News – Lebanese forces engaged in deadly fighting with al-Qaeda-linked Islamic militants in Tripoli and a nearby Palestinian refugee camp early Sunday, officials said, in the worst violence to hit the northern city in two decades.At least seven Lebanese soldiers were killed outside the refugee camp, emergency officials said. Security officials, speaking o
Not a member? Sign-up today!
queenpea
affeine
uncogito
lovingu
philbutler
Greenish79
KuNchik
mark_brown
bobrboob
savagenation
judydsingsforu
tynxy
TipsOfAllSorts
Ratskii
Helixbuilder
Alexia
libsRfunny
gfarral
CloseUSAborders
Teech
agentX
alfo
schristoforides
Redtail
corey.spring
STONERS
Catie
NelsonR
BarryM
saltyveruca
bfrogv1a
_kam0_
loverman
TGrass3001
plantlady
web_1
Schochee5
jakey1
Waterkeeper
ncara
populist
dadesider
JamesMarcus
engineer
Shadowolf
lovelytxwoman
Macas
joeblowe
Daylight
partrain
256)
Add Lebanon to the list of chaos and death from the Religion of Peace.
somehow the libs. are gonna blame this on america...
This is Hezbollah helping out Hamas by attacking Fatah.
But, to your point about the US being to blame ironically...
Checked out photos of the weapons that are being used to attack Fatah?
M48 Patton tanks made by the use and M115 armored personnel carriers made by the US. Apparently, those weapons we are afraid Syria is smuggling into Lebannon...are US made...lol.
how the hell did that happen...lol.
Now isn't Fatah Islam the moderate group whereas Hamas is the radial group...but the press is reporting this as the Lebanese government trying to get rid of Fatah because it is associated with AlQaida...????? huh?
I've got to do some research on this one...something is screwy.
Fatah isn't great but they are less radical than Hamas. Abbas is from Fatah. The advantage of weakening Fatah when they are in a gun battle with Hamas is.....?
I have to admit to being a bit confused for the first time...and the Saudis are now obviously in the game, financing militias as actively as anyone...hmmm
Hmmm, we'll be allies with Iran within 6 years.
This is about the legitimate government of Lebanon's army attacking a palestine refugee camp where it's soldiers were killed when they went there to get some bank robbers. They believe the robbers are members of fatah islam. And because it is the legitimate government of Leabon that is friendly to the U.S. and shares many of our ideals, it can buy or be given our weapons,if they ask and if we want. Moderate in this context means they will kill you with two bullets instead of three or maybe that's conservative.
ah, thanks. still, darned peculiar to us an army to go after bank robbers and to wind up killing a top Fatah leader in the process...at the same time Fatah and Hamas are battling it out in the streets... And when if Fatah were to consolidate its power, Abbas would be in a position to resume talking to Israel, and, Hamas, Hezbollah's ally would be weakened...you think it is in the US interest to have Fatah loose and Hamas gain control? Maybe it is...lol...if you're going to give Israel and Lebannon a green light to overrun Palestine...
Turn on the lights? Anyone home? Don't confuse me with the fact, I only want my truth, as it suits me?
But wait...according to the wackos in here the only place they're fighting "al-Qaeda-linked Islamic militants" is in Afghanistan? Lebanon is just a small county in Afghanistan?
Bush did it. The wackos don't care about American as long as they can get somebody to believe Bush did it. That man sure can do a lot of things, he must have 100 legs.
The reason al Qaeda has spread its influence is precisely because we invaded Iraq rather than finishing the job in Afghanistan and diplomatically working the region and improving our image and relations.
So, yes, Bush did do it and he only needed 2 legs and one dysfunctional ideology!
LOL jeffreak!
You really think that if we only focused on Afghanistan, then "diplomatically worked the region and improved our image and relations", as you say, al Qaeda would have just disappeared?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! You must be smoking the same grade of crack as Non-see Pelosi, Harry Reid and all the other DumDum Dems!
What is WRONG with you people? How many useless decades of "talking" and "diplomatically working the region" is it going to take for you to realize, "hey, maybe these people only respond to a dose of their own medicine"
I just don't GET it. WHY do you Libs always have your softie heads SO FAR up your a**es? GET A CLUE! They're playground BULLIES! Unless they're beaten up to a pulp, and given some discipline for once, THEY AIN'T GONNA CHANGE! And they're increasing their numbers and getting more and more violent. At what point are you DumDum Dems going to "allow" us to fight back?
You really haven't any understanding of the region or its history so let me help you out here:
- Saddam provided us help, by default, because he did not allow al Qaeda to operate in Iraq. He persecuted anyone who opposed him and would not allow any person or group that threatened or was a potential threat to his authority.
- We could have improved relations with Iran. They provided us aid in Desert Storm, Afghanistan, and the Bush Debacle currently under way. By default they are anti-al Qaeda.
- We could have used improvements in Afghanstan to improve our image throughout the region thus minimizing popular support for al Qaeda especially in Pakistan.
- Through diplomatic initiatives we could have stabilized power throughout the region thus providing stability that could have reduced popular support for any extremist group.
But, thanks for your post. It's just more proof that those on the right are the real threat. Your absolute ignorance isn't funny any more.
We were in Iraq before we were in Afghanistan jeffery1...long before, like over 10 years, but we never finished the job while we were there, consequently, you're now dealing with it again...thank the U.N., the wonderful organization it is, without teeth...I guess they planned on talking themselves to death.
We never finished it because Bush Senior was smarter than his retard son and did not upset the stabilizing strong-arm of Sadaam that was a powerful counter to Iran.
It was politics then...and now. At least then we had more of a multi-national force.
Interestingly enough France and Germany had contracts in Iraq. Everywhere we get into a war it seems the French are involved somehow? Maybe I can learn to do without French toast if this is the cost?
Sorry, but you're wrong. You really need to research what Schwarzkopf, Bush, and Powell said about Iraq to understand why. Why we did not go to Baghdad had absolutely nothing to do with the UN but with our military's assessment of what would happen if we did. So, we did complete the job we set to complete in Desert Storm.
The irony is that G H W Bush practically gave Saddam the green light to invade Kuwait.
I don't believe that and nobody who understood what was going on does. Invading Kuwait was Saddam's waterloo...prior to that we could have cared less he was murdering thousands I fear.
Practically? He gave him permission through April Galsby when he had her tell him that the problems between Iraq and Kuwait were an inter-Arab affair and not of any concern to the U.S.
How else could Saddam have taken that? Of course he took that as a green light to invade Kuwait. You're being too nice here!
"Why we did not go to Baghdad had absolutely nothing to do with the UN but with our military's assessment of what would happen if we did."
NO, it had everything to do with our agreement with Saudi Arabia, Jordan, etc. that we would liberate Kuwait only and not take out Saddam in the process. In exchange, we were based in Saudi Arabia, which ******ed off OBL, and were allowed to fly over Jordan.
No.....not 100 legs.......just 100 turds........for a brain.
So, Lordy, please explain why the United States has nearly it's entire army in Iraq when al-Quaeda-styled terrorists are not only in Iraq, but also in Indonesia, and....the poor besieged country of Lebanon?
This is not a retorical question, I do not have a clue as to why Commander-in-Chief Bush picked Iraq as the one spot to place nearly all of the troops in his war.
Israel should not have invaded Lebanon, so what's your point?
Apparently, your point is that Israel was supposed to just sit quietly and allow Hezbollah terrorists to murder Israelis, correct?
Actually, rightly or wrongly, Hezbollah was responding to Israeli kidnappings of Hamas and Hezbollah officials.
Name the official(s).
Which Libs?
It's my believe quackpot that the al-Quaeda-styled terrorists want to make Iraq their base of operations, to work out of, possibly because they can get supplies from neighboring countries sympathetic to them, get in and out easier than Afghanistan or other places, the region is in turmoil, and they can inflict their sickness of terror and intimidation, which includes blowing up women and children, causing numbing fear, so that nobody will want to stand to fight them.
Is America the only nation with enough guts and sand to do this? Should we have stayed out of WWII so that the Nazi could have continued murdering millions of Jews? None of these are easy questions to answer, and are probably being answered by more learned men than you and I. I do know that Sadam Insane was murdering hundreds of thousands. If anyone had seen the killing fields in Cambodia, you'd ask yourself why we left, left them to be murdered?
With Muslim terrorists in it, the world is NOT a safe place!
Maybe we need to do like they did in the old West? Put their picture on a "wanted dead or alive" poster, and pay up to whoever gets them?
Lordy Lordy!!Don't know where you've been but the cowboy did that with a deck of cards having Saddam as the Ace of spades. LMAO
It worked for a while too...it was actually kind of amusing, but some ACLU or bleeding heart managed to get that stopped.
Do you know what you're talking about? It seems not. Al Qaeda is merely tolerated in Iraq simply because the Iraqis insurgents can use them in attacking us. If we left then the insurgents would massacre the al Qaeda fighters.
So, seeing that the al Qaeda style terrorists are actually Iraqis fighting us to remove us so that they can control their own country because we set up a government and constitution that left them little. Then yes, they want to use Iraq as their base of operations because it is their country.
How did we leave Cambodia for the Cambodians to be murdered? You really need to research what Nixon and Kissenger were doing in the region to answer that.
I hate to inform you jeffry1, that this is not what the Iraqi people on the ground are telling our troops, not the ones who want peace in their land. They know if we leave, hell will break out once again. Lately I've also heard that if we do pull out several of the Arab Nations have already stated that they will not leave the area in unrest. They will go in, killing all who do not comply with their ideology. I hope you can sleep at night with that kind of decision. It won't be the good guys with the white hats taking over but the evil ones wearing the black hats, to borrow a western phrase.
This says you're wrong.
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles...
Careful what you read and who the author is. Read both sides, the far far left, and the far right, Somewhere inbetween you will probably have the truth. Sometimes both sides think they have the truth, but often I've discovered they don't.
Lordy,
You need to read more and say less of what you hear.
I'm reading Cobra II and it's amazing how wrong everyone was about Iraq. The administration was warned and knew that the intel they were relying on was thin at best. Very few people at DoD were willing to tell Rummy where to go. The CIA understood that THEY had no assests in Iraq. What little legitimate intel they were getting was from the Polish embassy and everything they were giving us was totally counter to what Wolfowitz, Cheney, and Rummy were whispering in GW's ear after filtering what THEY wanted to hear.
Add to that the fact NOBODY undertood the cultural and historical dynamics of Iraq. The fact that the U.S. backed Iraq against Iran 20 years ago should have lit a lighbulb in the stubborn dimwits running the administration. Machiavelli stated that one should sorround oneself with friends but keep your enemies closer. That was 500 years ago and still rings true today.
"This says you're wrong."
Iraqi leaders say you and the poll are wrong. Try reading the Drudge Report once in a while instead of DNC talking points.
I didn't say that there would be no trouble if we left nor did I say that we should. all I said is that al Qaeda is merely tolerated by the insurgency. They have been murdering al Qaeda fighters and sent a letter to Bin Laden to have al Qarda back off of killing Iraqis.
The Iraqis nationalists have little use for al Qaeda in the long run and will not allow al Qaeda to operate within their borders simply because most insurgents are Sunni Baathists. They had no use for Islamists when they were in power with Saddam and will have none if they assume power again.
It will be only through diplomatic intiatives that we can hope to achieve peace and stability simply because we messed it up first by invading Iraq and then by forcing our ideas into their government and constitution.
Oh PLEASE, jeffreak, at what point in the game will you get a clue?
MORE diplomatic initiatives, you say? What, were the first 900 over the past 30 years not enough? Explain to me what you even MEAN by "diplomatic initiatives" anymore?
We're dealing with people who are:
1. utterly blinded by Islamic extremism
2. uneducated
3. a complete stranger to human rights and respect for their fellow man
4. newly oil-rich, greedy for more, and using the money to fund more terror camps and put weapons in the hands of 6-year olds
Oh, but in light of all this, I'm sure they'll be willing and able to sit down and talk diplomatic initiatives.
No, jeffreak, you don't get it. Terrorists and rogue governments HAVE to buckle down, accept and adopt democracy, individual freedom and a free market system, or perish, whether it's by their own hand or ours - frankly, I don't care.
They either join the rest of the world or go the way of the Dodo, dodo.
Um. You haven't a clue so discussing things such as Iran helping us during Desert Storm, our invasion of Afghanistan, and the current Bush Debacle is basically futile so I won't even bother. You should, however, start researching the region's history as written by real historians. Maybe then you'd see that U.S. and Western policies structured around access to oil and the Cold War have not served us well.
Make sure you don't say that as your car stops because your tank runs dry.
I have some news for you, Jeffery: You see, terrorism is NOT limited to Al Qaeda.
Lordy,
Thanks for your well thought out reply. On some points I agree, but on others we have some differences, which is why I like reading your posts.
I'm not so sure about your statement that al-Qaeda wants to make Iraq a base of opperations. From what I have read, the locals are not too fond of them. Indoneasia sounds like a more reasonabel guess.
In Iraq, we are kind of a small kid batting at a very big bee hive, getting stung and turning alot of bees into MAD bees. The hive is big enough so that wiping Iraq off of the face of the earth would not affect terrorist-bee production.
quackpot,
The MAIN REASON the majority Iraqis don't care for AQ is because AQ is anti-Shiite. The only Iraqi faction that's in cahoots with AQ are non-Bathist Sunnis which are a proportionaly small minority and made up of a foreign cadre of extremists. The fighting in Iraq is mainly between Sunni factions and Shiite militia.
If the majority of Iraqis get tired of the BS and chaos created by these fighting factions, they'll succeed in creating a stable country, but 700 years of hatred is hard to overcome.
I do not see how guns will overcome this divide, but I do see how diplomacy might.
I am very pleased the Mr. Bush is finally starting to attempt some diplomacy.
quackpot, that is if the Iraqi's are strong enough to resist them, without U.S. and international forces. Indoneasia is a hot bed, but too far away for them to strike targets like the USS Cole, our Embassies, markets in the Europen area. I personally think the al-Qaeda are simply criminals, thugs, and deserve to be hunted down like them. Put a bounty on them. Someone who is enterprising might like a nice income, perhaps Bounty Dog?
lordy,
They're not too far away and Indonesia's not Arabic. The dynamics of Indonesia are very different from anything the Middle East presents.
Lordy,
There are only token "international" forces in Iraq. The rest of the world has said - "your gig Bush - good luck good bye".
Given that, the Iraqis are going to have to do their own gig perty soon, and after four years it is none to soon to ask for a plan.
I totally agree that al-Qaeda is a world-wide street gang. The question is, how to deal with such a street gang that has gained new members as a result of our perceived take over of a Middle Eastern Country
We haven't figured out what to do with our street gangs here. We need to get out the 30 gallon can of whoopass on our own streets.
As long as our press continues to give out the perception that we've taken over a middle eastern country, and our wackos keep agreeing with them, instead of repeating the truth, the problem may remain for a while. The truth is that if the terrorists would quit striking, would quit bombing women and children, and let the area settle down, the U.S. would leave and quite quickly. Maybe even we can get enough wackos to continue repeating that so they can hear it, they will? It could not hurt to try.
Sadar, for one, has that idea.
I would personally, as a member of the free world, like to thank you and people like for for helping to spread the message of radical terrorists. Without your help these fleas would have been still scrambling around Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia trying to find gullible people to join them. Now they have the mighty US propaganda machine churning out recruits left, right and centre. I ask you this again, since you are in favour of giving terrorists the press they so surely need to succeed, will you and your chicken friends now join in the fight which you claim only you can see? If you will not fight then i would call you a traitor since you claim to see a problem but you will do nothing to provide a solution. Liberals see a solution through less interference and slaughter, so i do not expect them to fight your fight for you...i ask you again, will you go fight your fight or are you a traitorous coward?