HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » ISIS just stole $425 mill...

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 10:56 AM

ISIS just stole $425 million and became the ‘world’s richest terrorist group’

Source: Washington Post

Of the many stunning revelations to emerge out of the wreckage of Mosul on Wednesday — 500,000 fleeing residents, thousands of freed prisoners, unconfirmed reports of “mass beheadings” — the one that may have the most lasting impact as Iraq descends into a possible civil war is that the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria just got extremely rich.

As insurgents rolled past Iraq’s second largest city, an oil hub at the vital intersection of Syria, Iraq and Turkey, and into Tikrit, several gunmen stopped at Mosul’s central bank. An incredible amount of cash was reportedly on hand, and the group made off with 500 billion Iraqi dinars — $425 million.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/06/12/isis-just-stole-425-million-and-became-the-worlds-richest-terrorist-group/



Thank you Saudi Arabia...

56 replies, 6034 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 56 replies Author Time Post
Reply ISIS just stole $425 million and became the ‘world’s richest terrorist group’ (Original post)
JCMach1 Jun 2014 OP
TwilightGardener Jun 2014 #1
JCMach1 Jun 2014 #3
JackRiddler Jun 2014 #5
TwilightGardener Jun 2014 #6
JackRiddler Jun 2014 #9
TwilightGardener Jun 2014 #11
wordpix Jun 2014 #13
TwilightGardener Jun 2014 #16
nolabels Jun 2014 #22
JackRiddler Jun 2014 #19
VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #26
Art_from_Ark Jun 2014 #41
villager Jun 2014 #53
mike_c Jun 2014 #29
btrflykng9 Jun 2014 #56
wordpix Jun 2014 #12
JackRiddler Jun 2014 #18
VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #27
JackRiddler Jun 2014 #33
VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #35
JackRiddler Jun 2014 #38
Nihil Jun 2014 #43
24601 Jun 2014 #23
VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #28
24601 Jun 2014 #31
VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #32
JackRiddler Jun 2014 #36
24601 Jun 2014 #45
JackRiddler Jun 2014 #47
HooptieWagon Jun 2014 #52
Old and In the Way Jun 2014 #54
GeorgeGist Jun 2014 #2
Name removed Jun 2014 #4
benld74 Jun 2014 #7
kelliekat44 Jun 2014 #21
IronLionZion Jun 2014 #8
JackRiddler Jun 2014 #10
JustABozoOnThisBus Jun 2014 #42
Kennah Jun 2014 #46
DCBob Jun 2014 #14
Leme Jun 2014 #15
Leme Jun 2014 #17
kelliekat44 Jun 2014 #20
superdem1984 Jun 2014 #24
arcane1 Jun 2014 #30
olddad56 Jun 2014 #25
KeepItReal Jun 2014 #34
benld74 Jun 2014 #37
Corruption Inc Jun 2014 #39
roamer65 Jun 2014 #40
Sunlei Jun 2014 #44
JCMach1 Jun 2014 #49
Blue_Tires Jun 2014 #48
MBS Jun 2014 #50
Exultant Democracy Jun 2014 #51
JNelson6563 Jun 2014 #55

Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 11:07 AM

1. Sunni vs. Shia. Just on a very big scale, now with even worse wackadoodles

than AQ. No way for the US to solve this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #1)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 11:10 AM

3. Expansion of Sunni vs. Shia proxy war

KSA vs. Iran...

Only ISIS is too radical for even Al Quaeda= NOT GOOD

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #1)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 11:44 AM

5. Hello, the U.S. caused this...

 

The U.S. deliberately stoked a Sunni-Shi'a civil war as the response to the Iraqi (Sunni but mainly secular) insurgency against the U.S. invasion and war of aggression in their country.

Certainly it is not for the original destroyer of the house to now step in and protect it against opportunistic looters. On that much we can agree: no further military interventions by the U.S. imperialist forces.

However, your post obscures U.S. responsibility. The U.S. government was the prime wackadoodle in creating this situation and bears the moral responsibility. Eventually, reparations must be paid. The first step would be war crimes trials for the architects of this horror, Bush, Cheney, et al.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #5)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 11:46 AM

6. Iraq was a mistake of tragic proportions, trying to destabilize Syria also a mistake.

We reap what we sow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #6)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 12:10 PM

9. It was not a mistake. It was a crime.

 

"We" reap none of it. The price is being paid by the people who live in the region, and not by the criminals who are responsible for the situation. They, on the contrary, are prospering. They have learned only that crime pays, and no doubt plot how to commit further such crimes.

The U.S. invasion was a war of aggression by a small coalition of witting criminal architects. Their motives combined a geopolitical vision with a drive to plunder resources and profit personally. They cajoled and bribed and threatened other factions so as to get the collaboration of many who should have known better, including (decisively) the majority of the Democratic party leadership at that time, including Kerry, Clinton and Biden.

Whether it went as planned or not is irrelevant to the fact that it was an intended international crime of epic proportions. If some methhead gang ran into a bank in the attempt to loot it, murdered people at random, and then failed to gain their objective, you wouldn't say they were mistaken, you'd say they were criminals. To call it a mistake is to exonerate for people who should instead be kicking their last at the end of a rope.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #9)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 12:18 PM

11. It was a crime by Bush/Cheney, a mistake by those in Congress. I don't believe

most of them knew at the time about the fake intelligence case, and thought it would turn out to be quick and popular like the first gulf war. In other words, they were out of their depth and league on foreign policy, and didn't realize what they were getting into (most in Congress are still this way--maybe even worse). The Bush team had a lot of old hands from the CIA and Pentagon, so even though Bush was clearly just a figurehead, no one thought that Poppy Bush's old buddies would drive the bus into the ditch that badly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #11)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 12:24 PM

13. sorry but those in Congress need to do their homework when they're starting a war

They are sending young people off to fight, die, get legs and arms blown off, suffer from PTSD and mental problems for the rest of their lives, etc. Try a little responsibility and accountability, Congress. And this war was clearly over oil so those responsible should be held accountable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wordpix (Reply #13)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 12:29 PM

16. They bear blame for being stupid and too lazy or politically motivated

to make wise decisions. Totally let us down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wordpix (Reply #13)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 12:55 PM

22. The problem with pointing a finger is three more still are pointing back at you

Many a moon we here at DU contemplated and discussed all of these things but the real Boogie-man is coming out of the bag now.

The oil and the money that came from it were only the elixirs. Those peoples lives who live over in areas have been effed with for decades or even centuries. They now can peer over at the rest of the world and see the unfairness they have endured. Those grandiose kingmakers people that hemmed this country together after WW1 did it that way to dis-empower the people by fractionation. That has all been undone now and it was undone by the greed of the oil lobby and war merchants. Every dictatorial regime in that portion of globe is now just a crap shoot.

The ''Shit on the neighbors because it is easy to get away with' is now in short supply.

Wake up and smell the coffee

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #11)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 12:40 PM

19. If they didn't know...

 

they were criminally negligent.

The real facts were available to them from many sources. They were well-covered in the international press. People who were on the ground in Iraq, like Baradei, Blix and Scott Ritter, made amply clear that there were no Iraqi WMDs. And EVERYONE could understand that the connection to 9/11 was pure fiction from Cheney. So whoever voted for it was responsible for what happened, yes. Not necessarily criminal, but certainly dangerous if not removed from politics. No career should survive such a "mistake."

And are you seriously going to plead naivete for Clinton, Kerry and Biden?! PLEASE!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #19)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 02:44 PM

26. Right no one lied to them the same way they lied to us right? They wouldn't lie to them would they?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #26)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 07:04 PM

41. The thing is, a lot of us here knew from the start that it was a lie

bu$h started bombing Iraq almost from the first day he slithered into the White House. Iraq had been one of the most bombed, the most surveilled, the most sanctioned countries in the world for the 12 years between the two Iraq wars. It was so painfully obvious that it would have been impossible for Iraq to develop weapons of mass destruction, and the means of delivering them, under those conditions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Art_from_Ark (Reply #41)

Mon Jun 16, 2014, 01:19 PM

53. It was pretty obvious from the get-go

 

For most of us on this board (at the time), anyway...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #11)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 02:54 PM

29. Congress was complicit....

I'm sorry, but congress wrote, debated, and passed legislation to give domestic legal cover to an international crime against humanity. That was not a "mistake"-- it was complicity in war crimes.

However, it's also important to recognize those who stood against those crimes: 60+ percent of the house democrats and 40+ percent of the senate dems voted NO.

Never forget.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #9)

Mon Jun 16, 2014, 02:39 PM

56. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #5)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 12:22 PM

12. "the US" doesn't bear the responsibility---BushCo and the oil cos. that perpetrated the war do!

Don't put me in the category of responsibility---I never would have voted to go to war. It was all over the oil---let the oil profiteers and their BushCo friends and puppets pay for this mess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wordpix (Reply #12)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 12:35 PM

18. The U.S. government...

 

and hardly just "BushCo." Everyone in Congress who voted for it are also responsible, e.g., Clinton, Kerry, Biden. The media who transported obvious lies and played cheerleaders while ignoring the contradictory evidence are responsible. This is a system. This is a bipartisan-supported system of imperialism that also produced the U.S. war of aggression in Vietnam, the Condor-backed dictatorships in South America, the 1980s massacres in Central America, the many years of starvation of Iraq prior to 2003.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #18)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 02:45 PM

27. They voted for the AUMF which by the way was meant to let the inspectors continue their work...

 

It was the ONLY possible way to prevent that war....it didn't work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #27)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 04:26 PM

33. Incredible inversion of reality!

 

So the authorization to use military force was the only way to prevent the use of military force!

Everyone understood at the time that this was the vote for or against giving the Bush regime authority for the invasion they intended. Twenty-three (Democratic) senators understood that, and voted against it. More than 120 House members voted against it.

But now you explain that it was the ones who voted FOR the Bush war who were really doing the "ONLY" possible thing to prevent it.

Is there no limit to the contortions of sophistry in the service of party lines?

Do you really think anyone can be persuaded by such transparent and poor PR work?

Clinton, Kerry and Biden voted to authorize the Bush regime's announced intent to invade the nation of Iraq on the basis of "WMD" and "9/11." End of story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #33)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 04:28 PM

35. That is YOUR interpretation.....IT DID in fact require that the weapons inspectors continue....

 

Deny that all you want!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #35)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 06:01 PM

38. History has not and will never forgive the collaborators

 

in the Bush war of aggression -- starting with the senators and House members who voted for the authorization for use of military force, which everyone understood was the only carte blanche the lawless regime would need in a historical period where declarations of war are no longer made yet war is the every day reality.

Clinton, Kerry and Biden in particular will always be remembered as among the chief enablers of the murderous Bush war of aggression that killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

Those who voted against it, and those who protested, did the right thing. For those who voted for it: NO EXCUSES.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #18)

Fri Jun 13, 2014, 08:11 AM

43. Excellent post - thank you!

 

It's just a shame that so many will be swayed by the posting puppets of the corporate party.

Keep up the good work.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #5)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 01:41 PM

23. Include anybody in Congress who voted to authorize it. They all have access to the same intelligence

but few members can be inconvienced to visit the Capitol's secure facility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 24601 (Reply #23)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 02:46 PM

28. No they don't you are entirely wrong about that....

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #28)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 03:49 PM

31. No, I'm right. Intelligence products distributed to Congress are available to all members who will

go read them.

Additionally,

1. Intelligence Community compartments & subcompartments are briefed at least annually to members of the Intelligence Committees

- Waived sensitive information briefed to SSCI Chair & Vice Chair, HPSCI Chair & Ranking Member, and, Staff Directors.

2. DoD Special Access Programs are briefed at least annually to members of the Armed Services Committees and Defense Subcommittees of Appropriations Committees.

- Waived SAPs limited to Chairs, Ranking Members & Staff Directors.

3. Any member has access to the classified appropriations & authorizations bills

Classified material must be kept in the Capitol's secure facility. Most members don't go read them and don't see them because they aren't delivered to their offices, which are not approved for classified discussion, storage and processing. Like the President and Vice President, members do not submit SF-86s, undergo security clearance investigations or take polygraphs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 24601 (Reply #31)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 03:53 PM

32. Then why is an Intelligence committee necessary if they all are privy to ALL the same Presidential

 

Daily breifings. I bet if you ask Richard Clarke he would tell you that you are wrong.

They DO have SOME of it....but most assuredly they do NOT see all of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 24601 (Reply #23)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 04:29 PM

36. I had access!

 

The whole world knew Bush was lying. It was no problem to understand it, at least if you weren't looking for bullshit justifications to do what was politically expedient.

Baradei, Blix and Ritter were telling the story.

23 Senators and 120+ House members knew enough to vote against the invasion.

These people trying to justify the collaboration of certain Democrats in the Bush regime's war crimes should stop insulting our intelligence!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #36)

Sun Jun 15, 2014, 08:45 PM

45. If you used the access you had, then you know that the intelligence communities world-wide reached

consensus that there was insufficient access to infer Iraq had a nuclear program, You also know there was strong consensus that Iraq had a robust chemical weapons program and large stockpiles - and that there was insufficient evidence on any Biological Weapons Program.

And you probably read Hussein's FBI debriefing where he discussed the Chemical Weapons Program was a deliberate deception he conducted to deter his neighbors. (Dude, it worked too well.) He admitted also that he intended to rebuild his WMD programs. Links attached but let me guess, years later, the FBI is part of the conspiracy?

Short Version: http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2008/january/piro012808

Long version with GWU National Security Archive (documents from FOIA releases): http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB279/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 24601 (Reply #45)

Sun Jun 15, 2014, 11:20 PM

47. The propaganda ministries? "Of the world"?

 

All of the world's "intelligence communities" agreed? Really?

Saddam wanted to pretend he had some nasty gear? That's a real surprise -- you'd think he had a legitimate fear that some insane country on the other side of the globe would come and bomb Iraq. If only he'd had some nukes and delivery systems, the foreign aggression might have been deterred, and the half-million or more people murdered in the war and its aftermaths might still be alive.

Problem is, the actual inspectors on the ground, the most credible ones, made clear that Iraq didn't have this machinery. (And again, if Iraq did, that was no justification for an aggressive invasion!)

Every state that can afford it maintains big agencies (or several) that specialize in lies, propaganda, deception, covert warfare, surveillance of their own populations, political policing, espionage, collaboration with criminal elements and the breaking of laws (their own and those of other countries). You can call these self-perpetuating criminal cultures "intelligence communities," if you like. Anything that comes out of them is going to be self-interested. Sometimes it's in their self-interest to be truthful.

No "conspiracy" (a concept you injected here) is required to expect that some of them might not want to directly contradict their American counterparts (like the NATO partners), or might want to see the Americans invade Iraq (like Saudi and Israel did, for example). Nevertheless, I'll take what Schroeder and Chirac did a lot more seriously than what their spook shops said.

As for the FBI, it is a political police. Like any political police, it extracts the confessions it desires. And what does it matter if Saddam genuinely believes he was successful in fooling the other countries. That doesn't mean they believed it.

Again, if the US and UK had believed their own bullshit, they might have hesitated before striking. They struck KNOWING the target would be helpless.

Anyway, if Democrats had not voted to authorize the aggression, we presumably wouldn't be having this discussion, because you wouldn't need to come up with excuses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #36)

Mon Jun 16, 2014, 01:16 PM

52. I didn't have access, and I knew BushCo was lying.

 

The Dems that voted for war were either too lazy to read the classified NIE available to them, or voted yes as a political calculation, or were MIC puppets. Any of the above was inexcusable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JackRiddler (Reply #36)

Mon Jun 16, 2014, 02:13 PM

54. I won't argue that Democrats didn't know that Iraq was well contained

And weren't a threat to us or anyone in the region. It should have been a straight Party vote against the IWR. But if I recall, we still had not a public investigation into 9/11 nor had the anthrax perps been found. I further think many Democrats in Congress felt that this administration's willingness to ignore the warnings of 9/11 made them criminally liable for this dereliction of duty.

What if every Democrat had voted against this act? I'm betting another attack occurs shortly thereafter and the evidence this time implicates Iraq directly. Immediately, Bush, Cheney, and the neocon Wurlitzer go into ovrrdrive, demanding an immediate attack. But, equally important, Democrats are now framed as "IRAQI APPEASERS...a Party complicit in letting this happen. Democrats are completely taken out as an opposition party - Bush Cheney get their war and kill the Democratic Party in the process.

Call me a paranoid, but I think that administration had a plan for One Party rule to compliment their PNAC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 11:09 AM

2. Got rid of Saddam ...

for something worse.



USA! USA! USA!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 11:47 AM

7. Shrubs $900 million embassy in Bagdad doesnt have a chance

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to benld74 (Reply #7)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 12:43 PM

21. Well, we looted and destroyed their antiquity...beautiful buildings and art work. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 11:54 AM

8. Any chance the US can stay out of this one?

F this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IronLionZion (Reply #8)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 12:11 PM

10. The U.S. is up to its eyeballs in this one.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IronLionZion (Reply #8)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 10:04 PM

42. When the vandals are at the gate ...

it'll be interesting to see if we abandon that shiny new bazillion-dollar embassy compound.

Or try to hold it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JustABozoOnThisBus (Reply #42)

Sun Jun 15, 2014, 09:14 PM

46. Perhaps we'll nuke it from orbit, just to be sure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 12:24 PM

14. The war drums are beating and Im afraid we probably headed back there..

in some form or another. Their primary fear is Iraq's oil falling into ISIS control.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 12:27 PM

15. if the one or two bank robber had kept their mouth shut..they could have come to USA and join the 1%

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Leme (Reply #15)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 12:29 PM

17. thinking some, maybe not enough money for being in the 1%

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 12:41 PM

20. Sorta like the US military and its mercernary contractors did when they invaded, eh? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 02:38 PM

24. but ... but ...


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to superdem1984 (Reply #24)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 03:12 PM

30. This thread isn't about al Qaeda n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 02:40 PM

25. the worlds richest terrorist group is the Bush crime family.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 04:27 PM

34. Kurds took control of $1.06 Trillion worth of proven oil reserves in Kirkuk

I'm just sayin....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 05:40 PM

37. Remember, the ORIGINAL name for the IRAQ war was,,,

Operation
Iraq
Liberation.


Otherwise known to all involved as OIL!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 07:03 PM

40. Riyadh sends them a lot more money than what they took.

These "folks" are Riyadh's Wahhabi proxies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Fri Jun 13, 2014, 08:24 AM

44. they will loot everything in their path on an epic scale. who the heck funded them? it needs to be

made public now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sunlei (Reply #44)

Mon Jun 16, 2014, 01:00 PM

49. Saudis, Qataris, Kuwaitis, and good old USA

Remember those millions Petraeus used to bribe the Sunni tribal leaders???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Mon Jun 16, 2014, 09:59 AM

48. I wonder how much of that amount is from U.S.

"nation building" funds from a decade ago...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Mon Jun 16, 2014, 01:07 PM

50. And, thank you, W, for creating this mess in the first place.

I remembering Powell's alleged Pottery Barn rule: "You break it, you own it".
Really, we should send W, Cheney and Rumsfeld to Iraq to clean up their mess in person. Except that (to state the obvious) they're not competent to do so, as the multiple tragedies in the middle east confirm.

W: the disaster that keeps on "giving".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Mon Jun 16, 2014, 01:13 PM

51. Blowback is a bitch, thanks Bush.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JCMach1 (Original post)

Mon Jun 16, 2014, 02:32 PM

55. Shit just got real-er.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread