Islamist: al-Qaida holds coalition troops

[Jedi Knight]

Al Qaida terrorists operating in Iraq long before the invasion of the country by coalition forces to free it from terror apparatus like Al Qaida, now claim to have US prisoners (http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20030402-084451-5231r.htm) and say they will demand to swap them for terrorist pals held by the US in Cuba.

JK

[Segnosaur]

Ok, this is a little off topic...

But does anybody else think al Qaeda keeps shooting itself in the foot?

First, they destroy the World Trade Center. It gets them a lot of publicity. But, as a result, America invades Afghanistan, and they loose their main base of operations (plus many of their people.)

Then, there are rumours of them in Iraq. This may not have been a very wise decision from a strategic point of view, since 1) there will be little they can do to help Iraq, and loosing more of their people would be bad for them, and 2) By getting involved in Iraq (even after 9/11) they lend support to the American arguments of "fighting terrorism by invading Iraq".

[Gem]

"A Muslim fundamentalist source claimed Wednesday that Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida network captured five coalition troops in Iraq.
The source who requested anonymity told United Press International by telephone that the kidnapping of four U.S. troops and a British soldier, took place last Saturday in al-Zubair region of southern Iraq, close to the Kuwaiti border. "

Why is it that the majority of news source want to remain anonymous?

"He said al-Qaida will soon release a videotape of the captured soldiers and will ask to swap them with al-Qaida suspects being held by the United States. "

Let's wait and see. At least Iraq (whether wrong or right) showed THEIR POWs on TV to proove they really had prisoners.

"He said the "kidnapped troops will be equally treated as al-Qaida prisoners held in Guantanamo Bay." "

I am a little skeptical of this claim, considering that I never heard anything from Guantanamo Bay.

Gem

[Ian Osborne]

Originally posted by Segnosaur
Then, there are rumours of them in Iraq. This may not have been a very wise decision from a strategic point of view, since 1) there will be little they can do to help Iraq, and loosing more of their people would be bad for them, and 2) By getting involved in Iraq (even after 9/11) they lend support to the American arguments of "fighting terrorism by invading Iraq".

bin Laden HATES Iraq because it is a SECULAR dictatorship. Osama and Dubya stand shoulder to shoulder on wanting to get rid of Saddam. Al-Quaeda don't want to help Iraq, they want to see it brought down by America, fuelling anti-western feeling among the arab nations and filling their ranks with new recruits. And Bush, that intellectual collossus, played right into their hands.

[The Fool]

Look I hate to piss on anybodys strawberries but this whole story is based on ONE phonecall, an ANONYMOUS phonecall


" The source who requested anonymity told United Press International by telephone"

These are truly exciting times eh? When one anonymous phonecall can get you headlines in the washington times.

[Ian Osborne]

Originally posted by The Fool
Look I hate to piss on anybodys strawberries but this whole story is based on ONE phonecall, an ANONYMOUS phonecall

Since when did trivia like facts get in the way of a JK story?

[Crossbow]

I always find it amazing how JK will accept what a terrorist group says a fact without thought or question, then other times, he ignores facts without thought or question, and througout it all, he see no conflict between these two extremes.

He sure does like living in his own world! No wonder he is so fond of fictional movies,