web analytics


By ATWadmin On May 15th, 2007

Did you read that a leading expert on Al Queda, Rohan Gunaratna, has told a security conference at Lloyd’s of London insurance market that Iraq would become a "terrorist Disneyland" where al Qaeda could build up its strength unchallenged? If U.S., British and other coalition troops withdrew from Iraq in the next year, he said, "certainly the scale of attacks that would be mounted inside Iraq, and using Iraq as a launching pad to strike other Western countries — countries in Europe, North America – would become such that after two or three years, the U.S. forces will have to go back to Iraq.

I wonder if all those who clamour for a US/British withdrawal ever stop to think about these things, or is defeatism so ingrained within them that they lock out all common sense?

10 Responses to ““A TERRORIST DISNEYLAND”…”

  1. would become a "terrorist Disneyland"

    whats with the "would become". surely the strategy of drawing in all jihadis to iraq is in essence the same thing. to quote jurassic park, maybe you could have a coupon day.

  2. Tripper,

    When did I say you could comment?

  3. >>that Iraq would become a "terrorist Disneyland" <<

    What, yet more American kitsch?

  4. Can somebody remind me plz how many Al-Qaeda members there were in Iraq BEFORE the coalition troops went in?

    And which came first, Chicken Licken or the egg?

  5. As the great bard from Barking once said:

    "You can fight for democracy at home,
    But not in some foreign land"

    What right have you or me to decide what Iraqi’s do in their own country?

    Such groups exist and strengthen ONLY because of western economic imperialism. Once the US and their lackies leave then Al Queda will have to look elsewhere for support.

    War on Terror or War OF Terror?

  6. Somebody should forward that report to the Pelosi/Reid cabal.

    If we leave, Iran will move in quickly , can anyone say oil, and fight off Al Queda just like we’re doing now, although probably quicker since they aren’t constrained by anti-war liberals whining about civilian casualties. They have their own terrorist group, Hezbollah, to do their dirty work for them. They won’t, and neither will their Russian bedmates or Syrian soulmates, tolerate a Sunni terrorist camp in their new Shia oil fields. If you follow this train, it might lead us out of Iraq, leave Al Queda with it’s ass whipped and allow a new focus on the leading centers of terrorism; Pakistan, Syria, Iran, The Phillipines and Londonstan.

    I am being slightly sarcastic for you literalists.

  7. They are there now. Our presence is surely not rooting them out. It is a far more complicated issue than the blame game debate admits from either side.

  8. They are there now. Our presence is surely not rooting them out. It is a far more complicated issue than the blame game debate admits from either side.

    what incentive does the whitehouse have for rooting out terrorism?

    as an entity it characterises everything they do. so surely the more of it the better.

  9. David,
    This is exactly why the invasion should never have taken place. And you’re using it as an excuse to continue the illegal occupation.

    I am opposed to a withdrawal precisely for this reason. Iraq will become a second Vietnam but only worse because the US can’t withdraw as easily this time, leaving oilwells in terrorist hands. The withdrawal cannot take place until Iraq is stabilised. Which means that Bush has REALLY messed things up big time. And he has only his country’s right wingers to blame for it.

    BTW the number of soldiers killed hasn’t fallen below 80 in any month of 2007. Isn’t that amazing? Four years after the invasion? Do you think the mounting casualties are evidence of imminent success?

  10. Daytripper,

    When did David say you could comment a second time? 🙂