 PM   #15
Vireil
Disturbing the force
 
Vireil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 2,711
I think that the main point of that think tanks assesment lies in the "winning the hearts and minds" school of thought. Winning hearts and minds in the Arab world is the key to ending Islamic extremist terrorism. Invading Iraq went a long way towards the "alienating the hearts and minds" side of the fence.
__________________
Vireil
Coercer
<Recovering>
Vireil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 10:23 PM   #16
Brigiid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,879
Send a message via AIM to Brigiid
Hrm, apparently you (Bumble) and I didn't get the same thing from that article.

Let's start with the source: CBS news. I won't attempt to discredit them. They appear to be mainstream, and I'll leave my usual "media spin" doctrine out of this post. I'll just take it for what's actually printed on the page, mkay?

The basis for the first portion of this article appears to me to be a commentary on the fighting forces that Al Qaeda has available to them.


Despite losses around the world, al Qaeda has more than 18,000 potential terrorists, and its ranks are growing because of the conflict in Iraq, a leading think tank warned Tuesday.
This was the original quote that started this thread, and apparently said alot of things to you that it didn't say to the rest of the world. It raised a question or two for me, and Zelgadis touched on it best:

How exactly are we counting terrorists now? Do they sign up somehere? Do they have t-shirts that they wear under their Sekrit Al Qaeda Operative (SAQO) uniforms? Do they carry ID cards in their wallets that identify them as Al Qaeda supporters? Haven't we been hearing pretty much since 9/11 that one of the things that made them so hard to track was that they had a knack for blending in with your common man? So where did CBS get the 18,000 number from? Let's look back to the article that you linked.


The estimate of 18,000 fighters was based on intelligence estimates that al Qaeda trained at least 20,000 fighters in its training camps in Afghanistan before the United States and its allies ousted the Taliban regime. In the ensuing war on terror, some 2,000 al Qaeda fighters have been killed or captured, the survey said.
Oh, so they estimated those numbers. So this highly scientific estimate includes those fighters that were trained in camps in Afghanistan, and assumes that all 18,000 made it to this particular conflict. Then we're going to estimate once again that 2,000 have been killed or captured since then. Granted, these facts and figures could be pretty close to the truth, but we don't know for sure, because all we have are educated guesses.

Given the fact that they estimated their original figure of 18,000 and estimated the loss of 2,000 members, how does one make an informed conclusion that the numbers have either risen or fallen? I mean, if you don't know for sure what you had before, and you don't know for sure what you have now, how can you know that it's more or less? Couldn't it just as easily be fewer rather than more? Answer? We don't know. You don't know. CBS News doesn't know. We're just all part of one big network of guessers.

Next question, based upon a statement made by you in your second post in this thread:


Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
Lesson to be learned here- going to war with Iraq has not helped the war on terror.
I've looked back over your article, and I don't actually see this stated anywhere. Is this your opinion of what was being said, or your opinion of the Iraqi affair in general? It's a pretty broad statement to make, regardless. You'd have to be able to prove that there has not been one positive result from our invasion of Iraq, in order to make this statement true. Are you able to provide that sort of proof? Are you able to prove that our action in Iraq has not effected the war on terror in any way?

In fact, if you read further into the article than the first paragraph, they make this statement:


"Al Qaeda has become increasingly decentralized and now has to rely to a much greater extent for the operational heavy lifting of terrorist attacks on local groups and affiliates," Johnathan Stevenson, an IISS employee, told CBS News Correspondent Mark Phillips.
Wouldn't the "increasing decentralization of Al Qaeda" look as though some sort of progress was being made?


The West and its allies must continue to mount a major offensive against al Qaeda and progress will be incremental, the report said. Any security offensive against al Qaeda must be accompanied with political developments, such as the democratization of Iraq and the resolution of conflict in Israel, it said.
And doesn't this statement by one of the article's contributers support the sort of "necessary action" that the current administration is pursuing?

Another tidbit of information that I found interesting...


Iraq has become the new magnet of al Qaeda's war against the United States and up to 1,000 foreign Islamic fighters have infiltrated Iraqi territory, where they are cooperating with Iraqi forces, the survey said.
Would this statement imply that Al Qaeda forces were in Iraq? It doesn't say if they were there before 9/11 or after, but it's food for thought for the "Iraq has nothing to do with terrorism or Al Qaeda" crowd.

Basically, what I'm getting at with my post is that this article doesn't provide the "OMG I told you so we were so wrong LOLZ" proof that you seem to be looking for. It admits that its figures are based on estimates, and provides absolutely no solid evidence that their forces are rising or falling, or that it has anything to do with our presence in Iraq.

You're hinging your argument on guesses, made by the same intelligence community that you have expressed so much skepticism over in other threads. Why is it that you believe them now? Have they become more credible, or is it just that they're supporting your argument now and that makes them right?

For a man who claims so adamantly that he posts facts, not opinions and conjecture, it seems that what you've posted for us is an article whose meaning is riddled with guesses and estimates, and is highly open to interpretation. Congratulations, on your excellent investigative work.
__________________
Meh.
Brigiid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2004, 10:27 PM   #17
chukzombi
The Undead Shaman
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Bowels of Hell, A.K.A. New Jersey
Posts: 9,566
Im sure glad that think tank revealed the truth for all of us to see. you are truly remarkable.
__________________
Chukzombi Astrocreep
Magister (re-united)
chukzombi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2004, 05:09 AM   #18
Maximus Faticus
Registered User
 
Maximus Faticus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,291
Not just any think tank, but a leading think tank.
Maximus Faticus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2004, 05:13 AM   #19
Wildane
Psychopath w/a conscience
 
Wildane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Hospitality State, asshole!
Posts: 10,540
Originally Posted by Shardmoon
Never ever argue facts with Bumble, he can make them up way faster than you can discredit them.
LMAO!
__________________
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." - Umberto Eco

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
Wildane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2004, 05:33 AM   #20
Caelie123
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,027
Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
Lesson to be learned here- going to war with Iraq has not helped the war on terror. If you hardheaded, warmongering cons would listen to anyone with any opposing viewpoints instead of throwing caution to the wind perhaps this kind of report wouldn't be necessary.
Are you suggesting we listen to you? What a joke. Then again we could listen to Kerry and his kind but the dumb son of a bitch's have nothing concrete to say.
Get Hannitized Bumbleroot and you can hear the "other" side of these reports. He has a view point just like your favorites only his are in the other direction. I listen to opposing viewpoints, laugh and switch back to those that report what I believe in.
__________________
Caelie
65 Human Cleric
Caelie123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2004, 05:41 AM   #21
Caelie123
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,027
Who exactly do we safely believe when it comes to terrorist number reports and what not? Do we have a safely protected man that is sent down to terrorist HQ where all the terrorists line up so they can be counted for information knowledge?
There's no doubt that the war in Iraq has brought out some rebellious animals that want to jump on the terrorist bandwagon. I say more power to them. It's better they all come out now so we can rid the world of them over the next few years instead of them floundering around in record numbers for the next 200 years.
As far as the numbers. Who knows? It's not like they register with a National Terrorist Network or anything. When somebody reports a number it's a joke and the person looks like a fool.
__________________
Caelie
65 Human Cleric
Caelie123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2004, 05:56 AM   #22
Zelgadis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 2,693
Send a message via ICQ to Zelgadis Send a message via AIM to Zelgadis Send a message via MSN to Zelgadis Send a message via Yahoo to Zelgadis
You mean Bumbleroot and friends listen to others with opposing viewpoints without slinging shit into the air at them??

And I'm still wondering...

Who exactly do we safely believe when it comes to terrorist number reports and what not? Do we have a safely protected man that is sent down to terrorist HQ where all the terrorists line up so they can be counted for information knowledge? O.o
__________________
Chamzel's Site
PSN Name - Cham-Zel

Serving one day at a time, for four-to-six years at a time.
Zelgadis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2004, 06:01 AM   #23
Caelie123
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,027
I'm sure Bumbleroot only reads and listens to what he wants to hear. He's no different than the rest of us and if he says he listens to Rush or Hannity he's a liar. Nobody can listen to crap they don't believe in long. If you think positive about the war, you're not gonna listen to alot of negative anti-Bush BS but a few minutes. If you're anti-war and anti-Bush you're not going to listen to alot of positives for long. It's human nature.

The only thing we have to go by Zelgadis is Intelligence reports. Anything else reported is just speculation by somebody that doesn't have a clue.
__________________
Caelie
65 Human Cleric
Caelie123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2004, 06:30 AM   #24
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Hrm, apparently you (Bumble) and I didn't get the same thing from that article.
Considering that you and almost every other pro-war con on these boards has repeatedly shown that you have no concept of context I can believe that.


I'm sure Bumbleroot only reads and listens to what he wants to hear
This coming from someone who admits that the only news she watches is FoxNews and whom forgot that I mentioned a cavalcade of sources that I listen to. How conveniently we forget eh Caelie? Or should I say, get out of your glass house on this one because your quotes on this are easy to find.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2004, 06:43 AM   #25
Caelie123
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,027
Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
This coming from someone who admits that the only news she watches is FoxNews and whom forgot that I mentioned a cavalcade of sources that I listen to. How conveniently we forget eh Caelie? Or should I say, get out of your glass house on this one because your quotes on this are easy to find.
Where did I ever say I listen to opposing views? I believe I said "I don't". No need to quote me because I admit it. Something you won't do.

What I did say is "Bumbleroot is a liar when he say's he listens to opposing views". You can type on this message board all day long that you do listen to and read pro-Bush and pro-con media, but we all know it's a lie. You are not a fence sitter. I don't care what cavalcade of sources you say you listen to because it's just not true. You only listen to and search out articles that support you're agenda.

I'm too pro-conservative to read or listen to the crap that the other side has to say and you're too pro-liberal to read or listen to the crap other than what you believe. Set yourself free Bumbleroot and admit it.
__________________
Caelie
65 Human Cleric
Caelie123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:13 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.