These are my random musings. Hopefully they will be witty, insightful, and frequently updated.
Al-Qaeda talking truce with US
Published on January 19, 2006 By singrdave In War on Terror
Here's an unexpected turn of events. He claims that despite al-Qaeda's preparations for fresh US attacks, he wants to sue for peace. He claims that he's got several projects underway and the only way we can prevent them from happening is to accede to bin Laden's demands. He claims that he doesn't want to fight any more, but can we take it at face value?

From Yahoo News:
Osama bin Laden warned that al Qaeda was preparing new attacks inside the United States, but said the group was open to a conditional truce with Americans, according to an audio tape attributed to him on Thursday.



"The operations are under preparation and you will see them in your houses as soon as they are complete, God willing," said the speaker on the audio tape, who sounded like bin Laden.

In the tape, broadcast by al Jazeera television, bin Laden said al Qaeda was willing to respond to public U.S. opinion in favor of withdrawing troops from Iraq.

"We have no objection to responding to this with a long term truce based on fair conditions."

It was not immediately known when the tape was recorded. A U.S. counterterrorism official said U.S. intelligence was assessing the tape in an effort to determine its authenticity.

Bin Laden issued an audio tape in April 2004 in which he also offered a truce -- on that occasion to Europe, but not to the United States. Analysts saw the move at the time as an attempt to drive a wedge between the United States and its allies and to scare wavering coalition members out of Iraq.

Bin Laden's last audio tape was in December 2004. The interval between then and now was by far his longest public silence since the September 11 attacks on the United States in 2001.


Wow, what a shocker. It's a surprising turn of events and an intriguing offer. But not believable. "Death to Americans" has been their rallying cry for so long. Why is it suddenly "live and let live"?

Comments (Page 5)
5 PagesFirst 3 4 5 
on Jan 22, 2006
From my post on Jan 19th on this subject. The Entire Statement is here.
Link


OK now that I have seen the whole thing finally I can say to answer him "Not no, but HELL no." (my quote)

Comment#1 - He talks about our soldiers? As if he knows the quality and fortitude of our soldiers? He knows NOTHING about our men and women in uniform. They are and will continue to be the finest fighting force in the world. They volunteer for the job and go forth and carry out the mission asigned to them with the best effort they can. As the Warrior Ethos states and we follow in the military: "I will always place the mission first, I will never accept defeat, I will never quit, I will never leave a falen comrade." He attempts to belittle the soldiers and that alone galls the hell out of me.

Comment #2 - Here he accuses the "the US army and its agents" of "These crimes include the raping of women and taking them hostage instead of their husbands. ... The torturing of men has reached the point of using chemical acids and electric drills in their joints. If they become desperate with them, they put the drill on their heads until death." What? Again he talks of our men and women in uniform doing these things? I say to him, we do not stoop to your level. Your "agents" have cut the heads off of helpless men, while they were still alive and then proudly showed it to the whole world! And you accuse us of torture? His "agents" kidnapped and killed women, dragged bodies through the streets and did other acts or barbarians and he talks of our military in such a fashion? I say in answer to this - KISS MY A**!!! Show your head out of your hole if your still alive and fight us like a man, not a rat in a hole afraid of a great eagle that would swoop down and snatch your butt for lunch.

Comment #3 - This statement CONFIRMS the point that Iraq is drawing the terrorist there and away from other points. That has been stated over and over again and only confirms this point the Generals on the ground have been saying.

Comment #4 - The offer of a truce is a farce, as he says that he also says operations are underway to attack America again. And he has no power to enforce this so called truce. If he wanted us to leave Iraq all he had to do was tell the terrorist to stop the attacks, things would quiet down and we would leave. What is so hard to understand about that? Truce< an enemy only offers a truce when they are on the ropes and can not win.

Commnet #5 - Again he threatens us. He ask for a truce in one breath and then tells us he is going to attack us in the other. Well got an answer for you Osama, NO!

After now being able to read the whole thing unedited and in its full length, I say he is weakened, his ability to do the things he says is not there. He has no power to cause or offer a truce. He does confirm that a few things we are doing is working, such as the drawing of the terrorist to Iraq. I think after reading it I have decided to tell Osama to go screw himself. We ARE winning, You are still in a cave hiding, and you will eventually be captured or killed and all the world will see just how powerless you really are becoming. You threaten to attack us here on American soil again, OK, bring it on, and see what happens when you really piss us off.

on Jan 22, 2006
From my post on Jan 19th on this subject.

I have gotta say, Shadow, I really enjoyed your take on Osama's tape. It was very well written and quite insightful.
Let's take a look at what you wrote here...

He attempts to belittle the soldiers and that alone galls the hell out of me.

Here he accuses the "the US army and its agents" of "These crimes include the raping of women and taking them hostage instead of their husbands. ... The torturing of men has reached the point of using chemical acids and electric drills in their joints. If they become desperate with them, they put the drill on their heads until death."

He's drilling these lines to stir up controversy regarding the treatment of prisoners at Gitmo. Remember the alleged flushing of the Koran? Caused rioting throughout the Muslim world. He's hoping to tap into that rage and stir up some Islamic violence and outrage.

Comment #3: This statement CONFIRMS the point that Iraq is drawing the terrorist there and away from other points.

Absolutely what we have been trying to tell the good COL the other day: America is safer when the battles are fought overseas.

Yep, it isn't an offer of truce. It's a sign that he's on the ropes and ready to go down for the ten count.
on Jan 22, 2006
I say let there be peace talks with Usama, over a nice meal of pork chops,
on Jan 23, 2006
let there be peace talks with Usama, over a nice meal of pork chops

With a big glass of vino to wash it down.
on Jan 23, 2006
Apparently the CIA dated the audiotape through context clues and references to current events.

They determined the tape was older because they heard Osama screaming "Free Tookie Williams!"

on Jan 23, 2006
I am going on a rant, because this whole Osama tape issue makes me so irritated...

Okay, from this audio tape, we now know that OBL is alive. At least the CIA placed the time and date at December of 2005.

The day it was released was hilarious! Watching the MSM talking heads and field reporters salivating over the so-called "truce"! Everyone was falling over everyone else to get to a mike and/or a camera to declare that we had beaten Osama and that he wanted a truce.

As has been mentioned in ShadowWar's great article, I too saw something different in Osama's words. Call it paranoia, call it distrust. Let's look at exactly who Osama was addressing when he made his truce deal. Well, I think he aimed those words at two distinct groups: Middle Eastern Muslims and the Democrats of the United States. He knows those are the only two groups who will believe his "offer".

If JUsers were like the typical American (which I know you are far above, in most cases), you know very little about history. If you do know your history, then you know this is one of the oldest tricks in the art of war. Divide your enemy and instigate a fight within their ranks. It works! And it’s been working, here in America, for one reason: because so much of our "ruling class" has no background in history and the psychology of war.

Osama knew the Democrats and the MSM (one and the same) would jump on this truce idea for no other reason than to beat the President about the head and shoulders with it. Osama also knows there are some lunkheads in America who actually believe he is weak enough to need such an offer.

Listen: OBL is not trying to negotiate from a position of weakness. No, far from it! In fact, it is just the other way around. He may even have the upper hand. Do we know where he is? How close are our precision-guided munitions, anyway? Where are those sleeper cells located within the US?

Suppose the US decided to take him up on that truce offer... who would sign the truce papers? Where would they meet? A nation can only sign agreements with other nations, not with individuals, and not with non-state actors like al-Qaeda.

Osama knows this. He also knows we are not taking his madcap offer seriously. This gives him more ammunition with the Muslims of the Middle East! He can now turn to them and say: "See, I offered a truce to the Americans and they shunned it. They do not want peace. They want war... and they want to destroy you." And they will buy it!

In one hand, OBL holds out the phony offer of a truce, and in the other he held a threat of more lethal attacks inside the US.

So, which is it? A truce or more war? The answer takes no effort to arrive at: more death and destruction. We have no choice. We must keep the Predators flying. We must keep the pressure on OBL and his henchmen, wherever they are in the world. We cannot let our guard down, not for one minute. Therefore the US must respond with a resounding "NO" to OBL and allow him to crawl back into his hole. It is ridiculous to consider the alternative.
5 PagesFirst 3 4 5