It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iraq investigates alleged US-insurgent talks

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Iraq investigates alleged US-insurgent talks


hosted.ap.org

BAGHDAD (AP) -- Iraq said Friday it was investigating reports that U.S. delegates and Sunni insurgents held reconciliation talks in Turkey this year, alleging the meetings violated Iraqi sovereignty and showed tolerance for terrorists.

The State Department acknowledged that unspecified meetings took place, but said Iraq knew about them at the time.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Hmmm. Can we say this is an attempt at maintaining a war? I definatley call shenanigans on this. This to me is proof positive of the US government trying to play both sides in order to continue conflict.

This is some dirty business here. I am thouroghly disgusted with this playing both sides. Next thing that will come out is that we are providing weapons and technology to the insurgents so as to destabilize the new government and make them ask for troop help.

hosted.ap.org
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Feeding the military industrial complex profits and enslaving the citizenry into bankruptcy and poverty in the process seems to be the agenda of our corrupt corporate government.

Create the problem, offer the solution, wouldn't it be wonderful if the average person could ever grasp the concept that fuels the propoganda, political and war machines?



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 04:16 PM
link   
I am also of the thinking that if the insurgency does not continue after the troop withdraw, the USA would have no good justification as to why we were there. If all of the sudden the fighting stopped then the international community would frown even worse on the US. In order to save face the fighting must continue even after the troop withdraws.



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 04:23 PM
link   
The insurgency was an American creation. We were never actually losing the war, just maintaining it to make money.



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 05:14 PM
link   
I strongly believe that this is not an issue of the US encouraging the insurgency. The issue that we are seeing here is that talks were made and the Iraqi government didn't play a part in them. This is an area of concern for a government that is attempting to stand on it's own two feet.

The insurgency within Iraq will go on without a US presence, your just not going to hear about it as much. A large number of attacks in Iraq are not focused on US troops, they are focused on the Iraqi population. They are against the newly found government who is in control because with a democracy the minority cannot rule. There are those in Iraq who want the new Iraqi government to fail so they can retake control. This is the exact reason why the US must pull out of Iraq in a well planned orderly fashion.

Do you guys really think that at this point in time the US is trying to save face? The damage has been done, we just need to make sure that the new government, the government elected by the people succeeds.



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Styki
 


You have way too much faith in the government. Our government is not full of do gooders that aim to help everyone. There have been multiple reports of different nations Spec Op's doing missions that are to create more "war".



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 06:22 PM
link   
U.S.: OK So let's stop killing each other so much!

Insurgent: Can we still blow stuff up?

U.S.: Yeah sure but only mosques and other public places!

Insurgent: What about Iraqi Police stations?

U.S.: What about them?

Insurgent: Never mind...



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by LeaderOfProgress
 


I'm not exactly saying that the US wants the new Iraqi government to succeed for the good of Iraq. That's just a plus that's good for the people of Iraq. There are many benefits for the US with a US friendly Iraqi government, even if in the future they can exactly be vocal about it. I do not agree that those in power would prolong a war just to "line the pockets of the rich", that too could be another plus that comes along with the flow of things. I happen to believe that it's more about political positioning in the region and the spread of "democracy", our democracy which will be the new hard power of the future (taking the place of full out military action).

Why would we build a super embassy in a war torn country? Building a super embassy in a country that is going to flourish and do well seems like the right place to plant our seeds. Take a look at any country the US has ever stayed in to help rebuild and you will see a country that has made a name for itself. On the other hand you have countries like Vietnam which the US pulled out of.

I don't entirely disagree with that you guys are hinting at. I just believe that there are bigger things at play and strong Iraq is better for the US than a war torn Iraq.



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Does everyone understand the definition of an insurgent?

It does NOT mean terroist!

It's like a texan getting his shotgun to confront an intruder in his home!



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Sure I do, the insurgents and I fought against each other back in the day.

In your analogy you forgot to add the part where that Texan also confronted his family members because they did not see eye to eye.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join