SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : News and Current Events : Do you believe him?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( 1 | 2 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Do you believe him?

[img]http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/07/24/us/24bush-600.jpg[/img]

[b]President Bush spoke before an audience of American military personnel at Charleston Air Force Base in South Carolina[/b]

July 24, 2007
Bush Insists Al Qaeda in Iraq Threatens U.S.
By BRIAN KNOWLTON
WASHINGTON, July 24 — President George W. Bush argued forcefully today that an Al Qaeda-affiliated group in Iraq is linked tightly to the central Al Qaeda leadership, and that for American forces to leave Iraq without defeating the terror group would be “dangerous for the world and disastrous for America.”

He made the remarks at Charleston Air Force Base in South Carolina, at a time of fierce debate in Washington over Iraq policy. Last week, a major intelligence report concluded that the international Al Qaeda organization of Osama bin Laden had successfully regrouped, probably in rugged northwest Pakistan, and that it is as strong as it has been in years.

In a half-hour speech clearly aimed at his Democratic critics, Mr. Bush said that those who argued that the affiliated group, called Al Qaeda in Iraq or AQI, was a local group with local objectives, and not a serious threat to Americans at home, were seriously misinformed.

“It’s hard to argue that Al Qaeda in Iraq is separate from bin Laden’s Al Qaeda when the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq took an oath of allegiance to Osama bin Laden,” Mr. Bush said, referring to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a leader of the affiliated group in Iraq who was killed last year.

Mr. Bush called the two similarly named groups “an alliance of killers,” and said, “No enemy is more ruthless in Iraq than Al Qaeda.”

The president’s remarks focused almost entirely on links between the two groups and on threats they pose. His tone was particularly tough. Mr. Bush’s message did not vary much in substance from what he has long said about the groups, though he added some details, apparently based in part on newly declassified information.

Critics of the administration’s policy in Iraq, including some Democratic politicians, have said that Mr. Bush’s portrayal of the links between the Qaeda groups is overblown, and that the group in Iraq did not exist before the American-led invasion. The international group, they say, is the one that poses the much greater threat to the United States, while in Iraq, sectarian violence is a far greater concern than are foreign-led terrorist groups like Al Qaeda in Iraq.

Democrats reacted swiftly and dismissively to the president’s remarks. Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, accusing Mr. Bush of “flawed logic,” said, “The president is putting forth a false rationale for continuing the war.”

Holding up a copy of the latest National Intelligence Estimate on terrorism, released by the administration last week, Mr. Kerry said, “Our own intelligence community tells us today unequivocally that our presence in Iraq has created more terrorists, attracted more terrorists.”

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, said that “the president’s claim that the war in Iraq is protecting us from Al Qaeda is as misguided and dangerous as the conclusions that drove us to Iraq in the first place.”

“Despite what the president would like us to believe,” he added, “it has been established that Al Qaeda had no active cells in Iraq when we invaded, and we have long known that we were not attacked from Iraq on 9/11. Saying otherwise does not make it so.”

Still, judging by recent opinion polls, the president has had some recent success in making a case to voters for continuing the war in Iraq. He has insisted both that success is possible and that failure would be catastrophic, in part because Al Qaeda in Iraq might then turn its attentions elsewhere.

Earlier today, the White House spokesman, Tony Snow, was asked why Mr. Bush felt the need at this point to insist that the two Al Qaeda groups were closely connected.

“I think, when somebody tries to argue that Al Qaeda in Iraq is not a key part of the problem, it creates a basis of saying, well, you need to go someplace else,” he said.

Mr. Bush emphasized in his remarks that Al Qaeda in Iraq’s top leaders include people from Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and Turkey, and said that American forces had recently unmasked an effort by the group to pass off an Iraqi actor, using the surname al-Baghdadi, as its leader to give it a more Iraqi image.

Mr. Bush said that after the United States-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, Mr. Zarqawi “was able to expand dramatically the size, scope and lethality of his operation,” and that he swore formal allegiance to Mr. bin Laden the following year.

Mr. Bush said Al Qaeda in Iraq was now the only known extremist group in Iraq with ambitions of attacking American targets outside Iraq.

“We’ll stay on the hunt, we’ll deny them safe haven, and we will defeat them where they have made their stand,” he said. “However difficult the fight is in Iraq, we must win it. And we can win it.”

The intelligence assessment released last week concluded that the United States was losing ground against the international Al Qaeda terrorist organization, saying it had regrouped and had become significantly stronger in the past two years.

American officials have ascribed the Al Qaeda resurgence to a decision made last September by Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the president of Pakistan, to take a hands-off approach toward the tribal areas in the mountainous northwestern region of his country, along the border with Afghanistan, where Al Qaeda and Taliban militants are thought to be based.

Frances Fragos Townsend, the White House homeland security adviser, has urged General Musharraf to take a sharply tougher approach. She warned on Sunday that American military forces might conduct their own strikes in the border areas if necessary an idea Pakistan has rejected.

 2007/7/24 21:05









 Re: Do you believe him?

worm-

I am a white middle class republican (or 'christian' as we call it in this country)... of course I believe him.

In Christ - Jim

 2007/7/25 12:52









 Re:

Since I've been to Kuwait, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Israel & Turkey (in my Marine days) during Desert Storm... yes, I absolutely believe what he says. I've seen the hatred. If you havent been there you ought not to be implying this is all a lie... because you're acting out of ignorance.

If you're not implying that, then please dont take what i just said personally. I just couldnt help but figure thats what you were meaning, judging by the title of your thread.

This is not a political issue with Al Quida. This is a fundamental belief issue with them. They aim to kill everyone who does not believe as they do, and they have world domination fantasies that make Hitler look like a cherub. Only a fool or a seriously uninformed person would believe otherwise. This is a much more serious threat than 90% of the people think it is.

So keep eating those McD fries and reading Harry Potter, America... everything is hunky dorey.

Krispy

 2007/7/25 14:09
MSeaman
Member



Joined: 2005/4/19
Posts: 772
Michigan

 Re:

[color=663333]So keep eating those McD fries and reading Harry Potter, America... everything is hunky dorey.[/color]

Krispy, you crack me up.

This is definitely a real threat. You can find legitimate information on it if you know where to look.


_________________
Melissa

 2007/7/25 14:28Profile









 Re:

“The Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.”

No WMDs were found.

“[Iraq] has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operatives of Al Qaeda.”

Hussein was a modernist, Bin Laden a fundamentalist. The Bush Administration never found a link.

“America tried to work with the United Nations to address this threat because we wanted to resolve the issue peacefully.”

The United States formed the "coalition of the willing" and unilaterally decided to invade Iraq without the consent of the vast majority of the world's nations.

“If we must begin a military campaign, it will be directed against the lawless men who rule your country and not against you.”

650,000 Iraqis have died in this war, many of them innocent women and children. And during the nineties an estimated one million children starved to death because of U.S. led sanctions.

“We will tear down the apparatus of terror and we will help you to build a new Iraq that is prosperous and free.”

He should have said, "we'll hire Halliburton to reconstruct everything for you". No work for the Iraqis, but lots of money for Americans in the way of weapons and reconstruction industry.

“Should Saddam Hussein choose confrontation, the American people can know that every measure has been taken to avoid war and every measure will be taken to win it.”

Saddam posed no threat to America. America posed a threat to Iraq's oil.

“The terrorist threat to America and the world will be diminished the moment that Saddam Hussein is disarmed.”

For every Iraqi kid killed by an American depleted uranium shell, ten more pop up. They're learning guerrila tactics. And they want revenge.

The toppling of Hussein increased the threat of terrorism.

“Unlike Saddam Hussein, we believe the Iraqi people are deserving and capable of human liberty... The United States with other countries will work to advance liberty and peace in that region.”

The single biggest thing Iraqis miss about Saddam is "at least there was order". Rape, theft, kidnapping, murder, and terrorism are rampent under the U.S. puppet government (divide and conquer... makes it easy to git' their oil [insert Bush laugh here])

 2007/7/25 16:53









 Jim

Quote:
I am a white middle class republican (or 'christian' as we call it in this country)... of course I believe him.



good.

as a former member of the intelligence community, when you have the Executive Branch of Govt, breathing down your neck, strong pressure to write a report on what they WANT to hear, I don't believe him.......and what has been happening is that both POTUS and VPOTUS have so alienated the CIA, that there is a wedge between the CIA, and the Executive branch that has never existed in this country before, that is the most disturbing element of all.

face it, the GOP is done in 08, unless of course "something bad" happens before then. Get your seatbelts on, and stay away from crowds.

I could tell you stories of lies, that have been told to the public in the past, that would blow your mind. Not conspiracy theories, but facts I've seen.

 2007/7/25 17:05









 Re:

Is the purpose of this thread to spark more controversy and division among the brethren? What does this have to do with discussion of theology or encouragement for the brethren?

Krispy

 2007/7/25 17:25









 Krispy

I'm saying this in love, real gentlemanly-like.

You were lied to, circa 1990-91.

We gave that idiot Saddam Hussein a wink and nod, a tacit "go-ahead" to light up Kuwait, it's true. Know why?

Ever since the Iranian Revolution, our NCA and NCS had been dreaming of ways to "project force" into the Persian Gulf, so that we could maintain boots on the ground, so as to never be at the mercy of those who would withhold the most strategic resource from the US, and thats petroleum.

You weren't fighting for the freedom of Kuwait, you were fighting to perserve the "American way of life", which is accesible, reasonably priced petroleum, and all the men and women who served in Gulf 1, performed beyond expectation, bravely and honorably. Duty is duty, but truth is truth.

I no longer trust the President, certainly not the Vice President, as I said to Jim, they have so alienanted the CIA , as well as other intel agencies, that this gulf will take years to heal.

Did you know the only ones, who had 'on the shelf' plans, 12 Sep 2001, to take down the Taliban, was the CIA?

The DoD had nothing, it was CIA paramilitary using oodles of cash to buy Northern Alliance troops that brought down the Taliban. The CIA commander on the ground cornered Osama in the Tora Bora region,they were intercepted his radio comms, the CIA commander begged DoD to send him one battalion of Army Rangers to seal off both ends of this valley and either take or kill Bin Laden.....700 men he asked for, he was rebuffed and Bin Laden escaped.

That said, are radical islamic jihadists a clear and present danger to America? oh yes they are, but its the old story of "lie to me once, shame on you, lie to me twice, shame on me".

He lied, plain and simple, no WMD's, no previous linkage bewteen the Ba'athists (marginal sunnis) and Al-Qaueda (salafi's) and no, repeat NO plan of the conditions of victory.

He has destroyed the fortunes of the Republican party in 2008, and they all know it, everyone at Dod, in the Pentagon, in the CIA, and the other intel communities, and most importantly the American people.

but who knows, there might another "October surprise".

I pray we don't repeat the mistakes of a war weary Britain circa 1918-1939.....they turned inward and ignored a growing threat, because they had been led by idiots during WW1, and let their military go to pot.

Which is why I intend to vote for Senator Clinton, I have watched her at Armed Services Committee hearings, she is no dove, she knows the military, and the generals have actually come to like and respect her, as I do. I didn't before, but I have watched these hearings.

You are right, jihadism is akin to nazism, but who will go to fight?

 2007/7/25 17:31









 I'm confused

Quote:
Is the purpose of this thread to spark more controversy and division among the brethren? What does this have to do with discussion of theology or encouragement for the brethren?



I see political threads going up all the time, without a word said. am I to be denied?

I don't intend to engender division, I'm speaking from my heart and from what I know. Maybe you don't agree, fair enough, but what price freedom?

 2007/7/25 17:34









 Re: Krispy

Worm...

Nothing you have to say to me at the moment means a hill of beans to me. You've made it quite obvious that you're not here to edify or encourage the brethren, or to discuss doctrine or theology, or to discuss the sermons available to download on this site.

You seem to have an agenda that doesnt line up with the purpose of this forum.

I havent read your post, and I dont plan on reading your post. In the future please do not respond to what I write and do not address any posts to me.... I will simply ignore them.

Krispy

 2007/7/25 17:36





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy