[jmc1969]

Bush made the Saudi Wahhibis want to come to Iraq to detonate themselves to kill Iraqi women and children. They were just peaceful Wahhibis before hand.

You can't make this stuff up.

[stockpirate]

Both Muslims and members of the peaceful Wannabee Sect of those in favor of religious intolerance.

[blastdad51]

Somehow we corrupted the religion of peace?!!!

Oh the shame of it all...

[EagleUSA]

Yes, the very idea of an "outsider" cleaning out replacing the despotic, murderous regime of Saddam in Iraq, how awful!!! Stopping the killing, the rape, the torture of thousands of people -- how intrusive and arrogant of the occupiers to disrupt such actions of pride in the Arab world....

Says it, does it not?

[riverrunner]

More likey it gave them a place to go and act out. It is lot easier for them to get to Irag then the US. More the better it is a lot better to take care of them there then let them travel around the world attacking us.

[riverrunner]

More likey it gave them a place to go and act out. It is lot easier for them to get to Irag then the US. More the better it is a lot better to take care of them there then let them travel around the world attacking us.

[SPRINK]

everyone knows that Muslims dont lie.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Baloney.

[denydenydeny]

"One important point was the number who insisted that they were not militants before the Iraq war," it said.

More Al-Taqiyya from Reuters.

[dagnabbit]

The Saudis who conducted 9-11 were just psychic, enraged in advance by the Iraq war.

[e_castillo]

The first few posts sumed it up for me... Could have used a garf alert!

[tkathy]

Islam radicalized these monsters. No one else.

[Rokke]

Hmmmmm. Since we've had substantial military forces in Kuwait, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Oman and Jordan for at least a decade before we moved into Iraq, I'm not sure I'm buying the gist of this article. No. Scratch that. I am sure I'm not buying the gist of this article. What a bunch of crap.

[Zeroisanumber]

Most were motivated by "revulsion at the idea of an Arab land being occupied by a non-Arab country".

Don't know why they mind so much, most of Arabia was ruled by non-Arabs for the lion's share of its history.

[xkaydet65]

Their answer to an infidel power occupying a Muslim land is to kill very large numbers of the indigenous muslim population in Iraq. If that is Islamic logic these people are more dangerous than the black death.

[driftless]

Yes you can. Reuters and the BBC make it up all the time. (ha, ha) But the analysis is so infuriating anyway. What they are saying is a country should never respond to a threat by another country because the they might make more enemies by responding. In short if during WWII Germany and Japan had more allies join their cause after we declared war on them, then we should have just taken our punishment and sat out the war. Unbelievable. They are asking us now to take our punishment because more idiot terrorists might be created by our retaliating after 9/11. These people (Reuters, etal) are spineless slime.

[jimbo123]

More hate from the terror enablers at Reuters.

[bert]

.....They were just peaceful Wahhibis before hand....

Correct.

[Citizen Tom Paine]

"revulsion at the idea of an Arab land being occupied by a non-Arab country" I am interested in how these areas became "Arab land". I understand that indigenous populations were living there before the "Arabs" came riding out of the Arabian peninsula to rape and pillage in the name of Allah. Perhaps we should talk to the Chaladees in Iraq about whose land in is (or was).

The implication is that the "Arab land" will never be occupied by another nationality from here on out.

[Red6]

BS story.

Another "tale" from the leftist I wish it were so list.

1. The Saudis do little of the fighting, they do the financing and are the players behind the scene in Iraq. Today they play a minor role in the actual fighting.

2. The writer of this article must have forgotten who Bin Laden is, or where he is from? Saudi involvement in terror (Look at the list of names and origin of the 9-11 terrorists) based on their Wahabist belief is NOTHING new. They have been exporting terror since the early 80s but their government is cracking down on it today since it threatens their own existence.

3. The writer over looks one aspect that people have been trying to explain for FOUR (4) years now. We need to bring the war to them, that is exactly what we did. It's better to fight in the streets of Baghdad than New York. We have created a new "killing fields" in the Middle East by choice and design. Let them come!

This is just more of "It's Bush's fault." Basically if you cut the chase the bottom line is that the author is saying: “Bush is causing the radical Islamic elements to polarize against us”. Yea, right, they loved us in the past. Achille Laura, US embassies, Kohbar towers, USS Cole, WTC 1993, WTC 2001, Madrid, London, Van Gogh, Russian train bombing, Chechen presidential assassination, Moscow theater, Beslan, two Russian hijacked planes flown into the ground in 2003…….. I feel the love!

These people are in a war against anyone who is not like them. Even the secular “intellectual” in Europe who thinks that silly religious wars are beneath his superior world view is a target. In fact, he’s not even a person of the book which a Christian is. This person is by definition an “infidel” not worthy of living. Bush didn’t polarize these people against us. Bush didn’t make them hate us. Bush didn’t start a war between us. Bush just helped make it clear that we were already in a state of war against them. He unlike his predecessor who ignored and downplayed the threat, allocated resources to fight an enemy set on our destruction.

Red6

[No Longer Free State]

I guess the fact that terrorists are taught to blame their militancy on Bush and America has nothing to do with how this data was captured?