Bush just said this in a press conference. Is this true? I don’t recall ever hearing about that before. Have I just not been paying attention or is this a new assertion?
(I posted this in GQ because I’m more interested in finding out whether any reports back this assertion rather than debating the merits of the war.)
Zarqawi had a base in Kurdistan (that part of northern Iraq not under Saddam’s control)
Colin Powell asserted that Zarqawi was in Iraq in his Feb 2003 briefing to the UN.
Before that, Zarqawi had participated in the assassination of our ambassador to Jordan, the Jordan Millennium Bombing plot, and much earlier, training with Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, specifically in Herat near the Iranian border. I’m not sure, but I think that his activity and primary choice of location imply that he is Shi’ite, and so despite his fervor, I doubt there’s any real connection with Saddam except for a shared enemy.
He probably was operating in Iraq with an intent to wage a mujaheddin-style campaign against the “infidel invaders,” like the one he fought in the 80s against the Soviets in Afghanistan. Because of this, I would not be surprised if, at some point in his past, he had been considered a potential ally of the US government.
All of the above info is from multiple sources; I pulled it from a timeline I had compiled when I was trying to pin down any connection between Zarqawi, Ahmed Chalabi, and Aziz Al-Taee during the Nick Berg case.
Two distinctions to keep in mind:
9-11 investigation: No 9-11 link between Al Qaeda and Iraq
Bush and Co: A relationship between the two existed, but 9-11 committee only makes their claim as it related to 9-11
Bush’s claims are true, but misleading. Nearly all of the terrorists in Iraq before the war were in Kurdish areas that Saddam didn’t control. I think these areas were under UN protection, or had some similar arrangement. The area was effectively lawless, and the terrorists took advantage of that.
The Kurdish areas in the north were not controlled by Saddam because they were under the protection of OPERATION NORTHERN WATCH. The U.S. occasionally allowed Turkish aircraft to bomb terrorist camps (as defined by Turkey) in this area – Turkey’s problem with Kurdish separatists caused them to use a rather broad definition of “terrorist”, however, which sometimes resulted in Turkey killing the Kurds we were trying to protect from Saddam, with our tacit blessing. We allowed them to do this because Turkey was a NATO ally, and because they host U.S. bases in the area which allowed us to project power over the Middle East. The politics of that entire series of events gets uglier the closer you look at it.
Since Diceman basically answered the OP (IMO) I offer this Zarqawi Bio from Slate
Philster said:
I’m not sure that’s correct. The staff report implied that, but other commission members came out immediately after and said the summary report was misleading, and that there was definitely contact between Saddam and al-Qaida. They specifically mentioned contacts in the Sudan.
In fact, several 9-11 commission members have said that there was virtually no difference between their position and the Bush administration’s.
As for Zarqawi, the administration says that they have good evidence that he was treated at a hospital in Baghdad. He maintained a safe house in Baghdad, which was raided after the war (where the ‘Zarqawi Memo’ was found). So the question is, if Zarqawi was working with Kurdish rebels, why was Saddam letting him use his hospital and have what looks like free run of Iraq?
Sept. 11 Panel Repeats Iraq-Osama Tie Weak (July 7, 2004)
But they existed, to be sure.
Well, we ALL condensed from the same protoplanetary disk…
Yep. Over ten years ago, the Hussein regime and al Qaida had a brief exchange of questions as to whether they might help each other. In the ensuing decade, no further contact has been found. Of course, this sort of contact justifies attacking Iraq–sort of like the support that Cheney extended to Hussein justifies throwing those Ba’athist supporters that currently control the Executive arm of the US. government in jail for supporting Hussein.
Or, perhaps, we could stick to relevant connections–all of which indicate that al Qaida and Hussein never established meaningful connections in any way.
It is very unlikely that he is a Shi’ite. He is Jordanian, (allegedly) has been cooperating with al Qaeda, and had his base in Kurdistan before the invasion. These factors all point to him being a Sunni. Any reason you’re claiming he’s a Shiite?
The location of his base in Kurdistan and the apparent cooperation of his group with Kurdish groups like IMIK would suggest antipathy to Saddam’s regime, but not for the reason you suggest.