From: "Tony Ingenoso" 

"Robert Comer"  wrote in message
news:42bf20f4$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> > You think the Kurds would see advantage from harboring Zarqawi and
resist
> > a
> > Saddam effort to clean Zarqawi out?  I can't see that at all.
>
> I would think the Kurds would think they were being attacked and would,
> indeed, respond.

Why would they think they were being attacked if you're not shooting at
them?  I believe the Kurds are sophisticated enough these days that they
understand radio and telephone communications and have gone beyond smoke
signals and pony express.

> Now if it were coordinated with them, that might have
> worked, but it's irrelevant, Saddam had nothing to gain, we wouldn't let
> him.

Now this is a completely NEW claim.  Where is it documented that the US/UN
refused Saddam permission to go clean out terrorists?  I need to research
this if your claim is in fact true.

Saddam had lots to gain - lifting of the sanctions and more stable border
situation leap to mind.

> I don't think the Turks are all that afraid of Zarquawi's group, they
would
> have responded differently during the lead up to the war. (If Zarquawi was
> there and they knew about it, of course.)

Right, the Turks are ambivalent about radical Islamists.  Please, that is way lame.

> I think Turkey would have been full with us if they perceived a threat.

One terrorist camp is not necessarily justification enough to risk public
wrath for an IRaq invasion.  We will never really know exactly what the
Turks did or did not do to aid us.  Hard to tell where flights out of Turk
NATO bases are headed.  I would guess they did a lot more than they're
willing to confess to publicly...that is the way of the middle east -
public denial, private cooperation.  ex. for many decades Israel has had
cooperative intelligence service relations with a LOT of arab nations that
publicly excoriated them.

> So why didn't the Kurds go after them themselves?  There's only a few
> options, one, they were friends, (but that can't be, we're supposedly
> friends with the Kurds :|), second, Zarquawi wasn't there, and third, they
> were perceived as no threat.

You studiously ignored option #4 - maybe Zarqawi was under Saddam's
protection and the Kurds didn't want to risk his wrath?  That is equally or
more plausible than your 3 options.

> The mass graves are a red herring for any recent stuff.

Somebody filled them.  They didn't fill themselves.  That somebody was
Saddam's security apparatus -- a security apparatus that was still capable
of performing assasinations until very recently.  ex. they whacked one of
Saddam's weapons scientists who foolishly chose to return to the country.

Also, with a competent intel apparatus functioning, it would have been
impossible for Saddam to execute the massive disinformation campaign he did
about the WMD.  Even his own generals were absolutely convinced there were
WMD (read the Dulfer report where this is detailed)

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5