Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Foreign fighters in Iraq (i.e. Al-Qaeda) are no more than 2% of the resistance..

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Postman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 07:09 AM
Original message
Foreign fighters in Iraq (i.e. Al-Qaeda) are no more than 2% of the resistance..
Edited on Sat Oct-28-06 07:10 AM by Postman
Suspected foreign fighters account for less than 2% of the 5,700 captives being held as security threats in Iraq, a strong indication that Iraqis are largely responsible for the stubborn insurgency.


a story from USA Today from July
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-07-05-deta...

This information was repeated again the other day by either a Talking Head General or Michael Ware, I can't remember which.

So why does the Administration continue to play up this minuscule aspect of the insurgency?

Because it feeds their line of BS that we're fighting Al-Qaeda in Iraq and it downplays the fact that Iraqi's are defending their homeland from invaders, just as we would do the same if it were to happen here.

Bush/Cheney are fascists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Possumpoint Donating Member (937 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 07:53 AM
Response to Original message
1. The Administration is Selling Fear
Carl Rove and the rest of the Republican Party is very adroit at selling fear to the American public. They are very skillful at motivating voters to the Republican cause by making them feel that any other vote will make their lives worse. The problem is, many in America are buying it.

It is well past the time for the Democratic Party to take a look inward and determine what is a winning position. Take a lesson from Arnold S. in California who until 6 months ago was a hard line Republican Conservative. That position was going to cost him the coming election. He has now moved to a more central position and is leading his race. Adhering to the old dictates of the Democratic party has cost the party many elections. Yet, they are unwilling to change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magellan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-28-06 08:57 AM
Response to Original message
2. I heard this the other day too
First time I heard it was a few months back. It's rarely reported, for obvious reasons. Can't have the American public knowing that most of the violence in Iraq is a result of BushCo's non-existent post-invasion planning, not foreign terrorists. And this outcome wasn't difficult to imagine, as many of us did even before the folly of an invasion happened.

They sent too few troops in to do the job. 350,000 give or take, to control a population of 29 million. And the number of boots on the ground dropped significantly in 2004.

Imagine if China invaded us, toppled our government, but only committed 4 million troops to the effort, scattering them in and around our major cities. That's a very generous equivalent of what Bush** did in Iraq.

How long would it be before there was anarchy in the streets, the Chinese began shooting and detaining American civilians by the tens of thousands because they were outnumbered by a growing insurgency, and armed militias started filling the power vacuum by creating fiefdoms across the country? How soon after that before those militias began attacking anyone who wasn't "one of them" in political or ideological terms, American or not, to solidify their area of control?

In Iraq, it only took several months.

Foreign terrorists would find such a terrain difficult to infiltrate. Small bands of militant Christians might cross our borders from the north and south and be welcomed by their American counterparts, but they'd be met with suspicion and outright hostility from everyone else. America is not so Christian that the majority of us would embrace foreign radicals whose mission was to help overthrow the Chinese occupation in order to bring the American people to heel under a hardline RW theocracy.

"Give me liberty or give me death" hasn't been extinguished from our hearts.

The same is true in Iraq, and that's why the number of foreign fighters who've entered the country is so small. They certainly help to mix things up, and they've likely found more sympathizers over time as the native population is radicalized by the occupation. But foreign terrorists didn't originate the violence; the Iraqis did, in response to the outrages and broken promises they suffered at American hands. They rebelled, just as Americans would if we were invaded and occupied.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Oct 23rd 2014, 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC