| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq-Jordan |
| hammorabi has some background of interest... |
| 2005-06-09 |
| The terrorists' operations are somehow well organized, logistically covered and financially well supported. To do that there are 3 main Arab states providing a full support in spite of their official denial. Syria, Saudi Arabia and Qatar are the main countries providing support for the terrorists in Iraq while other Arab countries providing information and propaganda support. Radical Islamists in Jordan, Iran, Kuwait, and other Arab states also provides different kinds of support. Radical groups especially Al-Qaeda supporters in the Western countries play an important role in recruitments, propaganda, financial and many other supports. One of the big mouths providing not only propaganda but well-formed support for the terrorists is the Qatari TV Al-Jazeera. Syria, Saudi Arabia and Qatar states are coordinating with the Wahabi and Salafi groups for the support of the terrorists in Iraq. They plan together, separately &/or with the radical groups in the Western countries for mobilization of manpower and financial support for the insurgents in Iraq. Part of the support goes to the media especially the TV channels. In Saudi Arabia many groups (thousands) have been recruited for the insurgents in Iraq inside the Mosques and the Religious Institutions and under the eyes of the Saudi Authorities. Not once these Authorities denied that they do not know enough about these activities to prevent them yet it happened in front of their eyes with a close range to their ears. There are many reports from different sources and from the confessions of the captured Arab insurgents that there are high level of arrangement between the Saudi recruitments and financial support and the Syrian Intelligent Authorities which is directly linked with the highest Authorities in Syria. Syria as well as Saudi Arabia intentionally lastly mentioned the capture of thousands of insurgents in Syria most of them are Saudis. They only did that after strong evidence given by the insurgents about the involvement of these countries in training, recruiting and providing all support for the insurgents in Iraq. This is just part of equivocation and double entendre by saying that they will secure the border from the insurgents yet they are doing the reverse. ... |
| Posted by:3dc |
| #1 In many ways our policy is "the attrition of the war-like". Throughout the world there are large numbers of young men, but still a tiny minority of all young men, that fit one particular profile. They are fanatical *and* they are willing to do something about it. A far larger number are willing to support the "doers", but wouldn't ever do anything themselves. So the 'direct' war is an effort to both concentrate the "doers" and exterminate them, and the 'indirect' war is the far slower process of changing the minds of their supporters. Afghanistan was too brutal to be used as an effective concentrator for most but the extreme fanatics; but Iraq is far more attractive, they not realizing that it is a far deadlier trap. But in any event, this concentration saps the strength from terrorist *movements* worldwide, draining them of the muscle they would use in their home country for all sorts of mischief. The few that return home do so with tales of horror and great disdain for those who sent them off in the first place. All told, the final result will be to make the entire region less war-like, by draining it of its warriors. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-06-09 10:05 |