Iraqi rebels fighting al Qaeda

[Guest saintjohn]

Dismiss article as "pro american/wishful thinking BS," claim that "the SOURCE of the story were Military officials" despite obvious evidence to the contrary, ignore the existence of reports from other news organizations which substantiate the original article, and then change the subject - brilliant!

[Guest mursa]

Dismiss article as "pro american/wishful thinking BS," claim that "the SOURCE of the story were Military officials" despite obvious evidence to the contrary, ignore the existence of reports from other news organizations which substantiate the original article, and then change the subject - brilliant!

continue with your Stance ..........

[Guest mursa]

By Julian Borger

An official assessment drawn up by the US foreign aid agency depicts the security situation in Iraq as dire, amounting to a “social breakdown†in which criminals have “almost free reinâ€.

The “conflict assessment†is an attachment to an invitation to contractors to bid on a project rehabilitating Iraqi cities published earlier this month by the US Agency for International Development (USAid).

The picture it paints is not only darker than the optimistic accounts from the White House and the Pentagon, it also gives a more complex profile of the insurgency than the straightforward “rejectionists, Saddamists and terrorists†described by George Bush.

The USAid analysis talks of an “internecine conflict†involving religious, ethnic, criminal and tribal groups. “It is increasingly common for tribesmen to ‘turn in’ to the authorities enemies as insurgents – this as a form of tribal revenge,†the paper says, casting doubt on the efficacy of counter-insurgent sweeps by coalition and Iraqi forces.

Meanwhile, foreign jihadist groups are growing in strength, the report said.

“External fighters and organisations such as al-Qaida and the Iraqi offshoot led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi are gaining in number and notoriety as significant actors,†USAid’s assessment said. “Recruitment into the ranks of these organisations takes place throughout the Sunni Muslim world, with most suicide bombers coming from Saudi Arabia and other countries in the region.â€

The assessment conflicted sharply with recent Pentagon claims that Zarqawi’s group was in “disarrayâ€.

The USAid document was attached to project documents for the Focused Stabilisation in Strategic Cities Initiative, a $1.3bn (£740m) project to curb violence in cities such as Baghdad, Basra, Mosul, Kirkuk and Najaf, through job creation and investment in local communities.

The paper, whose existence was first reported by the Washington Post, argues that insurgent attacks “significantly damage the country’s infrastructure and cause a tide of adverse economic and social effects that ripple across Iraqâ€.

“In the social breakdown that has accompanied the defeat of Saddam Hussein’s regime criminal elements within Iraqi society have had almost free rein,†the document says. “In the absence of an effective police force capable of ensuring public safety, criminal elements flourish … Baghdad is reportedly divided into zones controlled by organised criminal groups-clans.â€

The lawlessness has had an impact on basic freedoms, USAid argues, particularly in the south, where “social liberties have been curtailed dramatically by roving bands of self-appointed religious-moral policeâ€. USAid officials did not respond to calls seeking comment yesterday.

Judith Yaphe, a former CIA expert on Iraq now teaching at the National Defence University in Washington, said while the administration’s pronouncements on security were rosy, the USAid version was pessimistic. “It’s a very difficult environment, but if I read this right, they are saying there is violence everywhere and I don’t think it’s true,†Ms Yaphe said. She said USAid could have published the document to pressure the White House to increase its funding. The administration does not intend to request more reconstruction funds after the end of this year.

[Guest mursa]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1688730,00.html

[Guest slamminshaun]

Pro-American? You said that like there's something wrong with that....fine, you got me....I'm pro-American. My apologies to everyone.

[Guest saintjohn]

So you believe the Guardian but not Reuters?

I started this thread to share some information about fighting between various rebel groups in Iraq. If you want to discuss the article or even challenge the validity of the original news source, fine. If you want to discuss the general situation in Iraq, or WMDs, or anything else, please be polite enough to do so in an appropriate thread (in other words, start your own).

While the article you've posted is interesting, your contributions to this particular discussion have been off-topic and poorly spelled.

[ryan2772]

all is well!

[Guest drlogic]

[quote author=mursa

again, this article is from REUTERS.

and if you want to use big words at least please spell them correctly.

Someone (generals / army officials ) on the ground told Reuters .......reuters simply published the story . Or in more simplistic terms ........... the SOURCE of the story were Military officials ......the same ones that said

1..the capture of Saddam will kill the insurgency

then

2......the election will kill the insurgency ...

...then 2 more election occur ..

...we have now gone through 3

see a pattern ?

The pattern in obvious, you choose NOT to get THE BIG PICTURE...(for whatever reasons???????)

We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not to our own versions of facts...............that's where you made the wrong turn.

Regardless, keep it up. I disagree w/ you, but I need you to keep showing everyone who you are.

lol .....yea the big picture ........you know the big picture .

...the big picture of WMD's

..the big picture of Capturing Saddam

...the big picture of Election 1

...the big picture of election 2

...the big picture of election 3

refer to this , maybe you and your kind will be unchained one day http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/cave.htm

You forgot to blurt "HALLIBURTON!!!"

LOL

[Guest mursa]

So you believe the Guardian but not Reuters?

While the article you've posted is interesting, your contributions to this particular discussion have been off-topic and poorly spelled.

it's not that i believe one over the other ,,,,,,,,,,the point is that there is 2 sides to a particular story/event .......

.

..the truth probably lies somewhere INBETWEEN .

...as for my poor spelling, yea it could be ........whoopty doooooo , im shipping you a Spelling Nazi sticker in the mail .