The Myth of AQI

wkmac

Well-Known Member
This piece is lengthy (like my posts!):lol::lol::lol: but well worth the read. The writer is a former Iraq correspondent for the Stars and Stripes newspaper in 2005 and 2006 and if you don't know what Stars and Stripes is, ask any service man or woman and they can tell you. I know some here will see this in a bad light or as an attack on the current policy and even some an attack on the military but I don't see that at all. It asks a lot of good questions and gives lots of detail to consider in trying to understand much of what is going on. I hope you'll take the time to read it whether you agree or not.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2007/0710.tilghman.html#Byline
 

av8torntn

Well-Known Member
This article does have some truths to it. I would like to say there is more to slapping the label of AQI on someone than just convenience. Without going into to much detail the different groups use different types of attacks. You can watch the news and see a car bomb go off but there is always more to it than that. When a group finds something that works for them they tend to stick with it for a while. I am talking about types of explosives, trigger devices and placement.


I can say without any doubt that one way we have linked groups to Al Queada in Iraq is by intercepting communications between groups. This by itself would not make you a terrorist but when you take your orders and train with and facilitate operations for you can see how they get labeled.

I think I am safe to say this now. Al Queada used to put out a newsletter. I think they finally figured out that made our job a little to easy. Anyway everyone has an opinion but I still think it would be nice to have a strong ally in the area and since the vast majority of the Iraqi people already like us so much why not continue to help them and possibly gain a strong ally in the Middle East?
 

diesel96

Well-Known Member
This piece is lengthy (like my posts!):lol::lol::lol: I know some here will see this in a bad light or as an attack on the current policy and even some an attack on the military but I don't see that at all. It asks a lot of good questions and gives lots of detail to consider in trying to understand much of what is going on.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2007/0710.tilghman.html#Byline

It's amazing, if I posted this link I'd be called a "traiter","unpatriotic","don't support the troops","don't love your country" or "you have an agenda to slam Republicans".
Anyway...you must be made of teflon( or your post are so long , and informative people just get fustrated and concede).
Or maybe Rep's consider Indep"s higher in the food chain than Dem's in Brown Cafe and cut you more slack.
So you bring this link to our attention, and suggests it asks alot of questions and details to consider in trying to understand whats going on, but you don't offer an opinion on the article.
New lite beer "Man Law"...When one offers link to the group, then one offers an opinion.(And no fruit in beer)
It seems like you like to bait the hook with a rubber worm, cast it out to some sucker fishes and see if they take the bait or spit it out! And then SET THE HOOK when catching a misguided or uninformed sucker. I'll admit you caught me a couple times, but I hope you believe in the catch and release honor system. (Oops, I said "honor", as a Dem am I allowed to say "honor")

Av8 said:
Anyway everyone has an opinion but I still think it would be nice to have a strong ally in the area and since the vast majority of the Iraqi people already like us so much why not continue to help them and possibly gain a strong ally in the Middle East?

IMO..I don't think we can rely on Iraq as a "strong ally". Until they can Govern themselves which seems an eternity away. I'm not even sure the vast majority of Iraqs' want us there let alone like us. I seen more and more news reports of isolated trust factors between our troops against the Iraq Army .BYW..I'm not doubting the recent Surge isn't working.The sooner we achieve a shread of stability, the sooner we hopefully can disengage Militarily and just maintain a well guarded support and relief effort and evenutally pull out all together.
Speaking of strong Ally's, we supposedly have one in the form of Saudi Arabia. Or do we?
http://www.blairwatch.co.uk/node/1680
Is it possible to achieve a true trust worhty"Strong Ally" relationship with Arabs, Muslims, and radical Islamist while we "infidels" on their soil occupying Teritories/Bases and allowing Isreal to illeagally settle more and more on the West Bank? I don't believe so. It runs deeper than Money and Oil to achieve "strong ally's such as the UK and Austrailia.
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
It's amazing, if I posted this link I'd be called a "traiter","unpatriotic","don't support the troops","don't love your country" or "you have an agenda to slam Republicans".
Anyway...you must be made of teflon( or your post are so long , and informative people just get fustrated and concede).

It's not teflon Diesel, they're sacred to death I'll write a book in response! It's all a part of my master plan to take over the world. Bored everyone to death so that I'm the only one left and I'll,

OWN IT ALL!!! IT'S MINE I TELL YOU, IT'S ALL MINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:lol::lol::lol:

BTW: And I don't think you are unpatriotic or a traitor at all. I don't think that of anyone here for the record.

Now back to the "MY WORLD" comment, That's the first step Diesel, is to at least at some point have fun and even be willing to make some fun of yourself. You take all of this way to dam# serious at times like it's some kind of war. Do you honestly think any of us is going to change the world pontificating BS here? I sure don't but it is a great place to vent but also have some fun too and even learn. In some cases this place has forced me to go out and really read a lot more on a subject and even read contary points of view and that's good for anyone and I'd bet you'd agree with that. However, can you force everyone to do that? Nope and don't want to either but I can bore them to death and torture them with what I find which is even more fun!
:tongue_sm

I might just piss them off enough to the point that they do go out and read just to try and slam me down and that my friend is the point and I do say that with no smile or joke and with serious face. We face many problems and no one entity is going to have all the answers to everything.

Another problem that I see from your posts is your attitude. I know some of the other posters here post from a poltical perspective you disagree with and I at times do to but when they are right I say so and have no problems with doing it. You've been right at times, Big Arrow has been right, dare I say it but so has Tieguy. :wink: Love and kisses Tie.
Also don't always take an opposing point on every issue because sometimes agreeing and going further just might have the person look further at the issue and maybe they come to a differnt point of view. The post of the movie about Vietnam Big spoke of seeing the film with his father and I told him that's an excellent idea. Now I happen to believe Vietnam was bad foreign policy as it was nothing but us trying to salvage French imperial territory just as we are salvaging British and French imperial territory in the mideast today (I keep telling you people to read about the post WW1 settlements ending the war and dividing up the old Ottoman empire) but I know Big and his dad may believe different. However, Big's dad having been there may see something in that movie that he remembers and then maybe that position just might change just a wee bit. If nothing else, if the movie give those 2 time together even if they come out with the same opinion, it's still worth it IMO.

As for my teflon coat, Tie and a couple of others here will tell you that I've even called the gov't in Washington a Fascist gov't in several threads and still do to this day. And when I did not one person called me out or challenged me, not that they agreed or that I was even right but I point out why in a technical sense this was IMO true. I also call neo-conservatives neo-cons not to slame them but it's quicker to type neo-con. Irving Kristol who is the father of the neo-conservative movement coined the term neo-conservative in order to differ themselves from the more traditional conservatives like say a Barry Goldwater who was more in the mold of an 18th or 19th century "classic liberal". The terms liberal and conservative are so muddied these days I find them almost useless when discussing political theories in any serious and meaningful way.

These folks here completely and openly allowed me to voice my opinion with no problems what so ever so your suggested claims at times that some here are trying to trample free speech doesn't wash with me because I've stepped out into those extremes and the waters have always been warm and inviting. It's odd that most verbal and harsh attacks towards my expressed opinions here when they border into libertarian thought have been from folks like yourself, a Sue Zee girl and a lazy person in the name of an animal. Sure, Big and Tie and others object from time to time to some specific points and mostly in the realm of what they believe are moral voilations but none have ever attack me being lbertarian. Oddly that has always come from folks holding themselves out as democrats who always champion openness and diversity. I guess the neo-cons are more open than they get credit for!:wink:

BTW: I can't use their old names because of the BC police so my apologies to SuZEE and Sl0th for having to go this route. No disrespect was intended.

You guys holding the so-called open and diversity position of being civil libertairians in the cause just attack any and all points of view if it doesn't square completely with your own. "You either fit this into my box or else!" seems to be you MO at times. This is an open forum, it's for discussion and the sharing of ideas and don't take any of this as a personal attack because you'd miss the point. If I didn't like you or respect some of your points I'd ignore your post like I think most everyone else will but I think in reality you're an OK guy and riding a Harley I'd bet a lot of fun too.

We're all Americans here, we all come from various regions of the country where we all do things different. What works in your neighborhood may not work in mine and visa versa. We all see things different from our upbringing and cultural values and to try and create a central system with one set of rigid principles and ways of doing things in all matters will only in the end invite failure and discord and result in distrust and apathy, you know like we have now! :laugh: I joke but there's more truth there than we want to admit.

Let me and my neighbors in my community live as we see fit and the same goes for you because the moment you consolidate and centralize you have the "well this is the way we do it where I live so you'll just have to adapt" mentality come into play and then the discord and argument begins. Then those opportunist who are out for themselves begin to see money to be made and they manipulate the system even further to their own ends and then we fight and argue even more as we position to have our guys in power to make sure that we live like we want to live and force everyone else to live likewise whether it's the best thing or not for them. The minority form lobby groups and info drives to push their agenda to make it the majority and then the former majority now the minority begin to push back likewise and all these competing and conflicting interests dominate the system to the point nothing gets done but arguing. Look at the global warming thread here as a perfect example. We argue over the science and ignore the real solutions out there that really do make a better quality of life and that is and can be very independent of a centralize system and put the individual person more in control of their own life and what it wrong with that? In the meantime beause everything is so politicized and so politically charges we just fight and fight while they rob us blind behind the scenes (both parties do it) and then the fighting amongst ourselves only continues to grow and grow.

Yeah Diesel, 95% of what gov't does IMO is unneeded and as I've said before, in my perfect world I'd abolish the constitution and go back to the articles of confedration for starters but it's not my perfect world and likely won't be and I accept that. Also to walk in and dismantle everything all at once would likely be a self defeating effort and the people aren't really for it and the turmoil and chaos of such effort would likely breed a ground for a real tyrannt to step forth under hte guise of our save you from your pain and then their pain later would be horrible. We have what we have and will likely have for some time to come. However, I don't blame you or anyone else even though you support a contary viewpoint in some fashion and defend it even at the ballot box. If I don't blame you or feel you as some threat then why do you feel the same of me? And I ask that not as a specific question to you and I but general question that all of us should consider about the other person.

We all need to remember that this forum is not the gathering of the Gods to determine the fate of mankind but is nothing more than a group of working stiffs getting togther and pontificating ideas in our own little belief that we are the masters of our world. NOT!!!!!!

Instead, we should see ourselves as a bunch of UPSers, killing a couple of cold brews and sharing how we see the things of the world and how we see them differently and yes sometimes that does involve long and wordy explainations that border on the absolute boring.

Like this post!

:lol:
ROTFFLMAO at ME

Admit it Diesel, I just made you smile if not laugh and that's what I'm talking about!
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
This article does have some truths to it. I would like to say there is more to slapping the label of AQI on someone than just convenience. Without going into to much detail the different groups use different types of attacks. You can watch the news and see a car bomb go off but there is always more to it than that. When a group finds something that works for them they tend to stick with it for a while. I am talking about types of explosives, trigger devices and placement.


I can say without any doubt that one way we have linked groups to Al Queada in Iraq is by intercepting communications between groups. This by itself would not make you a terrorist but when you take your orders and train with and facilitate operations for you can see how they get labeled.

I think I am safe to say this now. Al Queada used to put out a newsletter. I think they finally figured out that made our job a little to easy. Anyway everyone has an opinion but I still think it would be nice to have a strong ally in the area and since the vast majority of the Iraqi people already like us so much why not continue to help them and possibly gain a strong ally in the Middle East?

Thanks for the insight and huge thanks for your service. You guys are a national treasure IMO!
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
av8torntn,

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20430170/site/newsweek/

Haven't been able to read it all and it is long but I wanted to share it with you for your insight and thoughts. Appreciated your comments to me the other day on this similar subject. I know we both share a hope that our guys do catch this guy and I do hope HVT-1 and HVT-2 are caught alive and then allowed to rot in some prison he11hole for the world to see. Although the thought of some average grunt GI getting to cap his arse in the field is also very appealing too!

I sure hope it's video'd for YouTube!
:thumbup1:

c ya!
 

av8torntn

Well-Known Member
wkmac

About the time I made it to page nine I thought maybe you wrote the article.

At the risk of getting my hand slapped by diesel again for straying off the topic of the thread I will answer your question.

They covered many topics and the major question I would have is what did they leave out. On the first topic they covered they would leave you to believe that that patrol had no situational awareness. They were heading straight for a major hiding place with very poorly trained enemy sentries watching. They then turned away at the last second. They never noticed that they were being watched and they never picked up any of the radio traffic as Al Queada fighters communicated with each other. I think this is unlikely from what I have experienced. Were our soldiers turned away because they were over the border?

On the thing with Rumsfield they kind of make my previous point for me in a round about way. I thought they operation had grown much larger in size but I was not there. This is a good reason to have civilian oversight for the military because many times there are more things to consider.


On the force protection I will say there are career officers who are more worried about their future than doing their job. That being said I do not think the things he brought up were force protection issues solely. Many soldiers have aggressive personalities. This is a good thing but they have to have rules put in place for a reason.

On a lighter note I think any high school freshman could make a better video than either of the two that were released this week. Maybe he is becoming ineffective.
 

tieguy

Banned
It's amazing, if I posted this link I'd be called a "traiter","unpatriotic","don't support the troops","don't love your country" or "you have an agenda to slam Republicans".

Are any of those characterizations wrong?

Anyway...you must be made of teflon( or your post are so long , and informative people just get fustrated and concede).

sometimes...:thumbup1:
Or maybe Rep's consider Indep"s higher in the food chain than Dem's in Brown Cafe and cut you more slack.

absolutely!!

So you bring this link to our attention, and suggests it asks alot of questions and details to consider in trying to understand whats going on, but you don't offer an opinion on the article.
New lite beer "Man Law"...When one offers link to the group, then one offers an opinion.(And no fruit in beer)
It seems like you like to bait the hook with a rubber worm, cast it out to some sucker fishes and see if they take the bait or spit it out! And then SET THE HOOK when catching a misguided or uninformed sucker. I'll admit you caught me a couple times, but I hope you believe in the catch and release honor system. (Oops, I said "honor", as a Dem am I allowed to say "honor")

You may require some training . :thumbup1:

IMO..I don't think we can rely on Iraq as a "strong ally". Until they can Govern themselves which seems an eternity away. I'm not even sure the vast majority of Iraqs' want us there let alone like us. I seen more and more news reports of isolated trust factors between our troops against the Iraq Army .BYW..

why would you trust the perspective of a new source over someone who served there?

I'm not doubting the recent Surge isn't working.The sooner we achieve a shread of stability, the sooner we hopefully can disengage Militarily and just maintain a well guarded support and relief effort and evenutally pull out all together.

wow I'm tingling I think we found some common ground.:laugh:

Speaking of strong Ally's, we supposedly have one in the form of Saudi Arabia. Or do we?
http://www.blairwatch.co.uk/node/1680

Mistrust the concept of trust?

Is it possible to achieve a true trust worhty"Strong Ally" relationship with Arabs, Muslims, and radical Islamist while we "infidels" on their soil occupying Teritories/Bases and allowing Isreal to illeagally settle more and more on the West Bank? I don't believe so. It runs deeper than Money and Oil to achieve "strong ally's such as the UK and Austrailia.

Perhaps we have to use a different benchmark when discussing a strong ally in the middle east?
 

diesel96

Well-Known Member
(Oops, I said "honor", as a Dem am I allowed to say "honor")

Not if you try and say it with a straight face.

It's called sarcasism, I wasn't sure if the "righties" had a patent on the word "honor" also!:thumbup1:

Tieguy said:
Are any of those characterizations wrong?

I'd rather you question my character, than be a gullible, submissive Republican servant and allow the "Far Right" hijacked your entire Party and the War Effort.
 

av8torntn

Well-Known Member
Also the author suggested we should have left our units in place in Afghanistan. I think this would have been a serious mistake. Combat operations take a heavy toll on your body. Units need time to recoup and train. I support a troop rotation policy and I do not think that pulling out one SOF ODA team and replacing it with another does much serious harm.
 

diesel96

Well-Known Member
DUH,
My response was a sarcastic remark, to your sarcasm.(the correct way to spell it)
Sorry to correct you again, you can not patent a word. A word can only be "trademarked".

Sorry Professor, But My kid reclaimed his Webster Dictionary from the computer room.....does this website have spellcheck?

BTW...You have to go thru a Federal Patent office to get a word "Trademarked".:thumbup1:
 

satellitedriver

Moderator
Sorry Professor, But My kid reclaimed his Webster Dictionary from the computer room.....does this website have spellcheck?

BTW...You have to go thru a Federal Patent office to get a word "Trademarked".:thumbup1:
Ha, Ha!!!
Professor use to be my nickname in grade school. I wore black horned rimmed glasses and always had an answer to any question.(Right or Wrong).
Thanks for bringing back that memory.(No Joke)
I had a witty comeback about the patent/trademark thing,but i will not use it.
You seem like a sincere person,with a strong belief system.
I hope we can have different points of view without rancor.
PAX
 

tieguy

Banned
It's called sarcasism, I wasn't sure if the "righties" had a patent on the word "honor" also!:thumbup1:

Tieguy said:
Are any of those characterizations wrong?

I'd rather you question my character, than be a gullible, submissive Republican servant and allow the "Far Right" hijacked your entire Party and the War Effort.

and you a supporter of Mikey Moore are being objective? If your argument was thus polarized then I would have to retreat in defeat but unless the likes of Carey and Hillary Clinton are now part of the far right then I believe the hijacking of the war in Iraq was orchestrated by both parties. Their politically motivated move against the war does not absolve them of that fact. Meanwhile while the clintons and kerrys and kennedys repositioned their belief system to align with public sentiment the neo con conservative movement has stood steadfast in its belief system. Meanwhile Obama Bin laden claims he was strongly against the war back in 2003 when one in actuality needed an amplifier to hear anything he stood for back then.

If this is the example of leadership displayed by the left then give me a far right hijacking any day of the week. :thumbup1:

Rephrased another way does anyone on the left have the gonads to do anymore then badmouth their country?
 

diesel96

Well-Known Member
It's called sarcasism, I wasn't sure if the "righties" had a patent on the word "honor" also!:thumbup1:



and you a supporter of Mikey Moore are being objective? If your argument was thus polarized then I would have to retreat in defeat but unless the likes of Carey and Hillary Clinton are now part of the far right then I believe the hijacking of the war in Iraq was orchestrated by both parties. Their politically motivated move against the war does not absolve them of that fact. Meanwhile while the clintons and kerrys and kennedys repositioned their belief system to align with public sentiment the neo con conservative movement has stood steadfast in its belief system. Meanwhile Obama Bin laden claims he was strongly against the war back in 2003 when one in actuality needed an amplifier to hear anything he stood for back then.

If this is the example of leadership displayed by the left then give me a far right hijacking any day of the week. :thumbup1:

Rephrased another way does anyone on the left have the gonads to do anymore then badmouth their country?

Like I said before, I don't entirely support Mike Moore.....But he rasises valid points and issues that you just can't shrug off with total disreguard. His delivery might be over the top just like Move on .com/org which does not represent the base of the Dem' parties approach. But even if these groups would simply present their case in a more subtle way, I still question the Conservative validity to engage in reasonable dialect. It's very troublesome listening to some of the far right politcal machine fire up some Conservatives like a pitbull before a mainevent in Micheal Vick's backyard. And once absorbed into this disposition I believe those who share this view accept terms/words such as 9/11,Al-Qadea, Honor,patriotism, victory, winning, stay the path, surge etc. used as a justification of OUR Military Personal dying for an unpopular foriegn policy(civil war/occupation, war on terror, nation bldg) whatever you want to call it, that doesn't make IMO our borders any safer.
Yes, both parties were responsible for engaging with Iraq with the false intel given at the time, however BOTH parties, not just Dems' should also take responsiblility for correcting the inadequacy of the events and acknowledging the falsehoods of the reports and realigning to a more politically correct stance which just so happens to be the US public/world sentiment. Reguardless of how successful the recent "surge" has been, Republicans should not hold steadfast in a belief system/policy that overall is not working due to our inability to understand the reluctance of all the politcal factions opposing each other in Iraq, recruiting and inciting more homegrown and worldwide terrorist, and using nonexsistent excuses for "staying the course" just for the sake of Nationbuildging, Oil, or staking a claim to the Middle East, or just saving face for next year's election. BTW..removing 30,000 troops by next summer, puts us back to where we were 9 months ago...Handing this over to the next Adminisration with active military combat troops still engaged IMO will not score points for GW's legacy.
This is not badmouthing our country or our Troops, it's called an opposing view against this Administration on foreign policy, if only most Reps' can see thru the likes of a Hannity or Lindbaugh, and the same for Dems' opposing extreme Left tactics such as Move on.com.None of it is useful.BTW Someone has to tell our congress as well, so we can get something done for once and stop stonewalling.
 

Overpaid Union Thug

🇺🇸 Let’s Go Brandon! 🇺🇸 🤡🌎
Its funny how the left is trying to down play the upcomming troop reduction as just "putting us at the same troop levels from a year ago." It's not a good tactic because they were already crying about the war long before any increase in troop strength accured. A couple of years before actually. It's even funnier that they were all for the war in the beginning but as soon as the terrorist bombings started they quickly flipped the script and did what they are known best for.....curling up in the fetal position and calling for the immediate pullout of or troops.
 

moreluck

golden ticket member
.....curling up in the fetal position and calling for ....

Kind of like those little potato bugs you see all the time.....:)

rollie-pollies
 
Top