In response to tvoter's comment:
In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:
" Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the Battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed."
Except major combat operations hadn't ended and we needed more troops in country after his speech than before.
"We have removed an ally of al-Qaida"
No we hadn't. In fact we emboldened that terrorist group and in an Iraq that we didn't yet control, they flourished. There were more al-Qaida in Iraq after the speech than before.
"In the Battle of Afghanistan, we destroyed the Taliban, many terrorists, and the camps where they trained."
No we hadn't. The Taliban are still operating in Afghanistan.
The 24-7 bombardment (MAJOR OPERATIONS) had ended!!
Yes Saddam had given aid to al qaeda or allowed it to happen at least
and Yes in Iraq al qaeda's camps were shut down.
So the surge of 5 battallions, over and above the forces in country, was not a major combat operation? Where I come from, if you deploy an additional 20,000 front-line combat troops that's a "major combat operation".
If you need to deploy more troops in country and extend all deployments, then "major combat operations" are not over.
If you do it to engage in the fiercest, bloodiest fighting of the war, then that is most certainly a "major COMBAT operation".
If you suffer 97% more casualties after the speech than before, then you are engaging in "major combat operations".
If these engagements are large enough to be designated with code names, (Operation Vigilant Resolve, Operation Phantom Fury) then you are certainly engaging in "military combat operations".
I guess you would have more access to the pre and post-war intel than every major Congressional committee in Congress.
The consensus of intelligence experts has been that these contacts never led to an operational relationship, and that consensus is backed up by reports from the independent 9/11 Commission and by declassified Defense Department reports as well as by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, whose 2006 report of Phase II of its investigation into prewar intelligence reports concluded that there was no evidence of ties between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda.
Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), a jihadist group of predominantly Sunni fighters, rose to prominence in the ashes of the U.S.-led invasion to oust Saddam Hussein. The insurgency that followed provided the group with fertile ground to wage a guerilla war against coalition forces and their domestic supporters.
But hey, why believe every foreign intelligence committee and foreign policy group when we have you to rewrite history.
Come on. Forget about it. It was a long time ago. Twelve Bengazis, or so.