Do you believe that the foreign Mujaheddin currently fighting in Iraq will "redploy" if U.S. troops leave or -

Question

will they stay in Iraq like they did in Afghanistan after the Russian "redeployment?"

Mujaheddin - Islamic holy warriors engaged in "jihad" against the "infidels."

Answer 1

Al Qaeda #2 Zawahari has already stated his intentions to do so. Iraq is his immediate objective and only a stepping stone.

His goals, just like OBL's are first the entire Muslim world with Iraq and Saudi Arabia being most important to him and the world as the ultimate goal. He has stated that 'regime change' in the US must be obtained using 'violent means' as well as other means.

See my article "The Caliphate", as well as "Know your enemy 101" and "Regional Webs of Entanglement":
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-DfkctJU7dK5B7LcNROoyVQ--;_ylt=AiNXZokI1G6zowgYXNnJS9m0AOJ3?cq=1

Answer 2

Oh yea they will be right behind us as we walk out the door.
After all this is a holy war, they are pretty much out to destroy all "infidels" American and otherwise. Remember their track record? some big examples, The American embassies in Africa, Their covert support of Somalia warlords' the USS Cole, Then 9/11 came along and we finally got the hint somebody don't like us. They was out to get us long before we did Iraq and they will be after us long after.
The word Mujaheddin might not be the right word but I struggle for a better one at this late hour.

Answer 3

They will move and strike elsewhere. It's a different situation than the Mujahadeen Al Khalq fighting Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. The "foreign fighters" in Iraq are performing Hijrah (voluntary expatriation to wage Jihad). They consider all of the planet to be in a state of Dar Al-Harb (a world at war). And they won't rest until they achieve Dar-Al-Islam.

Answer 4

you're maximum suitable, that interest became carried out. Now there's a sparkling interest. Osama has been marginalized. Iran and No. Korea are our greatest concern. And we are their greatest subject. Iran is responsive to that they are able to't proceed to construct their nuclear weapons if Iraq is a expert-American democracy. it somewhat is why they are working so frustrating to convince us to pass away. They recruit desperate human beings (there are lots of interior the middle East) to explode some marketplace or police station because of the fact they are conscious of it is going to play on American television. It serves no objective. They benefit no protection rigidity or monetary earnings in this. yet they are hoping to convince you that they are able to stay longer than us. that's a classic "attitude of exhaustion" as postulated via Mao Zedong. If we pass away now, we are able to make the worldwide a extra risky place. Iraq isn't professional-American. Nor will they possibly proceed to be a democracy. we would have wasted possibly the suitable probability to ward off a disastrous conflict with a nuclear armed opponent. Superpolitics - you write too lots and say no longer something. My brothers in hands have been being shot at via Saddam's protection rigidity in violation of the quit-fire, Saddam did have WMDs however no longer many, Saddam became coming up transport structures for WMDs in violation of international regulation. P.S. there is no "regulation" against a sovereign united states of america attacking yet another sovereign united states of america for any reason.

Answer 5

They'll stay. In the short term, there will be civil war, chaos, and much bloodshed.

Eventually a Taliban like regime will take power, and later start sponsoring terrorism with the oil revenues.

In 5-15 years, the USA would be hit again by terrorists, based in and supported by the Iraq regime. Maybe that time they'll hit us a lot harder.

Answer 6

They are not going anywhere. I believe they are just biding their time waiting for US troops to leave.

Answer 7

Why hasn't any media here reported on the expansion of Sunni-led insurgent organisations fighting the US occupation in Iraq?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2129675,00.html

The Free Republic has reported in February that the anti-Us feelings among world Muslims have soared (probably due to how Bush and his NeoCons handled the Iraq War???) despite the fact that most Muslims A large number of Muslims support the Western ideal of democratic government. "Percentage with unfavourable view of US in 2005 (all increased since 9/11 except where indicated: Saudi Arabia 79 percent, Jordan 65 percent, Morocco 49 percent, Iran 52 percent (down from 63 percent in 2001), and Pakistan 65 percent (down from 69 percent in 2001)."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1788945/posts

Sunnis, it seems, "account for over 80% of Muslims have over centuries fragmented in to three clear strands, the Political, Missionary and Jihad movements who posses individual characteristics and vary in global view."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_attitudes_towards_terrorism

Do Bush and his NeoCons ever given it a profound thought that by stubbornly wanting US Troops to remain in Iraq, they might be driving all moderate Sunnis to gang up with the evil jihadists? Why is it so hard for Bush and his NeoCons to realize that no citizen of a nation would welcome colonists unless he/she is can be corrupted to accept personal monetary gains?

Most Muslims hate the al-Quedas as al-Quedas are responsible for sectarian killings and suicide bombings against civilians. Al-Quedas are warped Muslims who would even kill young men who refuse to grow beards or massacre young children for carrying composites tomatoes and cucumbers because their warped minds force them to equate that to sexual images.

According to the Guardian's report, the "last three months have been the bloodiest for US forces, with 331 deaths and 2,029 wounded, as the 28,000-strong "surge" in troop numbers exposes them to more attacks."

Claims that reflect criticism and frustration voiced by British commanders of American military tactics.ain't going to help Bush and his NeoCons insistence of keeping the Troops there:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1684561,00.html

And who's going to say that the expansion of private contractors in Iraq is going to protect the image of America's Troops? Would these private contractors betray US?for large financial bribes since they must be looking for financial enrichment to want to go tro Iraq?

http://harpers.org/archive/2007/07/hbc-90000559

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1218370,00.html

And who's going to say that those poor and badly treated employees of the likes of Halliburton would not retaliate?
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=12675

A good site for summary of world news:
http://www.spiderednews.com/

Answer 8

uh huh... they'll probably redeploy to New York, DC, LA, Chicago, Dallas...

Answer 9

Yes because like all mercenaries they will go where the money sends them.

Answer 10

you lost me at mujaheddin...