U.S. Secretly Met With Insurgents

U.S. officials held secret talks in
Iraq with the commanders of several Iraqi insurgent groups recently in an attempt to open a dialogue with them, a British newspaper reported Sunday.

The commanders "apparently came face to face" with four American officials during meetings on June 3 and June 13 at a summer villa near Balad, about 25 miles north of Baghdad, the Iraqi capital, according to The Sunday Times.

The Sunday Times said neither the Iraqi government nor U.S. officials in Baghdad would confirm its report about the talks.

Military officials in Baghdad did not immediately respond to a request by The Associated Press for comment on the Times article early Sunday morning.

The story, which quoted unidentified Iraqis whose groups were purportedly involved in the talks, said those at the first meeting included Ansar al-Sunnah Army, which has claimed responsibility for suicide bombings in Iraq and an attack that killed 22 people in the dining hall of a U.S. base at Mosul last Christmas.

Full story here.

Story



How exactlly do you arrange a meeting with an insurgent group?

There are almost always people from the group that are known to the government and left in place in the group, precisely so that they CAN arrange meetings to have secret talks. Or someone that is known to be part of the group that is picked up, given the message, and let go again to deliver the message. This makes a lot of sense to me. Sort of a peace talks with the insurgents.

When there is no unified leadership, and a bunch of angry mini groups of insurgents, it will do nothing to fix the entire problem. In The code of Hammurabi, an eye for an eye will last indefinitely if someone feels wronged, then they get justice. Then the same party or allies of theirs goes and gets revenge, etcetera, and so on and so on.

It is similar to gangbangers, strike, retribution, retribution, strike. Very cyclical and never ending, until both sides don't even remember who landed the first blow.

-ADHDsux4me

Whatever happened to this?

No nation can negotiate with terrorists. For there is no way to make peace with those whose only goal is death. - George W. Bush April 2002

www.whitehouse.gov...

The very thing that the public was warned that a Democrat President of the U.S. would do, that being capitulating to the enemy, is now being done by a Republican administration.


If the U.S. citizenry legitimately elected their Commander in Chief in 2004 and the reasons were not over nonsense issues like bible banning and instead elected their Commander in Chief because he would not negotiate with the enemy, this would certainly be a huge blow to any supporters that he may have had.

Ignore this post if the allegations in the above news story somehow are proven false.

[edit on 26-6-2005 by Frith]

in my opinion it is probable that it could also be a briefing rather than a negotiation. now if you will excuse me I better go get my fireproof suit.

Well, you have Rumsfeld's provacateur group PG02. That could explain alot.
Interesting to read that the shi'ites are very opposed to this.

Iraq Shi'ite leader wants insurgents wiped out
24 Jun 2005 15:33:25 GMT

Source: Reuters

By Mariam Karouny

BAGHDAD, June 24 (Reuters) - One of Iraq's most powerful Shi'ite leaders, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, ruled out any dialogue on Friday with insurgents who, he said, had declared all out war on his community and "must be terminated".
www.alertnet.org...

Frith? are you now complaining because you got your way? was it not you and others like you who said we should be on the way out? I mean the democrats whine,cried,threw hissy fits, yelled about war crimes all to get their way, and now your going to complain thatyou got what you wanted?
Democrats can always be found where public opinion is.

[edit on 26-6-2005 by XphilesPhan]

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
Frith? are you now complaining because you got your way? was it not you and others like you who said we should be on the way out? I mean the democrats whine,cried,threw hissy fits, yelled about war crimes all to get their way, and now your going to complain thatyou got what you wanted?
Democrats can always be found where public opinion is.

Attempting peace through non-violent means is the only way to end some of the violence in Iraq at this point. It should be painfully obvious to all war supporters that violence only begets violence here as the portion of Iraq that is rebelling is not going to accept occupation. If even some of the issues rebels have with occupational forces could be examined, this might mean the end of at least some of the daily attacks.

I pointed this out because I wanted to remind supporters of the current executive administration who have previously strongly stated beliefs that liberals would vacillate during this time of war is now being done by the administration that claimed it would not. Can this administration's war supporters still support it now or are the reasons going to be changed? 51 percent of the voting population, the MAJORITY allegedly voted this administration into office for this reason. Unless they either didn't or voted them in over extremely silly or petty bigoted reasons like bibles being banned or out of spite for the extremely small homosexual minority of the country.

Now the United States has a war criminal president who also wants to do what the majority of the U.S. constituency didn't want to see happen in dealing with our clear and present danger of islamofascists whose global jihad threatens our very existence. (Please note that I don't believe a word of the previous sentence I typed. It was typed because this is what war supporters believe or want to believe about U.S. initiated violence. The whole war is nothing but lies and fabrications.)

Not everybody is a registered Democrat who is against the current administration. Being a liberal libertarian currently registered as an Independent voter I wanted to voice this opinion in the forum it seemed most appropriate.

[edit on 26-6-2005 by Frith]

I read last week that the Iraqi governing council agreed to invite our troops to leave immediately. Of course, being that this administration doesn't give a rats behind what they think, their voices on this matter have been muted. Hey Democracy's on the march - can't get in the way of that. Even if that means shoving it down the throats of the unwilling - by gunpoint.

Originally posted by xu
in my opinion it is probable that it could also be a briefing rather than a negotiation. now if you will excuse me I better go get my fireproof suit.

there is a good chance of that LOL

To Dulcimer

How exactlly do you arrange a meeting with an insurgent group?

wel you can ask this question to donald rumbsvelt very good at talking with many terrorist around the world in fact he had organized Iraqs weapons and maps for Iraqs invasion on Iran in the 80s.

.
This in so many ways is like Vietnam.

Remember all those secret talks with the North Vietnamese? Trying to pull our asses out of THAT rat trap?

You can't win a war like this without having or winning the hearts and minds of the indigenous people.

Especially an extremely fast war that does not wear the people down until they are just plain tired and will submit to just about anything.

I think the supporters of this war were wishing for some kind of instant WWII. Where indigenous populations would welcome an end to the hostilities after a protracted struggle, all in about 3 weeks.

Maybe some of these gung-ho War planners needed a little reality check.

Iraq is to a great degree an artificial creation by the British based on the Geo-politics at that time and having virtually no relation to indigenous peoples and geographies.

While the American public is shown this "We are all powerful and won't back down one inch", in the backrooms the desperation is beginning to show.
No WMDs,
Democracy is definitely no slam dunk,
Foreign fighters are pouring in to the uncontrolled place Iraq NOW is.

Now we see our proud leaders turning into rats deserting a sinking ship.

My psychic intuition is telling me to look next for "Peace with Honor". [remember that one?]

Bush supports the War on Terrorism by making sure there is a replacement state for Afghanistan, namely Iraq, where infighting will allow terrorists spaces and places to live and train.

We created helped create these Iraqi terrorists, now we legitimize them by negotiating with them!

Remember this was all done at the bargain price of 1/5th of a TRILLION dollars.
.

Originally posted by slank

Remember this was all done at the bargain price of 1/5th of a TRILLION dollars.

And its not over yet.

Amazing amount of money.

Not quite such a secret now tho' ...

BBC news

Originally posted by 0951
Not quite such a secret now tho' ...

BBC news

well it was all predicted that the war will grow into a similar war like vietnam. strange that it is only brought onto a country full of deserts and mountains the vietming had great camo in the forests and that gave the fighter a upper hand on the American recruits that came in period of a mounth or some thing hardly have trained in such enviroments.

but as you can see the fighters in Iraq are quite equiped all the sudden resently a crate of SA-18 sholder anti-aircraft misslie was found under the ground of a school in Iraq.

They are recieving these probally from Iran as there are a few nations producing them. The original producer is Russia and counteries that have the tech and producing similar to exact copies of the SA-18 are China, Pakistan, North Korea. But the missiles found were of Russian origin and only countery near who buys these SA-18's are Iran so I think probally Iran is starting to stir things up in Iraq.

Originally posted by 0951
Not quite such a secret now tho' ...

BBC news

"Speaking on Fox News, Mr Rumsfeld said the US regularly "facilitates" meetings between Iraqi officials and insurgents."

"We're going to create an environment that the Iraqi people and the Iraqi security forces can win against that insurgency."

"I would not make a big deal out of it," he told Fox News.
"Meetings go on frequently with people.
"I think the attention to this is overblown."

So Rumsfeld has been regularly involved in meetings with Iraqi insurgents yet the insurgency is growing each day and getting worse but it's no big deal because many meetings have occured in the past?

Sounds like they are trying to turn insurgencies against each other rather than against the invading force. They talk to the groups individually, try to reason with them so they will stop targeting the invading force but make sure they always keep somone out of the circle so it's never complete and they are the only ones holding all the cards.

"The Sunnis need to be part of the political future. This doesn't mean that we're talking to people like [insurgent leader Abu Musab al-] Zarqawi or people that are linked to his organisation."

Of course not, they are controlled by Rumsfeld and are intentionally kept on the outside of the real Iraqi insurgencies so there's always one group going against the grain and mixing the pot. Each time Rumsfelds group organise a meeting, they make sure their boogy Zarqawi group does the opposite of what they want so the infighting continues and the attention is drawn away from the US troops. It's always Zarqawi who starts up an otherwise dry spell in Iraq.

By using the US troops to fight back against insurgencies only creates more. Having their Zarqawi boogyman do it for them creates an illusion that the US are in the same boat as the Iraqi's and they must work together to destroy it. This is why Zarqawi is never caught and why he's blamed for everything which happens and makes the US look like saints. It's why he's the most profiled Terrorist in the world, yet they don't hold meetings with his group and no one can actually verify his exsistance.

Rumsfeld is the only one who will reference Zarqawi as a real and legit person controlling a real a legit group. Anyone that agrees with that assesment is doing so from an angle that stems from the Pentagon's original claims about Zarqawi. People actually living amongst this world they've created or who have independently traced the Zarqawi rise to fame, do not believe Zarqawi is real or in the least, the person who he's made out to be.

It's no suprise that Zarqawi is Rumsfelds man. He's been created to keep the insurgency fighting itself, trying to turn their aim inward and away from the US troops so they can be pulled back and moved toward an Iranian front while the troops remaining in Iraq will hopfully be seen for what they have yet to be seen as - troops keeping the peace and trying to help Iraq.

It will take a civil war in Iraq before US troops will be seen as anything more than an invading force.

LOL!! of course they're "insurgents" thats what the US calls terrorists where their on their side.

If Korea or Iran had met with the SAME PEOPLE they would have been called "terrorists" and not "insurgents"

USA Secretly meets with the Insurgets, and they come to a Deal, that the Insurgency will Last for 12 more Years.

Originally posted by Souljah
USA Secretly meets with the Insurgets, and they come to a Deal, that the Insurgency will Last for 12 more Years.

why would the insurgents me us, i mean if they really care about Holy War they should never negotiate with infidels. also they are targeting Shiites, i mean they have the right to kill the infidels......right?

Originally posted by deltaboy

Originally posted by Souljah
USA Secretly meets with the Insurgets, and they come to a Deal, that the Insurgency will Last for 12 more Years.

why would the insurgents me us, i mean if they really care about Holy War they should never negotiate with infidels. also they are targeting Shiites, i mean they have the right to kill the infidels......right?

Really your believing in the false media to now arnt you Holy war there isnt any holy war where the hell did you come up with that in vietnam people of vietnam were fighting against the US soldiers and the world was told because they were in the support of communism thats why they were fighting against the US which is false the country wa in occupation and the people were fighting against the occupation. Vietnam is no differnt to Iraq False war on the country Jihad is the main media catch fraze, Iraqis dying in Iraq is because of the Insurgents created by the US policy on Iraq, Iraq is being used as cash machine oil is taken illeagly every day... where to stop this it goes on and last but not least a popet gov is setuped