Originally posted by DurdenWhen I get older, huh? 
Get a clue, edsinger.
Well I guess I should have said wiser but that would not accomplish anything. Look if you want concrete facts and want to hold it in your hand then I
can not make you hold it, but I can tell you that the information I post is just as legit as what you do. The perspectives are different thats all.
Originally posted by Durden
Oh, would I now? Then maybe you would be the leader of witch-hunts back in the day...
Still no credible evidence you'd like to share to support
your opinion, btw? 
Look has the Osama in Baghdad visit been explained? If they were such mortal enemies then Osama would not have made it out alive.
As I have stated many of times, the old arab saying that "the enemy of your enemy is your friend" bears credence here. The 911 report plainly states
that there were connections but no CONCRETE PROOF of collabaration. The article I posted would be a decent reason as to why they met and had contacts.
If we can find the proof that the documents in which I posted show that Saddam was funding or involved in the Somalia fiasco, then you would have your
evidence.
Even though Rumsfeld was cautious
www.abovetopsecret.com...
the documents sure paint a different picture than the one you attempt to present.
Jan. 18, 1993 memo from Saddam Hussein, through his secretary, to the Iraqi Intelligence Service, urging that missions be undertaken to "hunt down
Americans," especially in Somalia.
Originally posted by Durden
I asked you to pull your head out. This is not an issue about political preference.
many more can be found as well as the translations here
www.cnsnews.com...\\Nation\\archive\\200410\\NAT20041011a.html
I would say that Saddam and Osama must have had an agreement as Osama never attemted to get rid of Saddam, maybe they worked togther towards a common
goal , who knows. But America was the enemy of both.
Originally posted by Durden
Don't confuse the outcome of the election with the opinion of the majority of US citizens when it comes to the attack
on Iraq.
Oh ok, well
Three in Four Say If Iraq Did Not Have WMD or Support al Qaeda, US Should Not Have Gone to War
Saddam's Intent to Build WMD Not Seen as Sufficient Reason
Majority Believes Iraq Situation Getting Worse, But Only 1 in 5 Want to Withdraw
But he got re-elected even though the public in general has no clue to the facts and the assumed facts. Some things will never be proven, and did you
notice this one?
Only 1 in 5 Want to Withdraw
We have a job to finish and the only way to do so is to win.
Originally posted by Aelita
The originator of this thread, as it would appear, needs the feel righteous and fill the void that would otherwise exist inside him. The original
paper he quoted and which I took time to read, contains conjectures and outright desinformation. The 9/11 report didn't conclude any ties between
Osama and Saddam, and there is multitude of sources that looked at that and came to same conclusion, Osama and Saddam were unfriednly to each other at
best, and in fact enemies (Saddam was a secular leader whereas OBL is an ultrareligious fanatic).
Whatever it takes, edsinger, whatever it takes...
I have no voids,
outright disinformation? Care to elaborate?
Unfriendly forces do not meet as AlQada and Saddam's folks did. Again why would Osama be allowed in Baghdad? True, I agree that Saddam was Islamic
only in "show", but he also had things that Osama needed and was probably willing to sell them.
After 911, the chance that Saddam would play nice just could not stand anymore, PERIOD. He had made the sanctions all but moot, of course now we know
why dont we? The claims of the deaths during sanctions were always directed at the United States, although it was the UN that imposed them and yet
would not enforce them.
I do not live in a dreamworld, I live in one that is hostile to my way of life and my country. We deal with threats as they come. 911 was not the
first strike against us, but it was the first to draw a serious response, and one that I think Bin Ladin miscalculated on, IMHO.
