Want some more evidence Democrats don't see Islamic terrorism as a threat to the US?

Question

-ACKERMAN: Isn't it true, General, Al-Qaeda in Iraq formed in 2005?

-PETRAEUS: Senator, I'm not saying when it started. I'm saying merely that Al-Qaeda/Iraq clearly is part of the overall greater Al-Qaeda network.

-ACKERMAN: But they didn't exist --

-PETRAEUS: -- first communications, and there is no question also but that Al-Qaeda/Iraq is a key element in igniting the ethnic sectarian violence.

-PETRAEUS: They have been, in effect, an element that has poured gas on burning embers with the bombing of the Golden Dome Mosque, for example, and with efforts that they have tried recently, for example, bombing the poor Yazidi villages in northwestern Iraq and so forth.

-ACKERMAN: Are they a threat to us?

-PETRAEUS: Al-Qaeda central is a threat to us.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_091107/content/01125111.member.html.member.ht

On September 11th, 2007, six years after 9/11, Gary Ackerman, a Democrat, has to ask if Al-Qaeda is a threat to this country.

history_schmistory: You have got to be kidding me. Out of context? I included the entire lead up. Come on, surely you can make better excuses than that.

Answer 1

Well, then Mr. Ackerman needs to have his head evaluated. It's grotesquely amusing to me how politicians can act so very stupid when it's politically expedient.

Answer 2

The question was about Al-Qaeda in Iraq. There is a definitive difference between the Al-Qaeda that attacked us on 9/11 and Al-Qaeda in Iraq. The Iraqi version is no real threat to the US mainland that was what Ackerman was asking about. He wanted to know the capabilities of Al-Qaeda in Iraq not whether or not Al-Qaeda is a threat to us. Petraeus never said Al-Qaeda in Iraq is a threat to us either. The question was an attempt to show that there was NO link between Iraq and 9/11 which has been thoroughly substantiated already. You are trying to place meaning in the question that isn't there.

Answer 3

I'd say that's excellent evidence enough to show why there is a difficulty in communication, since so little information about Al-Qaeda has come to Ackerman's attention. I wonder how many others missed it. Or did Ackerman goof because he was so intent on catching Petraeus on something? I would also like very much to see Bin Laden caught for his crimes against Americans. What American wouldn't?

Answer 4

You're taking Ackerman out of context. He wasn't asking whether Al-Qaida itself was a threat, he was asking whether the Al-Qaida elements in Iraq were a threat to the United States. He was trying to get General Petraeus to discuss the connection between Bin Laden and Al-Qaida in Iraq, whether it's centrally controlled or whether it's more independent and loosely organized. Way to twist people's words though, about what I expect from chickenhawks.

Answer 5

What is your point?

The AL Qaeda faction in Iraq was began after the war started in Iraq and were actually more involved prior to the sectarian violence!

As they did not exist before we were in Iraq, they could not have been a threat!

The war going on in Iraq is to take power of the government and to get us out! It is a sectarian civil war!

I don't think anyone ever said that militant Islam does not pose a threat to this country, however Bush did not know, nor could he care less, where Osama bin Laden was. He attacked a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 nor terrorism. In fact Hussein put terrorist to death he hated them so much!

I would rather not have gotten our troops killed over oil, and tried to find Osama, who is alive and well, and stronger than ever, thanks to you and yours!

If you thought they were so much of a threat why did't Bush give a damn about Bin Laden?

Answer 6

I think the question should be, are they such a threat that it justifies us spending half a trillion dollars, and counting, six years and counting, and thousands of lives (but who's counting)?

Especially considering that, the result so far of all this expenditure has been, that these people are now active over large areas where they could never have operated before?

And if the people running this war have to date, in fact, made the islamic terrorist problem worse in that area? Why, after four years, half a trillion dollars, and so many lives, is their word worth taking, for anything?

Not to mention that, if anyone really does want to attack the US itself, having half our armed forces in Iraq does *nothing* to stop them from doing that.

They don't have to go through Bagdad to get here you know. They can go through Saudi Arabia, through Egypt, through Germany. Like the actual 911 terrorists did.

Answer 7

Maybe Ackerman should send them some cookies. If they don't send back a thank you card, then the sh-t is goin DOWN!