The purpose of this thread is to dispel the myth that we're fighting Al-queda in Iraq.

Report by US think tank says only '4 to 10' percent of insurgents are foreigners.

By Tom Regan | csmonitor.com

The US and Iraqi governments have vastly overstated the number of foreign fighters in Iraq, and most of them don't come from Saudi Arabia, according to a new report from the Washington-based Center for Strategic International Studies (CSIS). According to a piece in The Guardian, this means the US and Iraq " feed the myth" that foreign fighters are the backbone of the insurgency. While the foreign fighters may stoke the insurgency flames, they make up only about 4 to 10 percent of the estimated 30,000 insurgents.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0923/dailyUpdate.html


U.S. Officers in Iraq Find Few Signs of Infiltration by Foreign Fighters
Print Single-Page Save Share

Published: November 19, 2003
The commanding general of the United States Army division that patrols much of Iraq's western borders with Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia said Tuesday that his men had encountered only a handful of foreign fighters trying to sneak into the country to attack American and allied forces.

''I want to underscore that most of the attacks on our forces are by former regime loyalists and other Iraqis, not foreign forces,'' said the officer, Maj. Gen. Charles H. Swannack Jr., commander of the 82nd Airborne Division.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950CE1DA163BF93AA25752C1A9659C8B 63


Extent of Foreign Fighters in Iraqi Insurgency
May Be Less Than Often Portrayed
By Jim Krane
Associated Press

Monday 03 May 2004

U.S. officials have for months publicly promoted the notion that foreign fighters and terrorists are playing a major role in the anti-American insurgency in Fallujah and the rest of Iraq.

By blaming foreigners, U.S. authorities hope to quash the idea that Iraqis are rising up against military occupation and frame the conflict as part of the wider war on terror. However, foreigners play a tiny role in Iraq's insurgency, many military experts say.

In Fallujah, U.S. military leaders say around 90 percent of the 1,000 or more fighters battling the Marines are Iraqis. To date, there have been no confirmed U.S. captures of foreign fighters in Fallujah - although a handful of suspects have been arrested

http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/9/4356


So enough with the *we're fighting them over there bullshit*

The purpose of this thread is to dispel the myth that we're fighting Al-queda in Iraq.

Why do you and others think that "al Queda" members can't be Iraqis??? Al Queda is a terrorist organization, not a nationality.

Baron Max

Some sources that are less than 2 years old would be nice.

Not that anybody ever bought the myth that it was only foreigners we were fighting, or that anyone is even selling it any more.

http://www.csis.org/component/option,com_csis_pubs/task,view/id,3965/type,1/

Author: Anthony H. Cordesman
Date of Publication: July 16, 2007
Associated Programs: Burke Chair in Strategy
Related Research Focus: Middle East & North Africa
International Security Experts: Anthony H. Cordesman

Synopsis:

The mix of Iraqi insurgent groups is as complex as ever. Al Qa’ida in Mesopotamia is only one part of a mix of different Sunni Islamist Extremists and more nationalist groups. There is a wide mix of Shi’ite extremists and militias. There are still no reliable estimates of the strength of given groups, or of how many attacks of what kind a given group conducted, who their leadership is many cases, or exactly what they stand for.
Ganymede:

Yet you're so sure that 2, 3 and 4 years ago the same CSIS and a couple leftie deadtree news outlets knew with precision the actual numerical makeup of "foreign fighters" then?

The Al Qaeda in Iraq are with the WMD in Iraq, visible only to US authorities.

The Al Qaeda in Iraq are with the WMD in Iraq, visible only to US authorities.
You don't get out much.

Let's hear from a Sunni Iraqi, shall we?

http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/2007/09/al-qaedas-war-of-villages.html

Apparently this is the latest chapter in al-Qaeda's war manual in their war against the Iraqi people and the coalition; raiding remote peaceful villages, burning down homes and slaughtering both man and beast.
Invisible to those who can only see the make-believe Iraq. (http://www.mudvillegazette.com/archives/009725.html)

http://www.csis.org/component/option,com_csis_pubs/task,view/id,3965/type,1/


Ganymede:

Yet you're so sure that 2, 3 and 4 years ago the same CSIS and a couple leftie deadtree news outlets knew with precision the actual numerical makeup of "foreign fighters" then?

Nope, I can provide more evidence from ABC, CBS, NBC, USA TODAY, but I'm not. If you would just lift one finger, and google foreign fighters in Iraq, you'll see the same articles. The only media outlets that refuse to discuss actual nubmers are the conservative ones. So I can understand why you're so un informed since you don't base your positions on actual facts. The truth hurts doesn't it:)

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c6/cetawayo/Craig.jpg

You don't get out much.

Let's hear from a Sunni Iraqi, shall we?


Invisible to those who can only see the make-believe Iraq. (http://www.mudvillegazette.com/archives/009725.html)

Ever notice how the al Qaeda instantly disappear when the Sunni Iraqis (supporters of Saddam and no supporters of the government or the US troops) get funds and arms from the Americans?

I can't believe you guys are so dumb. Its like going into Germany and funding/arming the Nazis.

War manual? Was there a spot marked X? With civil war written next to it? Cos thats where the arms and funds are going. Duh.

Nope, I can provide more evidence from ABC, CBS, NBC, USA TODAY, but I'm not. If you would just lift one finger, and google foreign fighters in Iraq, you'll see the same articles. The only media outlets that refuse to discuss actual nubmers are the conservative ones. So I can understand why you're so un informed since you don't base your positions on actual facts. The truth hurts doesn't it:)
Media articles aren't evidence, they're anecdote.

What you call actual facts and evidence is neither.

That you can't tell the difference doesn't cause me hurt.

Ever notice how the al Qaeda instantly disappear when the Sunni Iraqis (supporters of Saddam and no supporters of the government or the US troops) get funds and arms from the Americans?

I can't believe you guys are so dumb. Its like going into Germany and funding/arming the Nazis.

War manual? Was there a spot marked X? With civil war written next to it? Cos thats where the arms and funds are going. Duh.
What I notice is a growing parade of players wholly invested in inevitable irrelevance.

Natural Selection.

What I notice is a growing parade of players wholly invested in inevitable irrelevance.

Natural Selection.

I admire your capacity for self appraisal.

I admire your capacity for self appraisal.
I notice it's a capacity foreign to yourself.

Irrelevant :zzz:

Irrelevant :zzz:
Predictable.

So enough with the *we're fighting them over there bullshit*
While the administration often overstates the presence of AQI, you understate it. Their presence is numerically small, but there is definitely some cross-pollenation that takes place at a local level between certain gangs of insurgents and AQI foreigners.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110009900

Its all hearsay based on info and documents from Sunni pro-Baathist Iraqis.

How do they tell them apart from the al Qaeda?

Some sources that are less than 2 years old would be nice.

Not that anybody ever bought the myth that it was only foreigners we were fighting, or that anyone is even selling it any more.

Stop trying to derail the argument. Can you provide anything to refute the claims? The media is done with this myth. Why should they keep regurgating old news because people like you are to slow to catch on?

You conservatives have been blaiming your faliures on foreigners since the war began. And facts have exposed you for the liars that you really are.

Media articles aren't evidence, they're anecdote.

What you call actual facts and evidence is neither.

That you can't tell the difference doesn't cause me hurt.

What a creative way to concede defeat. You have no hard evidence that we're fighting Al-queda in Iraq. FACT!

Stop trying to derail the argument. Can you provide anything to refute the claims? The media is done with this myth. Why should they keep regurgating old news because people like you are to slow to catch on?

You conservatives have been blaiming your faliures on foreigners since the war began. And facts have exposed you for the liars that you really are.

Dude, you're not even making sense. I'm hearing a lot of misplaced rage, and very little rational thought.

Here's one to chew on: pointing out that your argument is specious and that your sources are dated does not imply that one is a conservative, supporter of the war, liar, or anything else other than perceptive and critical. Posting arguments that are less than half-way thought out with sources that are years out of date, and then berating anyone who notices this is a conservative liar, on the other hand, implies that you're a risible jackass.

Dude, you're not even making sense. I'm hearing a lot of misplaced rage, and very little rational thought.

Here's one to chew on: pointing out that your argument is specious and that your sources are dated

Saturday, February 3, 2007Strike 1!

Though the administration has repeatedly asserted that al-Qaeda and Iranian operatives are responsible for provoking much of the violence in Iraq, the NIE played down their roles. Analysts studied what would happen if Iran were not a factor inside Iraq and concluded that, even though Iranian agents target U.S. troops, the absence of Tehran's agents would not appreciably alter the sectarian conflict.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/02/AR2007020200685.html

10-1-07 Strike 2!
According to the study done by the Brookings institue (Please see page 27) It also states that there's less the 2000 foreign fighters in Iraq. This report was filed on 10-1-07 Strike 2!

http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf


that one is a conservative, supporter of the war, liar, or anything else other than perceptive and critical. Posting arguments that are less than half-way thought out with sources that are years out of date, and then berating anyone who notices this is a conservative liar, on the other hand, implies that you're a risible jackass.

March 18, 2007 Strike 3! you're out!

Attacking the United States clearly remains on bin Laden's agenda. But the likelihood that such an attack would be launched from Iraq, many experts contend, has sharply diminished over the past year as al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) has undergone dramatic changes. Once believed to include thousands of "foreign fighters," it is now an overwhelmingly Iraqi organization whose aims are likely to remain focused on the struggle against the Shiite majority in Iraq, U.S. intelligence officials said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/17/AR2007031701373.html


These articles were all written in 2007. And I'm reporting you for insulting me by calling me a *riseable jackass*. You lost the debate. Your "dated argument has been obliterated. All of these articles dating back to 2004 consistently say the same thing.

checkmate

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c6/cetawayo/CheckmateD.jpg

These articles were all written in 2007.

See? That wasn't so hard, was it?


And I'm reporting you for insulting me by calling me a *riseable jackass*.

Oooh, scary! Of course, reporting me won't make you any less of a jackass, but if it makes you feel better, go ahead. Note that I feel no need to run to mommy when some risible jackass makes silly character attributions about me for challenging his half-cocked polemics. I just call a spade a spade and move on with my life.


You lost the debate.

There was a debate?

Here's an interesting fact about debates: people who participate in them necessarily cannot decide who wins. Attempting to declare oneself the winner of a debate (before your opponent even has a chance to respond, no less) betrays a shocking misapprehension of what a debate is, and how one engages in one successfully. Posting chess photos and employing childish baseball metaphors, for example, are not effective debate tactics. They make you look insecure and unserious.

Anyway, here's one for you: that foreigners are not at this point a determinant factor in the course of the sectarian conflict in Iraq does not mean that they do not matter on their own, or that they did not play a pivotal role in the past, or that they will not play a pivotal role in the future. A couple of provocative attacks, carried out by small numbers of people, such as the Samarra mosque bombing, can do quite a lot to ignite conflict, or prevent a settlement from taking hold. Terrorist are, after all, engaged in asymmetric warfare, and so analyses of their absolute numbers are not particularly telling.

Moreover, everybody has known for quite some time that the sectarian conflict has eclipsed the terrorist campaigns as the biggest source of violence in Iraq. However, that does not imply that the terrorists aren't still worth fighting. All it means is that defeating them won't do much to solve our myriad other problems in Iraq. However, it is still a prerequisite to solving the sectarian conflict, due totheir above-mentioned ability to act as spoilers.

Your second source seems to deal primarily with Iranian agents, rather than Al Qaeda.

Your third source is explicit that the situation has changed dramatically in the past year, and so does not support your assertion that Al Qaeda exists in Iraq purely as a myth to whip up American public support. In fact, anyone who lives outside of a cave knows that AQI has gotten hammered over the past year due to the Sunni population of Anbar turning on them. That we're finally succeeding in marginalizing and eradicating AQI is not evidence that they never existed in the first place; quite the opposite in fact.