Al-Qaeda has Taken Over Iraq!

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
You have the gall to accuse me of not knowing what I'm talking about after the display of ignorance you've put on in this thread?

This thread?

[Drake Tungsten]

To be fair, he's more crazy than ignorant in some of the other threads...

[Berzerker]

Abd al-Hadi al-Iraqi is one of Usama bin Laden’s top global deputies, personally chosen by bin Laden to monitor al Qaeda operations in Iraq.

Monitor?

[Dinner]

Let's look at the contributions of Drake and his regular fan club. The OP provides sites and clear documentation that the Administration's new policy is to pretend that everyone we kill in Iraq is part of Al Qaeda. Drake posts a junk piece claiming that the US only targets Al Qaeda and then makes the leap of faith, completely unsupported, that there for the people we kill must be Al Qaeda and launches into his usual insults.

No where in his tripe does he prove that all the people we kill in Iraq (between 200,000 and 600,000 since 2003 depending on how you calculate) are members of Al Qaeda and instead just goes into his usual bam and personal attacks. The administration is documented as consistently attempting to call everyone we kill as Al Qaeda fighters yet a real look shows almost none of them are in any way involved with Al Qaeda.

Drake, your lack of critical thinking skills makes the entire American education system look bad.

[Dinner]

I do like how he always avoids the real topics and points he can't refute though. For instance that Bush is full of **** by constantly claiming every insurgent is a member of Al Qaeda. Don't want to touch that little fact do you? It was only the central thesis of the entire thread so why would you stop to talk about that before launching into your typical bam?

Numb skull.

[Drake Tungsten]

Monitor?

mon·i·tor

–verb (used with object)

16. to oversee, supervise, or regulate: to monitor the administering of a test.

17. to watch closely for purposes of control, surveillance, etc.; keep track of; check continually: to monitor one's eating habits.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/monitor

[Dinner]

Drake once again avoiding the central argument after he has lost.

You're a poor loser.

[Drake Tungsten]

I'm not the one who lost, killer.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Let's look at the contributions of Drake and his regular fan club. The OP provides sites and clear documentation that the Administration's new policy is to pretend that everyone we kill in Iraq is part of Al Qaeda. Drake posts a junk piece claiming that the US only targets Al Qaeda and then makes the leap of faith, completely unsupported, that there for the people we kill must be Al Qaeda and launches into his usual insults.

Drake's "junk piece" was from the front page of the Washington Post, you loon.

edit: and it's spelled cite, goddamnit. And "therefore."

[Berzerker]

so monitor means watching ( I knew that)

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Drake's "junk piece" was from the front page of the Washington Post, you loon.

It's called a junk piece, you loon, because it didn't refute the OP and was just junk filler.

[Drake Tungsten]

You're a goddamn mentalist...

[ZEE]

getting a bit off track arent we gentlemen?

i think the point of all this is simply that the Bush Administration trying to gain what sliver of support they can for the entire war "effort" by demonizing all the "insurgents" as Al-Qaeda members, as has already been obviously stated numerous times in this thread. In their defense however this has been done countless times during history and throughout wars, despite who the ruling party in the situation, and this should not be a tremendous shock to anybody. The only argument here, between anybody, is just old personal attacks and left-right nonsense that continuously floods the OTF. The argument at hand is merely secondary to one poster trying to PWN the other one...

when in the end it makes absolutey no difference anyways.
piece

[Drake Tungsten]

Another junk piece in today's LA Times!

U.S. to increase focus on Al-Qaida in Iraq

BAGHDAD -- U.S. commanders plan a summer of stepped up offensives against al-Qaida in Iraq as they tailor strategy to their expectation that Congress soon will impose a timeline for drawing down U.S. forces here.

The emphasis on al-Qaida, described by commanders in interviews here this week, marks a shift in U.S. plans away from Shiite militias and death squads inside Baghdad. It reflects the belief of some senior officers in Iraq that the Shiite militias likely would reduce their attacks once it became clear that a U.S. pullout was coming. By contrast, they believe al-Qaida in Iraq could be emboldened by a pullout plan and must be confronted before one is in place.

When the administration began sending additional troops to Iraq, U.S. commanders spoke frequently of the threat posed by the Shiites' al-Mahdi Army, and they issued thinly veiled threats against its leader, the radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. Although military leaders say Shiite militias loyal to al-Sadr remain a priority, al-Sadr has tacitly cooperated with the U.S. troop buildup, telling his followers to avoid confronting U.S. troops. He is also a key supporter of the U.S.-backed government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Now, with the final infantry troops of the Bush administration "surge" strategy having arrived in Iraq, the military is increasingly focusing firepower against the Sunni side of Iraq's civil war, especially al-Qaida in Iraq.

"These operations are more on towards Qaida because they . . . are the ones that are creating the truck bombs and car bombs that are having an effect . . . on the populace," Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the commander of day-to-day military operations, said in an interview this week. "So we are going after the safe havens that allow them to build these things without a lot of interference."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-strategy28jun28,0,7706103,full.story?coll=la-home-world

I hope Glenn Greenwald is on the case to expose this outbreak of Bush propaganda at another major US newspaper!

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

The point being nowhere in any of the aforementioned posts (articles or administration) did anyone ever attempt to claim all 100K - 600K Iraqi deaths (use whatever figure you wish ) were AQ. Only of recent does sockpuppet/Greenwald and his saliva spewing disciple come to the conclusion that of late they have been called AQ. (And guess what of late they have been targeting AQ in Iraq.) So therefor all deaths since incpetion must be AQ.

Oerdin's attempt to say that all Iraqi deaths from inception of hostilities to now as being claimed AQ from the administration is beyond strawman and into the realm of delusional imaginations. Knocked down with the merest glance not even requiring the slightest breeze.