Iraq New Terror Breeding Ground

From the Washington Post:

Iraq has replaced Afghanistan as the training ground for the next generation of "professionalized" terrorists, according to a report released yesterday by the National Intelligence Council, the CIA director’s think tank.

Iraq provides terrorists with "a training ground, a recruitment ground, the opportunity for enhancing technical skills," said David B. Low, the national intelligence officer for transnational threats. "There is even, under the best scenario, over time, the likelihood that some of the jihadists who are not killed there will, in a sense, go home, wherever home is, and will therefore disperse to various other countries."

Great. What better then to bring all the terrorists to us where we have a large military presence and are retraining an army in our mold? Much better then them coming after us in nightclubs in Germany, blowing up planes over Scotland, and crashing planes into buildings on our shores. If we keep them, for the most part, in Iraq, we can keep killing them and killing them, before they come after us on our soil. There have been no terrorist attacks on US property outside of the ME, specifically Iraq and Saudi Arabi, since 9/11. Why be the Scorpion, wandering around the deserts of Arizon looking for a meal, when we can be the Trapdoor Spider in Iraq, bringing our victims right to us?

Ms. Priest discuss’s there only being tenuous ties with Al Qaeda by Iraq prior to the war. She totally and completely ignores all the officially recognized ties to other groups, such as Hezzbolah and Hamas, who are terrorist groups, of course. There is no doubting those links. They are real, and existed. No longer will Saddam pay some kid’s family $25K to blow up women and children.

"The al-Qa’ida membership that was distinguished by having trained in Afghanistan will gradually dissipate, to be replaced in part by the dispersion of the experienced survivors of the conflict in Iraq," the report says.

Shall we sit back and let them just train in Afghanistan to come after us, being reactive rather then proactive? Ms. Priest doesn’t say. She seems to be throwing it at the wall to see if it will stick, this being the Washington Post and all. Our job will be to do our best to stop as much of state sponsered terrorism as possible. We will never fully stop terrorism: but, if we can cut of the support that the larger groups recieve from countries and money men, will will go a long way towards acheiving our goals. And, just so Ms. Priest doesn’t forget, terrorism is bad.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

6 Responses to “Iraq New Terror Breeding Ground”

  1. Jeremy says:

    No longer will Saddam pay some kid’s family $25K to blow up women and children.

    Almost right. Now it will be coming from Saddam’s buddies and relatives in Syria. There’s proof too…if I could just find the link.

    Something not too many people have figured out is that once we leave Iraq the media will follow. When the media leaves the Shi’ites (the people that will most likely win election) will turn into shock troops and will most likely be forming a terrorist cleansing. Yeah, lets get em’ all into Iraq so we can leave and they (the Shi’ites) can wipe them from the face of the planet. Go Bush.

  2. “If we keep them, for the most part, in Iraq, we can keep killing them and killing them, before they come after us on our soil.”

    Ye olde “flypaper” defense again. It was goofy then, and it is goofier now. If you really think “the terrorists” are “mostly in Iraq” or that we can keep them there and kill’em and kill’em, then you are well and truly deluded, Teach. I understand it is good for your psyche to try and believe that turning Iraq into a breeding ground for new terrorists is a good thing . . . but that doesn’t change the fact that it is most certainly not a good thing.

    “There have been no terrorist attacks on US property outside of the ME, specifically Iraq and Saudi Arabi, since 9/11.”

    Means nothing. There weren’t any for the during 8 years of Clinton, 4 years of Bush I, or 8 years of Reagan either. What does the fact that we’ve gone another four supposed to mean? All of the terrorists decided to vacation in Baghdad instead? Please.

    And Jeremy, your theory is disneyland, too. Since when did Shi’ites become anti-terror superheros? Does Iran ring a bell?

    Do you think it will really matter to them so long as the attacks are not directed at them? What about the non-Iraqis that leave?

  3. You forget about the first attack on the WTC. There were many attacks on AMericans and AMerica property during Reagan, Bush 41, and Clinton’s years. We are keeping it contained within 3 provinces in Iraq. Let them come. We should not be sitting back, and reacting. The terrorists want to kill us.

  4. Yeah you’re right, I did forget about WTC 1. My point stands anyway. Eight years passed between that attack and 9/11 . . . and if you think terrorism is and can be “contained within 3 provinces in Iraq” you are still deluded.

  5. Jeremy says:

    Sure PW,

    You’ve got a wonderful play yourself. Pull all the troops back to America. Post one every 50 feet or so on the border and keep everyone that is a terrorist out. Screw everyone else. It’s about A0merica and no one else.

    Stop taking in oil, no matter how bad it hurts us, and find an alternative fuel effective immediately. I like this one too but it’s a pipe dream. American car manufacturers won’t even move over to diesel engines in small vehichles. What do you think the chances are that any of this will get past California. They tried it already. They’re still selling gas guzzling beasts there.

    Isn’t that the idea? To get our fingers out of everything? To shut ourselves off from the rest of the world instead of stumbling through things until we get it right?

    Or do you have a better plan?

  6. Don’t put all that crap on ME, Jeremy.

    Invading Iraq was a stupid thing to do and was 100% ineffective in keeping us safe from terror is what I’m saying. None of that other mumbo-jumbo you’re pinning on me (ourselves off from the rest of the world; stop taking in oil, no matter how bad it hurts us; pull all the troops back to America. Post one every 50 feet or so on the border) came out of MY mouth . . . er . . . fingers.

    If “stumbling through things until we get it right” includes invading and occupying countries that had little to no connection to terror while ignoring (or even coddling) the ones that do, then quit stumbling, I say. Pick a GOOD plan and carry it out.

    .

Pirate's Cove