Al Qaeda terrorists are fleeing Baghdad

What was Bush and Rummy thinking when they decided to occupy Iraq with
only 120,000 troops?

Well for a start they didnt think ....Period!
You need a brain to be able think and "Brush" certainly hasnt got "much up
there"
or they wouldnt have even gone there.

Wolfowitz the idiot right wing zealot convinced them otherwise with
falsehoods .

Now they are paying for assisting one sectarian mob against the previous
sectarian mob who were
ruling to the exclusion of each other.
The sectarian hatred in Iraq has been going on as long as one can remember
Recipe for disaster if you exclude any one group from power.

US will either "pull the rug" and get out like Vietnam or still be there in
20 years.

If they stay it will cost them so much moneterily and troop lives it will
make
them a 3rd world country, which is OK by me, as at moment they believe they
are the true world "godfather" and are effectively acting like the British
Colonial power of old.

Using the Wolfowitz manifesto principle of "we are the strong ones,
so if we disagree with a particular country, then we should just go in and
belt the hell out of them"
This hasnt got US anywhere yet, except in a big mess, and wont anywhere
as you dont know how to fight guerilla type war, which is what you have got
in most areas your troops are in active combat.

Vietnam proved that, and the US generals still havent learnt that bombing
the hell
out of a country doesnt work and that civilian populations become like the
French resistance and give you hell back, then disappear back into their
daily lives.

What really gets up my nose is the massive civilian and troop loss of life,
so the political ends of the radical right in US can get there grubby hands
on a few more resources they dont have but use at such a massive rate
they want what other people have e.g. OIL. (read Halibut)

John H


"Al Dykes" wrote in message
...
In article om,
PJ O'Donovan wrote:

01/17/2007


Results 1-5 of about 31 for 'Al-Qaeda-terrorists-are-fleeing-Baghdad'
(0.05 seconds)Al Qaeda terrorists are fleeing Baghdad


If Congress kept their mouth shut they wouldn't have had time to
leave.



"Al Qaeda terrorists are fleeing Baghdad in advance of President
Bush's 21,500-man troop surge, according to a senior military
intelligence officer today. Under orders from the al Qaeda commander in
Iraq, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, fighters are streaming toward the Diyala
region of Iraq....The apparent evacuation of Baghdad by al Qaeda forces
comes from direct orders issued by al-Masri, the former soldier who
took control of the Iraqi wing of al Qaeda following the June 2006
bombing death of Zarqawi.



We are playing whack-A-mole with the Bad Guys and losing.

For those that don't know their geography, greater Baghdad 7 million,
about one quarter of All Iraq. Sadr City is part of Baghdad is a slum
of 2 million people in 8 square miles.

In 1968 we had more than a million US and South VN troops losing a
war. At the time S. VN was 16 million people. 1:16

At that ratioo, We need to get nearly half a million troops in
Badgdad. So far the Iraqis have produced very few reliable troops and
police. The Brits are leaving, We are alone.

The AQ is a small part of the war in Iraq. Even if they never come
back, the Iraqis will still be fighting each other and fighting us.

What was Bush and Rummy thinking when they decided to occupy Iraq with
only 120,000 troops?


"If you get involved in a major ground war in the Saudi
desert, I think support will erode significantly. Nor should
it be supported. We cannot even contemplate, in my view,
trading American blood for Iraqi blood."
John McCain, New York Times, August 19, 1990.

Cheney, as SecDef in 1990, said that an attempt to take out Saddam
at the end of GW1 would end in disaster for us.

Cheney and McCain were against invading Iraq before they were against it.

--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Harrison for Congress in NY 13CD www.harrison06.com
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore. A Proud signature since 2001

Dont forget WOLFOWITZ who disappeared off to the world bank after he got the
Iraq mess going.
John H
"Al Dykes" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
wrote:
And if our intelligence (sic) was really this good the war would have
been over three years ago.



The war worked great. It was the peace (aka occupation) that Bush has
screwed up royally. When our sons are dying at the rate of three a
day, "major combt opoerations" are NOT over.

I actually think the peace is the fault or Rummy and Cheney. The war
was Bush's fault.

I was against the invasion, but I assumed, once it started, that we
would be done and out quickly and Bush would have a legit feather in
his cap.

Cheney and Rummy ****ed that up. This war is going to cost our
children a trillion bucks and we will be living with thousands of
maimed vets for decades.





PJ O'Donovan wrote:
01/17/2007


Results 1-5 of about 31 for 'Al-Qaeda-terrorists-are-fleeing-Baghdad'
(0.05 seconds)Al Qaeda terrorists are fleeing Baghdad


If Congress kept their mouth shut they wouldn't have had time to
leave.



"Al Qaeda terrorists are fleeing Baghdad in advance of President
Bush's 21,500-man troop surge, according to a senior military
intelligence officer today. Under orders from the al Qaeda commander in
Iraq, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, fighters are streaming toward the Diyala
region of Iraq....The apparent evacuation of Baghdad by al Qaeda forces
comes from direct orders issued by al-Masri, the former soldier who
took control of the Iraqi wing of al Qaeda following the June 2006
bombing death of Zarqawi.

Initially, the Baghdad-based AQ fighters did not want to leave.
Al-Masri had to send unequivocal orders for their retreat, adding that
one of the lessons from the Fallujah campaign was that Americans have
learned how to prevail in house-to-house fighting. Masri said that
remaining in Baghdad was a 'no-win situation' for the
terrorists......



......"In more than ten years of reading al Qaeda intercepts, I've
never seen language like this," the intelligence officer said.
Usually, al Qaeda communications are full of bravado and false
confidence, he added.....



--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Harrison for Congress in NY 13CD www.harrison06.com
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore. A Proud signature since 2001

Now wouldnt that be ironcial!
Iran & Iraq together.
High possibility of actually happening.
John H

"Dirk Bruere at NeoPax" wrote in message
...
John of Aix wrote:
PJ O'Donovan wrote:
01/17/2007


Results 1-5 of about 31 for 'Al-Qaeda-terrorists-are-fleeing-Baghdad'
(0.05 seconds)Al Qaeda terrorists are fleeing Baghdad

Erm what 'al Qaeda terrorists' would they be then. Surely not the ones
with the WMDs and the yellowcake uranium?

They are probably the Sunni suicide bombers.
I hardly think they are running away out of fear.
And I doubt that's there's more than a few dozen of them who aren't cannon
fodder.

Go away ****wit, Your president is an idiot, your foreign policy a blight
on humanity and your action in Iraq illegal and murderous. You are scum
to even give a semblance of support to such blatant war crimes.

Look on the bright side.
Now that AQ is out of the way the Americans can severely **** off the Shia
majority by fighting their way into Sadr city and getting them to join in
the "lets all kill Americans" fun.

I imagine the fun will escalate to the point where the Democratically
Elected Iraqi Government (ie the Shias) tell the US to leave, shortly
before setting up an Islamic Republic just like Iran.

--
Dirk

http://www.onetribe.me.uk - The UK's only occult talk show
Presented by Dirk Bruere and Marc Power on ResonanceFM 104.4
http://www.resonancefm.com

I reckon USA will entice al Qaeda to fight with Iraq against Iran.
The promise of removing US troops from Saudia Arabia, and concessions given
by Israel to Palestinians, might do it.
US, Israel, Saudia Arabia, bin Laden all win, except Iran.
It will be done through the bin Laden family in Saudia Arabia.


"John H" wrote in message
...
Now wouldnt that be ironcial!
Iran & Iraq together.
High possibility of actually happening.
John H

"Dirk Bruere at NeoPax" wrote in message
...
John of Aix wrote:
PJ O'Donovan wrote:
01/17/2007


Results 1-5 of about 31 for 'Al-Qaeda-terrorists-are-fleeing-Baghdad'
(0.05 seconds)Al Qaeda terrorists are fleeing Baghdad

Erm what 'al Qaeda terrorists' would they be then. Surely not the ones
with the WMDs and the yellowcake uranium?

They are probably the Sunni suicide bombers.
I hardly think they are running away out of fear.
And I doubt that's there's more than a few dozen of them who aren't
cannon
fodder.

Go away ****wit, Your president is an idiot, your foreign policy a
blight
on humanity and your action in Iraq illegal and murderous. You are scum
to even give a semblance of support to such blatant war crimes.

Look on the bright side.
Now that AQ is out of the way the Americans can severely **** off the
Shia
majority by fighting their way into Sadr city and getting them to join
in
the "lets all kill Americans" fun.

I imagine the fun will escalate to the point where the Democratically
Elected Iraqi Government (ie the Shias) tell the US to leave, shortly
before setting up an Islamic Republic just like Iran.

--
Dirk

http://www.onetribe.me.uk - The UK's only occult talk show
Presented by Dirk Bruere and Marc Power on ResonanceFM 104.4
http://www.resonancefm.com

Al Dykes a écrit :
In article .com,
wrote:
And if our intelligence (sic) was really this good the war would have
been over three years ago.



The war worked great. It was the peace (aka occupation) that Bush has
screwed up royally. When our sons are dying at the rate of three a

you hit a sore spot, the fact is that an increasing part of troops are
would-be
immigrants or impoverished youth from ethnic minorities. I do not know
if
they have any substance, but I have heard rumors that some felonies can
be overlooked if the convict enlists.

The professional army ensures that very few sons of the UMC, or UC
actually
serve in the army (or have a ground duty.) Is there a son of a
representant
in Irak?
And the second largest force in Irak is made off private contractors
which could
be as numerous as 100 000.

Some people say that having the darft back would ensure that the US do
not
go to war whimsically.

I actually think the peace is the fault or Rummy and Cheney. The war
was Bush's fault.

I was against the invasion, but I assumed, once it started, that we
would be done and out quickly and Bush would have a legit feather in
his cap.

Cheney and Rummy ****ed that up. This war is going to cost our
children a trillion bucks and we will be living with thousands of
maimed vets for decades.





PJ O'Donovan wrote:
01/17/2007


Results 1-5 of about 31 for 'Al-Qaeda-terrorists-are-fleeing-Baghdad'
(0.05 seconds)Al Qaeda terrorists are fleeing Baghdad


If Congress kept their mouth shut they wouldn't have had time to
leave.



"Al Qaeda terrorists are fleeing Baghdad in advance of President
Bush's 21,500-man troop surge, according to a senior military
intelligence officer today. Under orders from the al Qaeda commander in
Iraq, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, fighters are streaming toward the Diyala
region of Iraq....The apparent evacuation of Baghdad by al Qaeda forces
comes from direct orders issued by al-Masri, the former soldier who
took control of the Iraqi wing of al Qaeda following the June 2006
bombing death of Zarqawi.

Initially, the Baghdad-based AQ fighters did not want to leave.
Al-Masri had to send unequivocal orders for their retreat, adding that
one of the lessons from the Fallujah campaign was that Americans have
learned how to prevail in house-to-house fighting. Masri said that
remaining in Baghdad was a 'no-win situation' for the
terrorists......



......"In more than ten years of reading al Qaeda intercepts, I've
never seen language like this," the intelligence officer said.
Usually, al Qaeda communications are full of bravado and false
confidence, he added.....



--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Harrison for Congress in NY 13CD www.harrison06.com
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore. A Proud signature since 2001

Let is be knownst that on Fri, 19 Jan 2007 13:09:06 +1030, "John H"
writted:

Now wouldnt that be ironcial!
Iran & Iraq together.
High possibility of actually happening.

High possibility of the USA trying to not let it happen. High
possibility of a lot of blood being shed in the process!
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

Deeply Filled Mortician wrote:
Let is be knownst that on Fri, 19 Jan 2007 13:09:06 +1030, "John H"
writted:

Now wouldnt that be ironcial!
Iran & Iraq together.
High possibility of actually happening.

High possibility of the USA trying to not let it happen. High
possibility of a lot of blood being shed in the process!

The US has said that it is going to disarm the Shia militias (also known
as "The Iraqi Government"), and the only way it can do this is by
fighting through the Shia Sadr City in Baghdad. That will ensure the end
of the last vestiges of support for the US in Iraq.

--
Dirk

http://www.onetribe.me.uk - The UK's only occult talk show
Presented by Dirk Bruere and Marc Power on ResonanceFM 104.4
http://www.resonancefm.com

John H wrote:

What was Bush and Rummy thinking when they decided to occupy Iraq with
only 120,000 troops?



Well for a start they didnt think ....Period!
You need a brain to be able think and "Brush" certainly hasnt got "much up
there"
or they wouldnt have even gone there.

Wolfowitz the idiot right wing zealot convinced them otherwise with
falsehoods .

Now they are paying for assisting one sectarian mob against the previous
sectarian mob who were
ruling to the exclusion of each other.
The sectarian hatred in Iraq has been going on as long as one can remember
Recipe for disaster if you exclude any one group from power.

US will either "pull the rug" and get out like Vietnam or still be there in
20 years.

If they stay it will cost them so much moneterily and troop lives it will
make
them a 3rd world country, which is OK by me, as at moment they believe they
are the true world "godfather" and are effectively acting like the British
Colonial power of old.

Using the Wolfowitz manifesto principle of "we are the strong ones,
so if we disagree with a particular country, then we should just go in and
belt the hell out of them"
This hasnt got US anywhere yet, except in a big mess, and wont anywhere
as you dont know how to fight guerilla type war, which is what you have got
in most areas your troops are in active combat.

Vietnam proved that, and the US generals still havent learnt that bombing
the hell
out of a country doesnt work and that civilian populations become like the
French resistance and give you hell back, then disappear back into their
daily lives.

What really gets up my nose is the massive civilian and troop loss of life,
so the political ends of the radical right in US can get there grubby hands
on a few more resources they dont have but use at such a massive rate
they want what other people have e.g. OIL. (read Halibut) John H

"Al Dykes" wrote in message
...


WE never see in our mainstream media the TERROR, CARNAGE & RUINS BUSH &
Co CAUSED.
- udarrell

In article om,
PJ O'Donovan wrote:


01/17/2007


Results 1-5 of about 31 for 'Al-Qaeda-terrorists-are-fleeing-Baghdad'
(0.05 seconds)Al Qaeda terrorists are fleeing Baghdad


If Congress kept their mouth shut they wouldn't have had time to
leave.



"Al Qaeda terrorists are fleeing Baghdad in advance of President
Bush's 21,500-man troop surge, according to a senior military
intelligence officer today. Under orders from the al Qaeda commander in
Iraq, Abu Ayyub al-Masri, fighters are streaming toward the Diyala
region of Iraq....The apparent evacuation of Baghdad by al Qaeda forces
comes from direct orders issued by al-Masri, the former soldier who
took control of the Iraqi wing of al Qaeda following the June 2006
bombing death of Zarqawi.



We are playing whack-A-mole with the Bad Guys and losing.

For those that don't know their geography, greater Baghdad 7 million,
about one quarter of All Iraq. Sadr City is part of Baghdad is a slum
of 2 million people in 8 square miles.

In 1968 we had more than a million US and South VN troops losing a
war. At the time S. VN was 16 million people. 1:16

At that ratioo, We need to get nearly half a million troops in
Badgdad. So far the Iraqis have produced very few reliable troops and
police. The Brits are leaving, We are alone.

The AQ is a small part of the war in Iraq. Even if they never come
back, the Iraqis will still be fighting each other and fighting us.

What was Bush and Rummy thinking when they decided to occupy Iraq with
only 120,000 troops?


"If you get involved in a major ground war in the Saudi
desert, I think support will erode significantly. Nor should
it be supported. We cannot even contemplate, in my view,
trading American blood for Iraqi blood."
John McCain, New York Times, August 19, 1990.

Cheney, as SecDef in 1990, said that an attempt to take out Saddam
at the end of GW1 would end in disaster for us.

Cheney and McCain were against invading Iraq before they were against it.

--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Harrison for Congress in NY 13CD www.harrison06.com
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore. A Proud signature since 2001


Where were the religious leaders when they should have stood against the
invasion of Iraq.
It is strictly mass murder if there is NO imminent threat of an attack
on your homeland!
Where was the transparency regarding how many would be killed & children
their arms & legs blown off!
This is a documented public record fact! The Rev. Pat Robertson visited
Bush before the invasion and told him he should prepare the American
people to accept the casualties.
Bush told him there wouldn't be any casualties. (Bush Not in Reality?)
The Bush spokespersons said that Bush did not say that, Robertson says
Bush did. Pat was & is a powerful Bush supporter, is he going to lie to
hurt bush? - udarrell

--
WISDOM PRINCIPLED EMPOWERMENT COMMUNICATIONS -
THE REAL POLITICAL ISSUES and PEOPLE EMPOWERMENT
The Powerful Living Wisdom of the Eternal Cosmic Spiritual Principles’
- LET US all live & be guided by those Powerful Spiritual Truths
http://www.udarrell.com/

In article ,
John H wrote:
What was Bush and Rummy thinking when they decided to occupy Iraq with
only 120,000 troops?

Well for a start they didnt think ....Period!
You need a brain to be able think and "Brush" certainly hasnt got "much up
there"
or they wouldnt have even gone there.

Wolfowitz the idiot right wing zealot convinced them otherwise with
falsehoods .

Now they are paying for assisting one sectarian mob against the previous
sectarian mob who were
ruling to the exclusion of each other.
The sectarian hatred in Iraq has been going on as long as one can remember
Recipe for disaster if you exclude any one group from power.

US will either "pull the rug" and get out like Vietnam or still be there in
20 years.

If they stay it will cost them so much moneterily and troop lives it will
make
them a 3rd world country, which is OK by me, as at moment they believe they
are the true world "godfather" and are effectively acting like the British
Colonial power of old.

Using the Wolfowitz manifesto principle of "we are the strong ones,
so if we disagree with a particular country, then we should just go in and
belt the hell out of them"
This hasnt got US anywhere yet, except in a big mess, and wont anywhere
as you dont know how to fight guerilla type war, which is what you have got
in most areas your troops are in active combat.


Wolfie was on record as saying that 35,000 troops would be
enough. Standard Pentagon planning said high 300,000s. Many generals
agreed. Source;

_The threatening storm : the case for invading Iraq_,
Pollack, Kenneth M.

Pollack is reality-based career CIA planner and not a PNAC that I can
tell. He shows how Saddam was really really evil (he was) and had to
be dealt with by the west, one way or another.

It's an interesting time capsule, being written before Bush started
beating the WMD and support for terrorism drums WRT Iraq. Saddam really
*was* a problem, the author felt that containemenmt couldn't hold for
ever and Saddam had his two sons to take over and they were as bad as
he was. OTOH, the author dismisses claims that Saddam had WMDs by
then, or supprted international terrorism in any meaningful way.



Vietnam proved that, and the US generals still havent learnt that bombing
the hell
out of a country doesnt work and that civilian populations become like the
French resistance and give you hell back, then disappear back into their
daily lives.


It's an Air Force thing more than a a universal opinion. The AF
thinks that wars can be won without putting boots on the ground.
Sometimes they get their way (Kosovo) and sometimes they don't.

It seems that for GW1, the AIr Force made a case that no troops would
be required and almost got their way. When Schwarzkopf came it, he
founds teh inter-service battles and won. This is described in;

_Air Power_, Budiansky (also Battle of Wits)






--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Harrison for Congress in NY 13CD www.harrison06.com
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore. A Proud signature since 2001

In article ,
bk wrote:
I reckon USA will entice al Qaeda to fight with Iraq against Iran.
The promise of removing US troops from Saudia Arabia, and concessions given



Bush, Jr cut and ran from Saudi Arabia in early 2003.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/ne...430-psab01.htm


--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m
Harrison for Congress in NY 13CD www.harrison06.com
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore. A Proud signature since 2001