# No WMD's? Strike 1. No Saddam/Qaeda connection? Strike 2 **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 9, 2003, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715 "2003-06-09T20:40:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![OliverH](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/278dde/32.png) [@OliverH](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OliverH)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/141 "2003-06-15T19:02:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by BeatenMan \* > \*\*I would kill innocent people to protect the innocent people I am in charge of. Because more of them would be killed at a later date if I did nothing. And letting other countries know ahead of time what I would do would stop any of this from happening. \*\* Ah, I see. So what you are saying is that Iraqis are ‘Untermenschen’, whose lives are infinitely less valuable than those of an American. ---
**Author:** ![OliverH](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/278dde/32.png) [@OliverH](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OliverH)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/142 "2003-06-15T19:03:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by BeatenMan \* > \*\*Bush had the UN mandate that is all he needed. \*\* Bush had no UN mandate whatsoever. I suggest familiarizing yourself with UN procedures. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/143 "2003-06-15T19:19:10Z")
This just in: [http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030623-458730,00.html](http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030623-458730,00.html) “After weeks of pressure to explain what it knew about the alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq before launching the war there, the Bush Administration has placed the issue in CIA Director George Tenet’s lap. Administration officials have been subtly pointing the finger in his direction, saying all their knowledge of Iraq’s weapons programs came from Tenet’s agency. That apparently didn’t apply to a British intelligence report, cited by President Bush in his State of the Union speech, that claimed Iraq had tried to purchase uranium from an unnamed nation later identified as Niger. The report has since been discredited, having been based on forged documents. The CIA had, in fact, looked into the report in February 2002 and found it dubious. At first the White House claimed that the CIA, if it had had any reservations about the intelligence, had not communicated them. Then, after other U.S. officials revealed that the CIA had sent a cable to the White House in March 2002 that cast doubt on the Niger report, Bush aides insisted the warning was too vague to raise red flags. Now Bush has put Tenet in the hot seat, placing him in charge of the hunt for the wmd.” [snip] "The new assignment offers him a chance to go out either as a hero–or a scapegoat. “The spin is that somebody’s got to be in charge so that it’s being done in an organized fashion,” says an intelligence official. “The more cynical view is that they have handed the whole bag of s\_\_\_ to him.” A guy who isn’t willing to fall on his sword for Fearless Misleader…he’s just not a team player, you know? ---
**Author:** ![ChaosGod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ac91a4/32.png) [@ChaosGod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChaosGod)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/144 "2003-06-15T19:25:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by BeatenMan \* > \*\*Genocide is a good reason not to nuke the USA with even a dirty bomb. That’s right a country that is insupport of a group hit New York with a dirty bomb I would nuke everything that walked of crawled the earth in every square inch of the attacking country. \*\* Haha. You think GWB would move a finger if you, BeatenMan, where kidnapped, tortured, cut in tiny pieces and fed to the dogs by some muslim terrorsts from a country whith no gepolitical import? Nope. No. Nada. He would probably claim he had proof that you did it to yourself. He went after Saddam cause [“after all, he tried to kill my dad”](http://www.whitehouse.org/news/2002/media/saddam.mpg) ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/145 "2003-06-15T19:40:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by OliverH \* > \*\*Ah, I see. So what you are saying is that Iraqis are ‘Untermenschen’, whose lives are infinitely less valuable than those of an American. \*\* No, it’s the one logical point in **Beaten Man** ’s screeds – GWB was elected President of the U.S. and took an oath that specifies that he is to protect and defend the U.S. Whatever you may think of his various claims and the actions he’s taken on them, he legitimately is supposed to be protecting the lives of U.S. citizens prior to worrying about the lives of citizens of other nations. Beyond that, however, I have no desire to go. I find the sort of jingoism in the rest of his posts to be repulsive. And at odds with the political realities of the world at large, as well. (I’d link to the “Are Americans naive about the rest of the world?” thread, but it probably wouldn’t do any good.) ---
**Author:** ![OliverH](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/278dde/32.png) [@OliverH](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OliverH)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/146 "2003-06-15T19:50:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Polycarp \* > \*\*No, it’s the one logical point in **Beaten Man** ’s screeds – GWB was elected President of the U.S. and took an oath that specifies that he is to protect and defend the U.S. Whatever you may think of his various claims and the actions he’s taken on them, he legitimately is supposed to be protecting the lives of U.S. citizens prior to worrying about the lives of citizens of other nations. > \*\* The mandate of the US president ends at the border of the US. He has no mandate whatsover to protect the lives of Americans abroad. He is not supposed to do it. He has no right to do it other than that granted to him by other countries and international law. Not the least, however, your argument fails to be in line with basic human rights, which forbid discrimination based on nationality. ---
**Author:** ![BeatenMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3ab097/32.png) [@BeatenMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeatenMan)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/147 "2003-06-15T19:57:10Z")
j i n g o, j i n g o, j i n g o and jingoism was my name O’ . If you value the enemy’s lives as much as you do the lives of our own country. We would loose every war fought and probably loose the freedom to post on the straight dope. ---
**Author:** ![BeatenMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3ab097/32.png) [@BeatenMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeatenMan)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/148 "2003-06-15T20:06:26Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by OliverH \* > \*\*Bush had no UN mandate whatsoever. I suggest familiarizing yourself with UN procedures. \*\* Saddam broke the cease fire agreement from the first gulf war that is all we needed. That was all clinton needed to launch desert fox. He was a democrat so nobody complained. Oh and I don’t need instructions on how to start a proper war from somebody posting from Germany. ---
**Author:** ![Ben](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/df788c/32.png) [@Ben](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ben)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/149 "2003-06-15T20:09:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by BeatenMan \* > \*\*j i n g o, j i n g o, j i n g o and jingoism was my name O’ . > > If you value the enemy’s lives as much as you do the lives of our own country. We would loose every war fought and probably loose the freedom to post on the straight dope. \*\* Funny, I thought part of the reason for the war was to free the downtrodden Iraqi people, who were oppressed by a tyrant who didn’t care about them. Now they’re the enemy, and Saddam’s victims had better roll over in their mass graves to make room for more. The rest, I’ll say in the Pit. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/150 "2003-06-15T20:11:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by BeatenMan \* > \*\* That was all clinton needed to launch desert fox. He was a democrat so nobody complained. \*\* Actually, quite a few people did. The charge was that Clinton was attacking Iraq needlessly to distract from the Whitewater/Lewinsky investigation and impeachment. Don’t you remember? ---
**Author:** ![BeatenMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/3ab097/32.png) [@BeatenMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeatenMan)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/151 "2003-06-15T20:14:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by OliverH \* > \*\*The mandate of the US president ends at the border of the US. He has no mandate whatsover to protect the lives of Americans abroad. He is not supposed to do it. He has no right to do it other than that granted to him by other countries and international law. Not the least, however, your argument fails to be in line with basic human rights, which forbid discrimination based on nationality. \*\* Cite. I guess you are still mad that we got rid of that Hitler guy. We should have fought him from our borders. ---
**Author:** ![ChaosGod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ac91a4/32.png) [@ChaosGod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChaosGod)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2003, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/152 "2003-06-15T22:01:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by BeatenMan \* > \*\*Cite. I guess you are still mad that we got rid of that Hitler guy. We should have fought him from our borders. \*\* Hitler thought Germany should “defend” itself and counter potential threats from surrounding “enemies”. Just like GWB. The Nazi argument goes both ways, you see. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2003, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/153 "2003-06-16T00:12:40Z")
I guess that godwinization is inevitable. ThanX **CG** ---
**Author:** ![Tee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@Tee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tee)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2003, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/154 "2003-06-16T03:10:11Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SimonX \* > **Pretty weak-ass evidence, Tee. You’re asking us to believe that Hussein was in league with a group that was operating out of the US controlled areas of Iraq that wanted to establish a separate Kurdish state in Iraq.** No, I said that al-Qaida operated out of Iraq. Which they did. This part of your last citation: > [@](#): > > Even if al-Zarqawi had been in touch with Iraqi officials, the idea that he is operating a terrorist training center in Northern Iraq is completely unproved. The training center does exist, and it does have connections to al Qaeda, but **it is run by a dissident Kurdish Islamic militant group, Ansar al-Islam.** This group is utterly opposed to the Iraqi regime and has no connection to it. I guess the existence of al-Zarqawi in Iraq is not in dispute. Whether he is connected to anyone else is, though, and frankly who cares. If Al Z. paid someone to kill one of our diplomats, then we need prove further guilt of his. But the idea that Ansar al-Islam is dedicated only to establishing a separate Kurdish state seems wildly optimistic. Or whatever. That is also disputed and here’s another Australian source on that: [http://www.dfat.gov.au/qwon/2003/qwn\_030324a.html](http://www.dfat.gov.au/qwon/2003/qwn_030324a.html) > [@](#): > > Importantly, it is allied with and actively supported by al-Qaeda. This group has also had contact with Iraqi intelligence officers in recent times. There is evidence to suggest that Iraqi intelligence services have provided support to Ansar al-Islam to destabilise the Kurdish so-called safe haven which was established after the Gulf War in 1991. There was a report in February of this year that claimed that Iraqi intelligence agents are among Ansar al-Islam’s leadership, though we cannot confirm that. There are also reports that Ansar al-Islam has been experimenting with poison gas and toxins and that these may have been provided by the Iraqi regime. Ansar al-Islam is based in the Kurdish part of northern Iraq, which is the region where Mr Moran was killed. Etc. So Australia alleges links between Iraqi intelligence and Ansar al-Islam, and I’ve no idea if any have been proven. Again, does it really make a difference? I don’t recall anyone having to prove the Taliban was responsible for 9/11. Why should it be necessary here? ---
**Author:** ![Tee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@Tee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tee)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2003, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/155 "2003-06-16T03:15:35Z")
\*typo: we need _not_ prove his further guilt. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2003, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/156 "2003-06-16T03:17:08Z")
So that we visit our wrath on the guilty, rather than kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out? That would be nice. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2003, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/157 "2003-06-16T04:04:09Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tee \* > \*\*So Australia alleges links between Iraqi intelligence and Ansar al-Islam, and I’ve no idea if any have been proven. \*\* They stop short of actually making an allegation: “There is evidence to suggest … There was a report in February of this year that claimed…we cannot confirm that.” > [@](#): > > [_ABCNEWS_](http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/DailyNews/ansar030205_krekar.html) > In an interview with ABCNEWS, the man considered the leader of Ansar al-Islam, Majamuddin Fraraj Ahmad, who is also known as Mullah Krekar, denied all allegations that he is in any way linked to Iraq. > > “They are our enemy,” he said, adding that his group opposes Saddam Hussein because, **unlike Osama bin Laden, Saddam is not a good Muslim**. > > “We believe that Saddam Hussein, him and his group and his ministers also outside of Islam zone,” said Krekar. > > Ansar al-Islam’s 600 or so members impose a strict interpretation of Islamic law on the several thousand villagers under their control, much the way the Taliban did in Afghanistan. At least 40 of their members claim training in Taliban and al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan. > > The U.S. case about the terror connection was further undercut today in London. The BBC reported that > **British intelligence has concluded there is no evidence to support the theory that al Qaeda and Iraq are working together.** > [@](#): > > [_Beeb_](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2741003.stm) > Journalists have visited the alleged chemical weapons site in Kurdish-held northern Iraq that US Secretary of State Colin Powell says is run by an Islamic group linked to al-Qaeda. > > But they saw no obvious evidence of chemical weapons production. Bear in mind also that the primary sources of info about Ansar al-Islam, (besides members of the group itself), are their enemies in the PUK who have vested interests in receiving American and Western money, arms and support. Even if Ansar al-Islam somehow got over Hussein’s atrocities against Kurds and somehow got over Hussein’s various infidel-like behaviors and formed some sort of alliance, (even though Ansar al-Islam says it has been working for the overthrow of Iraq’s secular government- Hussein et al), and Hussein got over Ansar al-Islams apparent affilliations with Iran and Ansar al-Islam’s condemnation of Hussein, Ansar al-Islam are still predominately concerned with regional issues and unlikely to amount to much of threat to the USA. ---
**Author:** ![Tee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@Tee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tee)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2003, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/158 "2003-06-16T14:07:42Z")
Well, what else is the leader going to say. If he hated Saddam that much he’d say “sure, they invited us here, gave us 80% of their WMD stockpiles and bought us all new SUVs” except that it hands us a victory of sorts, and that’s even worse. It still doesn’t matter if they are working together or not - we will go after al-Q wherever they are and no matter what pet cause they claim this week. The governments harboring them don’t have to co-operate, but the US considers that a criminal act and might actually do something about it. From the link, Ansar al-Islam is “primarily concerned with regional issues” and that’s quite the understatement, and one more example of excuse-making. Remember that the alliance with al-Q is not disputed. Their attack here was about being in Saudi Arabia, in Morocco it was (supposedly) the official postponement of elections, in Kenya (the second time) it was about the Jews…etc…now it’s all about the Kurds and their independence. Awwww. Utter bullshit. People who think OBL is a “good Muslim” are probably unmoved by the plight of the Kurds, who have worked to establish a democratic government in their region, and probably more concerned with there being something other than an Islamic state in Iraq, or some part of it. Thus they fight the PUK and try to destabilize the region and end up looking and acting suspiciously like the same regime they claim to be working _against_. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2003, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/159 "2003-06-16T14:25:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tee \* > Well, what else is the leader going to say. If he hated Saddam that much he’d say “sure, they invited us here, gave us 80% of their WMD stockpiles and bought us all new SUVs” except that it hands us a victory of sorts, and that’s even worse. This is a fairly nonesensical piece of tripe. > [@](#): > > It still doesn’t matter if they are working together or not - we will go after al-Q wherever they are and no matter what pet cause they claim this week. Bravo, bravo the stump speech. Not actually the case in the end, but does work with the uninformed knuckledraggers. However that does not say very much about reality. > [@](#): > > The governments harboring them don’t have to co-operate, but the US considers that a criminal act and might actually do something about it. Hmm, Ansar we not being harbored by any government so that rather is yet another set of meaningless posturing. > [@](#): > > From the link, Ansar al-Islam is “primarily concerned with regional issues” and that’s quite the understatement, and one more example of excuse-making. Not at all, Ansar was fighting fellow Kurdish insurgents, there may have been some egging on from the Iraqi side with some matierial support but nothing of substance is proven on that. > [@](#): > > Remember that the alliance with al-Q is not disputed. Their attack here was about being in Saudi Arabia, in Morocco it was (supposedly) the official postponement of elections, in Kenya (the second time) it was about the Jews…etc…now it’s all about the Kurds and their independence. The Moroccan attacks are relevant to your point how? The Ansar were (perhaps are) about an Islamic state in Iraq, something that implied the overthrow of Sadaam as well. Now insofar as they were at odds with the two more or less secular Kurdish seperatist parties and insofar as they were safely in territory that Sadaam had no control over regardless, a little realpolitik in supporting a weak little splinter fighting a stronger opponent - rather similar to US realpolitik in supporting say the Iranian coutnerparts or the mujahids in Afghanistan - would not be surprising. However it is hardly a rational argument for invading Iraq. > [@](#): > > Awwww. Utter bullshit. People who think OBL is a “good Muslim” are probably unmoved by the plight of the Kurds, who have worked to establish a democratic government in their region, and probably more concerned with there being something other than an Islamic state in Iraq, or some part of it. Instead of working from what may be characterized as at best a dim and distorted understanding of hte region and in the specifics, Iraq, perhaps you should read and inform yourself before posting confused rubbish. (a) Ansar were for an Islamic state. (b) Kurdish ‘democracy’ is overblown and harldy a reality. One set of elections after a decade of pure warlordism, whipped up right quick for Washington and suckers who by the line. > [@](#): > > Thus they fight the PUK and try to destabilize the region and end up looking and acting suspiciously like the same regime they claim to be working _against_. Againb,your confusion is deep and your understanding lacking. Try to destabilize the region? They were fighting for an Islamic state. Rather nothing like the regime, either the Kurdish quasi-statelets or the secular regime in the south. Their imposition of their understanding of Sharia, Islamic Law, in the areas they controlled - a few pitiable little villages hard up against the Iranian border, hardly bears the least resemblance to Sadaam’s resolutely hard drinking secular regime. Nohting in Ansar, in short, points to Sadaam. ---
**Author:** ![Tee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@Tee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tee)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2003, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715/160 "2003-06-16T15:27:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Collounsbury \* > **Bravo, bravo the stump speech. Not actually the case in the end, but does work with the uninformed knuckledraggers** “stump speech.” Are we after al-Qaida or not? And do try to explain why or why not. > [@](#): > > \*\*Againb,your confusion is deep and your understanding lacking. Try to destabilize the region? They were fighting for an Islamic state. Rather nothing like the regime, either the Kurdish quasi-statelets or the secular regime in the south. \*\* Yes, but which state, Iraq or Kurdistan? Either is a ridiculous idea, that they even bother themselves with geopolitical boundaries, but I’ll play along. Who do they have to fight to attain their goal, and what does this “goal” look like. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-wmds-strike-1-no-saddam-qaeda-connection-strike-2/180715.md?page=9)