Jump to content

So we got Zarqawi:


Recommended Posts

Who did that translation?  Who did the analysis?  Are they actually qualified to do either?  They let you assume it's a military translation and analysis...but it clearly isn't so (and even if it were...why would it be coming from TRADOC?  Nothing against them...I appreciate what they do, and they're very good at it.  This isn't it.) 

707817[/snapback]

 

The link to the previous days report gives that information:

 

FOX Thingy

 

One of those who has taken up the challenge is Ray Robison, currently a military operations research analyst specializing in aviation and missile research in Huntsville, Ala. Robison served on active duty as a fire support officer for the 3rd Brigade of the 2nd Infantry Division at Fort Lewis, Wash. and as a Battalion Signal Officer with the 101st Airborne. His 10 years of active service include duty in the Gulf War and on peacekeeping assignment in Kosovo.

 

Robison also served in Qatar as a contractor for the Defense Intelligence Agency, working as part of the CIA-directed Iraq Survey Group (ISG) that examined efforts by Saddam Hussein to build and hide weapons of mass destruction, among other objectives.

 

...

 

 

Robison supervised a group of linguists to analyze, archive and exploit documents and materials of Saddam's regime. He has seen thousands of these documents and translations previously, having worked with them for a year in Iraq. He was involved with briefing his group's findings to senior U.S. military and political leaders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh.  Well, okay.  I can see where a rocket scientist would have the ethnographic knowledge to judge the content of the document.  Thanks, that really clears things up... 

 

:)

707832[/snapback]

 

Hey...you asked. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read the thing and in all honesty I probably have to read it again, I may have missed something - I didn't see much point, and it gave me a headache.

 

Nothing jumped out at me other than overtures between Iraq and the Taliban. The Taliban got what they deserved, but I wouldn't consider them terrorists in the common sense. They were extreme fundamentalists, ideologically ok with and harboring terrorists. But they were internally focused, and busy winding down their civil war; I'm not aware of any terrorist acts they were behind. They made a choice to protect bin Laden (a paying guest). Had they turned him over I bet they'd still be in power.

 

And in Iraq's position it made perfect sense to show solidarity with your neighbors. The lead-in states the meeting was a result of an invitation to mediate in their civil war. As far as I can tell, the conversation never touched on terrorism, but rather entirely on the US, Russia, the UN, and international politics - obviously of interest to both sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Fight the war abroad so we don't have to fight them at home" was a pretty common refrain in the run-up to this war. 

 

A common point cited against it was that it would create a breeding ground for terrorists.

 

Well, in our desire to find a center upon which to affix our troubles, we successfully found one in Zarqawi -- a brutally murderous, terrible human being, a terrorist who deserved the death he received after killing many innocents.  And we finally got him.  Great news.

 

But... sometimes it sucks to be right.  And I mean REALLY sucks.

 

We can argue if Zarqawi might or might not have been much of anything if he didn't have a cause to build upon and a place to do it in Iraq.  But he almost certainly wouldn't have had the opportunity to train a cabal of international terrorists in Iraq, had we not invaded.  What the hell have we done, but to kill one head of the hydra only to have many heads spring up?

706928[/snapback]

Here's is bill oreilly, claiming he would run iraq like saddam hussein, to prevent the widespread violence.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200606200008

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's is bill oreilly, claiming he would run iraq like saddam hussein, to prevent the widespread violence.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200606200008

711453[/snapback]

 

Well...in his defense, he's right: the reason this sort of violence wasn't present in Iraq before is because of Saddam Hussein's brutal ruling practices.

 

And that just goes to show how much of a total !@#$ing idiot O'Reilly actually is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well...in his defense, he's right: the reason this sort of violence wasn't present in Iraq before is because of Saddam Hussein's brutal ruling practices.

 

And that just goes to show how much of a total !@#$ing idiot O'Reilly actually is.

711468[/snapback]

Hope you did'nt mind me posting that, I could'nt help it was too funny , oreilly is briilliant :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...