Posted on 03/17/2011 7:36:29 PM PDT by Zhang Fei
Well known to the United States policymakers in Obama White House and Clinton State Department along with the National Security Council but not widely known to American mainstream media, the U.S. West Point Military Academy’s Combating Terrorism Center document reveals that Libya sent more fighters to Iraq’s Islamic militancy on a per-capita basis than any other Muslim country, including Saudi Arabia.
Perhaps more alarmingly for Western policymakers, most of the fighters came from eastern Libya, the center of the current uprising against Muammar el-Qaddafi.
The analysis of the Combating Terrorism Center of West Point was based on the records captured by coalition forces in October 2007 in a raid near Sinjar, along Iraq’s Syrian border.
The eastern Libyan city of Darnah sent more fighters to Iraq than any other single city or town, according to the West Point report. It noted that 52 militants came to Iraq from Darnah, a city of just 80,000 people (the second-largest source of fighters was Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, which has a population of more than 4 million).
Benghazi, the capital of Libya’s provisional government declared by the anti-Qaddafi rebels, sent in 21 fighters, again a disproportionate number of the whole.
If the 2007 captured records revealed the Eastern Libyan participation in the anti-coalition forces militancy in Iraq one could imagine the Banghazi-Darnah export of Islamists since then.
“Libyans were more fired up to travel to Iraq to kill Americans than anyone else in the Arabic-speaking world,” Andrew Exum, a counterinsurgency specialist and former Army Ranger noted in a blog posting recently. “This might explain why those rebels from Libya's eastern provinces are not too excited about U.S. military intervention. It might also give some pause to those in the United States so eager to arm Libya's rebels.”
(Excerpt) Read more at asiantribune.com ...
I seek to exterminate a country?? What are you talking about?
Since when is one who wants to exterminate a terrorist who murdered 189 American citizens, a person who wants to exterminate a country?
The context of your statement — “exterminate both sides.” Currently it’s Libya vs. the rebel movement.
We could argue this all day, but it looks like the pro-interventionists got their wish, so it’s a moot point. But it’ll be over the protestations of a lot of people in this country who don’t trust the abilities or intentions of the a-hole who calls himself “president.”
Okay, you think it's "Libya" against the rebels and I think it's Gadaffi against the rebels.
We could argue this all day, but it looks like the pro-interventionists got their wish, so it’s a moot point.
Okay, you think the "interventionists" got their way and I think Gadaffi and the non-interventionists, after slaughtering the rebels for three weeks, got their way.
It's going to take more than killing Gadaffi. If you think he has no support among Libyans, you're mistaken.
Okay, you think the "interventionists" got their way and I think Gadaffi and the non-interventionists, after slaughtering the rebels for three weeks, got their way.
Optimally, it'd continue with Libya fighting its own internal battles, but apparently the internationalist "do-something" crowd has, in the end, won. Somehow, you seem to be carrying an altruistic ideal about the intentions of this "rebellion"... that somehow it's based on something other than carving a path for an islamist takeover in Libya. Well, good luck with that.
Really? You have polling numbers that suggest there is a lot of support gof Gadaffi? Regardles, whatever number does support Gadaffi, they can scream all they want, while we drop a smart bomb on the scoudrel who ordered the killing of 189 Americans over Lockerbie.
Somehow, you seem to be carrying an altruistic ideal about the intentions of this "rebellion"... that somehow it's based on something other than carving a path for an islamist takeover in Libya.
I already made clear my agnostic view on the rebels. But you ignore that and you put words in my mouth.
Do me a favor, and don't do. You're not good at it.
Thanks.
Khaddafy had been trending Westwards; now, whatever happens, he will go his own way and can create some hassles for the West. And feeling betrayed, he may even resort to his old habits.
Stupid, stupid move.
No vital or strategic interest for the USA in essentially a tribal and civil war with the Ikhwans lurking in the background and guiding some of the fighting.
We`ll see how this pans out... it`s not going to be nearly as simple as the process you describe.
But you`ll have something to cheer for in the early going, anyway.
He is showing his humble nature. Obviously he could make himself Generalissimo but wants to stay close to his roots. Propaganda and public relations ploy? naaaa
Not at all. I certainly am not as mixed up as those who believe this has anything to do with the establishment of a democracy. Basically anything our media is cheering cannot be good for the US.
Well, I am not willing to just watch an evil whacko slaughter a lot of men who have enough courage to fight for their freedom. It is a rare people that actually have the gumption to do that! To fight back! I love it, and do hope that there are enough decent and courageous men in that freedom wanting fighters to not through it away to islamic radicals.
Unfortunately, we have many here who have no clue about what Islam is all about. Apparently history means nothing to these folks who are happily lapping up whatever bilge the Treason Media is pouring out.
Islam not Imperialist? LoL. Those who believe this crap should read the Song of Roland and check out the Battle of Tours.
Unfortunately, there have been periods when the Middle east has been basically unified and during those periods it was a great danger to Western Civilization. It already is again and it is not even unified.
That report would never even be mentioned by the Treason Media. It suppresses so much information that there should be no surprise that the AQ connection is not referenced by it. How many Americans learned from it the nature of the war against Serbia in kosovo? Many learned and understood the importance of Bush’s invasion of Iraq from the media, that it convinced the Colonel to turn over his Bio-chem weapons and Saddam’s nuclear research program being run in Libya? Can you imagine the casualties from his possession of those weapons today? If not recall Saddam and the Kurds.
Perhaps I just don't know enough about Islamic and Arabic civilization, but I can't identify that period when Islam was truly united, except under the early "rightly guided" caliphs.
The rest of their long history has been filled with Fatimids, Buyids, Ummayads, Abbasids, Mamelukes, and whatever you like flavor of powers and potentates. They were only dangerous at Tours and after Constantinople fell -- and that was the Turks, not the Arabs; the Turks would have been a threat whether they'd converted to Islam or not, like their distant cousins the Mongols, who came as far as Liegnitz in the north (1241) and Ain Jalut (Well of Goliath, 1260) in the south.
Moslems were not removed from Spain until 1492. Moslems attacked Rome and controlled Sicily a couple of centuries before. Venice was in an almost constant state of war with its advocates for hundreds of years. They were only beaten back from the gates of Vienna in the 17th century and controlled Greece until the 19th (remember Byron). It is true that there was constant conflict for the levers of power which you reference but that was only over who would have the honor of destroying the enemies of Islam.
There was never complete unity nor a time without squabbling between various claimants but even so Islam has been a terrible danger for 1200 years. It rose to power only through the destruction of the Christian and Jewish cities and communities which were throughout the Middle East. Since it is more of a political movement (a totalitarian one at that) than a religion it will always be an enemy of Western Civilization.
Street demonstrations are fairly common throughout the Islamic world and generally they are caused by the regimes not being insufficiently anti-Israel or anti-Western. That is the most likely cause in Libya as it was in Egypt. Since when has the Treason Media cheered on “freedom fighters”?
Politics in the Islamic world are totally different than in Western Civilization since the opposition is considered “evil” and death is the solution to disagreements. There is no compromise acceptable. It appears that most of these demonstrations are the result of Shi’a attacks on the status quo Sunni power structures. Clearly that is the case in Yemen, Baharain and Saudi Arabia and I suspect is also true of Egypt and Libya.
Shi’a propaganda has always been directed at the oppressed from even before the time of Hassan Ibn Sabbah and the Old Man of the Mountains. Yet there was no real freedom for its adherents even when and where they achieved political control. Iran is a case in point.
Freedom is not at issue here any more than it was when Nazi thugs battled Commie thugs in the street of Berlin in the twenties and early thirties of the 20th century.
you are using words like suspect...likely..i am not willing to let these fighters be slaughtered due to likely scenarios! Likely according to history but maybe not so in Libya....we really do not know.
Daffy had been neutered and was playing nicely for a change. Now we are putting a huge unknown into the terror equation and it will likely blow up in our faces. For prospects high UNlikely to be beneficial to the West. There are far more UNlikelys in changing Daffy than in keeping him.
Freedom fighters my butt.
Again why trust the media’s angle when it is entirely unAmerican and pro Obama?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.