Decius wrote: Yeah, this is a partisan source, but I think ABC is likely to be reasonable.... We'll see what they say... The information seems to be that: Iraq had dealings with Al'Q back in 1992/1993. They bought a limited amount of chemical and biological stuff back in 2000.
What are "dealings"? Anyway, it was likely opportunistic on both sides and not a strategic arrangement. If Saddam had rebuffed them, Al Qaeda could have gone elsewhere -- to Pakistan, for example, where they might have been offered nuclear materials or technology. So perhaps the US owes thanks to Saddam for sating their appetite with World War I-era technology. As for as the "dealings" -- the US had substantial dealings with Islamist jihadists as late as 1989, funneling huge sums of money, weapons, and technical and operational support through Pakistan over a sustained period of several years. Our "ties" to the mujahideen were much stronger than Saddam's ever were, but no one ever seriously suggested this relationship as a basis for toppling the US government. Peter Bergen -- a journalist who has worked for/with CNN, ABC, NYT, LA Times, Washington Post, Foreign Affairs, The Atlantic, The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph, and more -- met extensively with Osama bin Laden, conducted formal interviews of him, etc. Yet he won awards for his previous book, and he has a new book just now in stores. 'Dealings' between Iraq and Al Qaeda |
