Bin Laden´s truce proposal- what the heck is that about?

[foxtrot023]

CAIRO, Egypt - Al-Jazeera aired an audiotape purportedly from Osama bin Laden (http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news/?p=Osama+bin+Laden) on Thursday, saying al-Qaida is making preparations for attacks in the United States but offering a truce to rebuild Iraq (http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news/?p=Iraq) . http://bc.us.yahoo.com/b?P=zvgLvUSOwhVz8LPXQ8vHBw9FyeHqNkPPsjEACg8G&T=19cchhu9k%2fX%3d1137685041%2fE%3d84441876%2fR%3dnews%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3d8%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d943285396%2fH%3dY2FjaGVoaW50PSJuZXdzIiBjb250ZW50PSJzZWN1cml0eTtpdDtJcmFxO2dpdmU7cmVmdXJsX3d3d195YWhvb19jb20iIHJlZnVybD0icmVmdXJsX3d3d195YWhvb19jb20iIHRvcGljcz0icmVmdXJsX3d3d195YWhvb19jb20i%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3d45C28E44&U=139lnqng7%2fN%3dphEXEESOxIU-%2fC%3d354796.7727028.8582668.1442997%2fD%3dLREC%2fB%3d3245498
The voice on the tape said heightened security measures in the United States are not the reason there have been no attacks there since the Sept. 11, 2001, suicide hijackings.
Instead, the reason is "because there are operations that need preparations, and you will see them," he said.
"Based on what I have said, it is better not to fight the Muslims on their land," he said. "We do not mind offering you a truce that is fair and long-term. ... So we can build Iraq and Afghanistan ... there is no shame in this solution because it prevents wasting of billions of dollars ... to merchants of war."


More at- http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060119/ap_on_re_mi_ea/al_qaida_bin_laden

[East Scout]

The US wont make deals with terrorists...He knows that so when he strikes he can say he tried to be fair.

[ed316]

OK, and the death of many top AQ leaders didn't play into it either. The only time you want a truce is when you get your ass handed to you day in day out. Wow, no death to America?

[East Scout]

OK, and the death of many top AQ leaders didn't play into it either. The only time you want a truce is when you get your ass handed to you day in day out. Wow, no death to America?

Good point ed........Hard to tell though.

[ed316]

Good point ed........Hard to tell though.

This is more of a PR stunt for AQ then a truce peoposal. With the indiscrimanate killing of civilians on AQ's part, they must feel some heat from the other muslims on it not including Wazirastan

[Hooahman]

The US wont make deals with terrorists...He knows that so when he strikes he can say he tried to be fair.
I agree with Brand here. This gives him a chance to use this an excuse for anything he does now. He attacks some random place and kills 20 civilians, but he tried to make the truce!

[East Scout]

If he is losing the battle he would want to put his last grand plan that he use to talk about into action..To save face in the minds of what muslims still support him he will talk truce so when the US says stuff it he will say that at least he tried........ Its hard to tell what he had as far a B plan for after 911. This could have been in the works long ago nd might be totaly independent from normal AQ operations...Im sure he planned on his ranks being widdled down at some point.

[akd]

More at- http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060119/ap_on_re_mi_ea/al_qaida_bin_laden

What the heck is that about? Al Queda in Iraq's operations have proven seriously counterproductive to Al Queda's broader aims.

[East Scout]

What the heck is that about? Al Queda in Iraq's operations have proven seriously counterproductive to Al Queda's broader aims.

Yeah AQ is killing other Muslims more than they are killing US/ Allied forces and losing support in the country and around the muslim world.

[joshfox0]

Its a really clever move on his part now he'll play the card of "oh we offered them a truce and now they reject it and kill more muslim women and children see we can't deal with these people peacefully." Thus recruiting more people and carrying out more attacks. Its a classic terrorist ploy :-(

Lets hope US troops capture Osama alive and can put him on public trial in the US. And lets also hope the talk of more attacks is just propaganda bull****

[East Scout]

I dunno its so hard to tell...Ist not like he can say OK, Im done, i lost Im gonna go home and relax infront ofthe Tv...He has nothing to lose...If he is losing than he really has nothing to lose and that makes him more dangerous than ever.

[Bia]

This is more of a PR stunt for AQ then a truce peoposal. With the indiscrimanate killing of civilians on AQ's part, they must feel some heat from the other muslims on it not including Wazirastan
I tend to agree with that comment too.

[signatory]

offering a truce to save money


I wonder how well that will go down among the young radicals

[socom6]

Well he's up to something, dont know what it is but it aint anything good thats for sure.

And yes suppose if the US and allies makes a big dent in his operations by capturing or killing some of his henchmen or at worst make some kind of mistake and kills scores of innocent civillians in Afghanistan/Pakistan or in Iraq he going to assume the high ground and say the West are animals and they cant be dealt with so the jihad continues so we would be back to square one.

He's looking for some kind of adavantage here possibly out of pressure from Al Zawahiri to do or say something. I think Al Zawahiri has been feeling it badly, his younger wives and children wiped out during the Afghan invasion and his closest Egyptian cohorts in Al Qaida blown to bits in the airstrike recently... must be running scared.:-*$

[ed316]

http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/printer_friendly/news_logo.gif
Arab media shun al-Qaeda message
By Sebastian Usher
BBC World Media correspondent


A new audio tape purportedly from Osama Bin Laden has been broadcast as an exclusive on al-Jazeera, the Arab TV station that first made its name by showing al-Qaeda messages before and after 9/11.
It is the first new tape said to carry the voice of the al-Qaeda leader for just over a year.
During that time, two other figures have taken Osama Bin Laden's place as the leading voices of radical Islamic militancy.
They are Al Qaeda's number two, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and the Islamic militant leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
Both have released new communications this month and both have received short shrift in much of the Arab media, giving a sense that they may be losing ground in their propaganda struggle.
Their communications were also both broadcast on al-Jazeera, which remains the most watched Arab news station. Al-Jazeera broadcast Zawahiri's latest video as an exclusive on 6 January.

Videotape
It ran several excerpts, though not the full video, and hosted a discussion programme on its importance.
The station also picked up the audiotape purportedly by Zarqawi from the radical Islamist website where it had been posted and broadcast excerpts on 9 January.
In the following days, a number of newspapers and commentators across the Arab world attacked and even ridiculed the two statements.
Their reaction shows that these two leading voices of violent, radical Islam may be finding it increasingly hard to get their messages across in the media battle they are waging for the hearts and minds of the Arab and Muslim public.


Zawahiri is using his stone-age language to brag about a battle, the price of which the sons of Iraq are paying
Journalist Munir al-Khatib

Several papers also highlighted what they see as a growing clash in the media between the radical Islamic voices espousing violence to achieve their aims and the more traditional Islamist organisations now using more peaceful, political means to reach their goals.

Although al-Jazeera led with the latest messages from Zawahiri and Zarqawi - just as they have done with the tape purportedly from Osama Bin Laden - a number of other Arab broadcasters did not broadcast the material at all.
TV stations in Iraq ignored them almost completely. The criticism directed by Zarqawi at Iraqi Sunnis who participated in the recent elections drew strong criticism from Sunni politicians.
Leaders of the main Sunni party, the Iraqi Islamic Party, issued denunciations of Zarqawi's call for Iraqi Sunnis to side with the insurgency and not the political process in the international Arab media, such as the Dubai-based TV station, al-Arabiya, and the influential pan-Arab newspaper, al-Hayat.
There was similar reaction from the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, which was attacked by Zawahiri in his latest video for taking part in Egypt's recent parliamentary elections.
The organisation's deputy leader, Muhammad Habib, warned on the Muslim Brotherhood website that Zawahiri's violent tactics would "open the doors to evil and create total chaos".

Denunciation

Zawahiri's statement was criticised in a number of other Arab media outlets, while Zarqawi's statement was mostly ignored.
One columnist, Nahid Hattar, in the Jordanian paper, al-Arab al-Yawm, portrayed the al-Qaeda number two as a parasite.
"American imperialism in Iraq is certainly on the verge of defeat," the columnist said.



"But the credit for that goes to the sacrifice of the Iraqi people... It will never go to al-Qaeda under the leadership of Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, who appeared in his televised message to be thirsty, like a leech, for the blood of Iraqis, as well as haughty, stupid and lacking any connection to reality, just like George Bush junior."
The same criticism was levelled at Zawahiri by another columnist, Munir al-Khatib, in a Lebanese paper, Sada al-Balad.
"From inside a cave belonging to some unknown age, al-Zawahiri is using his stone-age language to brag about a battle, the price of which the sons of Iraq are paying," he said.
"It as if Saddam's evil deeds were not enough. The problem is that no-one is willing to argue with al-Qaeda's number two".
In Egypt, a commentary in al-Akhbar said that the "continued threats" by "al-Zawahiri and the other leaders of terrorism is in the end providing an acceptable justification" for the Americans to "occupy Iraq, Afghanistan and other places".
Propaganda war

Little if any of this criticism is directed at what's widely seen in the Arab and Muslim world as a legitimate resistance movement in Iraq, but is instead aimed at al-Qaeda for trying to take credit for it.
Zawahiri has made no secret of the fact that al-Qaeda and the violent, radical groups inspired by it need to receive popular support in the Arab and Muslim world.
The growing distinction drawn in sections of the Arab media between what is seen as acceptable - some of the insurgency in Iraq, political moves by Islamist groups - and the unacceptable - Islamic militants' targeting of civilians - has been underlined by the coverage given to his latest statement and that of Zarqawi.
Al-Qaeda's propaganda war for the hearts and minds of the Arab masses is clearly facing increasing obstacles - from outright denunciation in the Arab media to studied indifference. In the coming days, it will be interesting to see just how much weight and seriousness is given to the latest ****ouncements allegedly made by Osama Bin Laden.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/4628028.stm

Published: 2006/01/19 17:00:52 GMT

[signatory]

And yes suppose if the US and allies makes a big dent in his operations by capturing or killing some of his henchmen or at worst make some kind of mistake and kills scores of innocent civillians in Afghanistan/Pakistan or in Iraq he going to assume the high ground and say the West are animals and they cant be dealt with so the jihad continues so we would be back to square one.




His last truce offer was for europe but when EU nations told him to p/ss off he _extended_ the truce offer lol... and warned among things italy would be swimming in blood... if anything happened that was orchestrated (though unlikely) by Al-Qaeda it was the London bombings a full year later.

So who looked like animals?


(2004 truce story http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3627775.stm
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapcf/04/15/binladen.tape/ )

[Ea$y-8]

The United States of America does not make deals with terrorists... We blow them away.

[signatory]

The United States of America does not make deals with terrorists... We blow them away.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/18/archive/north.jpg
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/18/archive/

[Laworkerbee]

So then the bitch is alive then?

I remember a thread a few days back where all swore he must be dead by now.

[Limeyfellow]

The US wont make deals with terrorists...He knows that so when he strikes he can say he tried to be fair.

Since when? Sure its bad when it comes out public but even know we are protecting and made deals with Iranian terrorists in Iraq who have killed US citizens before, anti Castro cuban terrorists, we made deals and helped Afghani terrorists for years before 9/11 and then there is Irangate amongst other big scandels. The US doesn't make public deals with terrorists often but every country uses them for their advantages.

[usa320]

I think we should accept his "truce"...he expects the "we dont negotiate line"...so i think publicly telling him "sure, we will have a truce" would really be unpredictable on our part and i think we should take every opportunity we can to throw him off.

Im not saying we should actually honor a truce with him, im just saying we should tell him we will, all the while still hunting his ass down.

Then again PR wise it probably wouldnt set the best precedent.

Then again, it does seem like a PR move largely to get the US into a public opinion **** storm... so sticking with "we dont negotiate" probably is the safest bet.

[East Scout]

Since when? Sure its bad when it comes out public but even know we are protecting and made deals with Iranian terrorists in Iraq who have killed US citizens before, anti Castro cuban terrorists, we made deals and helped Afghani terrorists for years before 9/11 and then there is Irangate amongst other big scandels. The US doesn't make public deals with terrorists often but every country uses them for their advantages.

Good point........you win this one.

[Michael RVR]

Oi, wasn't the truce only supposed to be for Iraq ?

[East Scout]

The VP just said on FOX- NO DEAL....Just what UBL wanted to hear.

[Major Maxillary]

He's a bitter old man, let him rot.

[socom6]

Since when? Sure its bad when it comes out public but even know we are protecting and made deals with Iranian terrorists in Iraq who have killed US citizens before, anti Castro cuban terrorists, we made deals and helped Afghani terrorists for years before 9/11 and then there is Irangate amongst other big scandels. The US doesn't make public deals with terrorists often but every country uses them for their advantages.

They wont make any deals with this one Limey fellow. And since when the Afghan Muhajedhin who fought your friends the Soviets became terrorists?

[East Scout]

@ SOCOM6..Love that avatar.

[SeanAshi]

http://www.spaceg.com/multimedia/Iraq/Bin%20Laden%20toilet%20paper.jpg
That's what we think of bin Laden's truce.

[ed316]

Since when? Sure its bad when it comes out public but even know we are protecting and made deals with Iranian terrorists in Iraq who have killed US citizens before, anti Castro cuban terrorists, we made deals and helped Afghani terrorists for years before 9/11 and then there is Irangate amongst other big scandels. The US doesn't make public deals with terrorists often but every country uses them for their advantages.

Much anger I sense in this, it's always easy to point out the bad

[East Scout]

I thought so to ed but i saw no point in dragging that one outta the trash

[S70A_9]

Does it seem odd to everyone that there have been no video messages for sometime now? Was it late 2004 early 2005 if that?

Could be that moving information around the Pakistan / Afghanistan area is now more difficult for him than anticipated - the massive coalition presence and all. *sarcasm on* Geez, what a shame. *sarcasm off*

[ed316]

I thought so to ed but i saw no point in dragging that one outta the trash


I think OBL is doing this to scare the American public. "We will attack you, but do you want a truce?". We should keep gunning for these turds as long as their out there

[East Scout]

Does it seem odd to everyone that there have been no video messages for sometime now? Was it late 2004 early 2005 if that?

Could be that moving information around the Pakistan / Afghanistan area is now more difficult for him than anticipated - the massive coalition presence and all. *sarcasm on* Geez, what a shame. *sarcasm off*


Or his battery in the Cam-Corder died.......Lost to guess at...I hate uncertainty

[East Scout]

I think OBL is doing this to scare the American public. "We will attack you, but do you want a truce?". We should keep gunning for these turds as long as their out there


I hope that your are correct ed.......

[ed316]

I hope that your are correct ed.......

JMO, If you are a AQ why the telegraphing?..like I said JMO

[East Scout]

I just find it hard to belive he started this war w/o an end game plan..He has said in the past that he has one and that it may be a WMD plan........If i were him id would have planned this before the 911 attacks do get the last word in..Its not his style to talk peace.....If he wanted peace i dont think he would air it on AJs for the world to see........Plus it was made before the attacks this week..Like i said ..Who knows, but i hope you are correct!

[2Sheds_Jackson]

AQ is nothing if not crafty - this is a very smart political move that they can get a lot of mileage out of. It's designed to be broad enough to appeal to the anti-war audience, but too narrow to be taken seriously. But above all it signifies weakness. So much for ridding the holy land of the infidel - they'll settle for a McDonald's every few blocks as long as they promise not to serve any pork.

We need to craft an equally ingenious reply that makes us look reasonable, but demands real concessions - such as surrendering wanted international criminals, arms etc. as a show of good faith.

[East Scout]

Guess Im the odd man out on this one..:-)

[East Scout]

Whered the reps go?

[Michael RVR]

No Deal huh? Personally I don't think its a smart call to make. The war in Iraq allows people who are sympathetic to the Al-Qaeda to go to Iraq and make war on americans. With a truce, in theory, the Coalition would be able to rebuild the country and with popular support and stop soldiers from dying.

Resources would be better spent on keeping the terrorists from entering the US, and foiling their prospective attacks. Personally, i think the US has more capabillity of dealing with attacks at home than it is with dealing with an insurgency.

All that said though, messages like this do signal that Al-Qaeda has seen the futility of its recent operations. They're hurting the wrong people and so are losing the same popular support which has enabled them to continue operations.

Regardless, i think just saying 'NO' to the proposal of a truce fails to look at the situation as a whole.

[ed316]

No Deal huh? Personally I don't think its a smart call to make. The war in Iraq allows people who are sympathetic to the Al-Qaeda to go to Iraq and make war on americans. With a truce, in theory, the Coalition would be able to rebuild the country and with popular support and stop soldiers from dying.

Resources would be better spent on keeping the terrorists from entering the US, and foiling their prospective attacks. Personally, i think the US has more capabillity of dealing with attacks at home than it is with dealing with an insurgency.

All that said though, messages like this do signal that Al-Qaeda has seen the futility of its recent operations. They're hurting the wrong people and so are losing the same popular support which has enabled them to continue operations.

Regardless, i think just saying 'NO' to the proposal of a truce fails to look at the situation as a whole.

A truce means OBL is still alive and can live. The big picture is to kill or capture him

[usa320]

No Deal huh? Personally I don't think its a smart call to make. The war in Iraq allows people who are sympathetic to the Al-Qaeda to go to Iraq and make war on americans. With a truce, in theory, the Coalition would be able to rebuild the country and with popular support and stop soldiers from dying.

Resources would be better spent on keeping the terrorists from entering the US, and foiling their prospective attacks. Personally, i think the US has more capabillity of dealing with attacks at home than it is with dealing with an insurgency.

All that said though, messages like this do signal that Al-Qaeda has seen the futility of its recent operations. They're hurting the wrong people and so are losing the same popular support which has enabled them to continue operations.

Regardless, i think just saying 'NO' to the proposal of a truce fails to look at the situation as a whole.

true, but this is only assuming he means to stick to his promises, which i wouldnt bet a dime he is. if we agreed on a truce and pulled out of Iraq, he would go on Al Jazeera the next day and tout it as a victory. It would make us look weak.

[Michael RVR]

I'm not saying to pull out of Iraq. What a truce would give is to make it less hazardous to those working there and make it easier to build up the Iraqi forces, while at the same time rebuilding Iraq's infrastructure.

He can then tout that hey, its a truce, but i think by then the Iraqi's couldn't care less what he does and we win in the end p-)

[signatory]

I wonder what was in the other 10 minutes of the tape that Al-Jazera didnt' feel like putting on air.

[SeanAshi]

I wonder what was in the other 10 minutes of the tape that Al-Jazera didnt' feel like putting on air.
same ol' quotes from the quran blaa blaa blaa..

[signatory]

same ol' quotes from the quran blaa blaa blaa..

maybe he said "Oh and don't believe anything al-jazera says! they are total wankers...!"


Bah they should put it up on their site.

[jmatucd]

... but most likely a truce would entail leaving iraq and afghanistan.. so much for reconstruction - it would be open season on Iraqis and Afghans who won't support a Taliban-style state.


As for Iran Contra, I remember that we armed two different groups. We gave weapons to Iran (who was fighting a brutal war with Iraq...) and we then supplied the Contras. Remember what Syria did in Lebanon? They would always back the weaker side and watch them kill each other off. After wards, the road was clear for the decades long Syrian rule over Lebanon which recently ended.

Do you think Iran was strengthened or weakened during the Iran-Iraq war while maintaining the Cold War status quo? Both Iran and Iraq fought longer, harder, and to a more disastrous end. We battered an enemy and a strongman in one stroke - without endangering our armed forces.

Considering our 'negotiations with terrorists' resulted in prolonging Iran-Iraq, I would consider it a success if we could duplicate this with AQ. Not likely to happen, though.

[Hemaworstje]

if you have a complete idiot ( see 9/11) warns you he will hit you again in the face, you can say he we don't negotiate with him , then be prepared ,
this is like a hostage situation , you do know in which building he is but not traceable, and has a remote to blast the building, then you have two options , send in a team to trace and kill , or negociate/stall things.
If you negotiate in the open it would be considdered accpeting he is/has power, that will never happen, but politics are a dark area , and will not appear in here , history tells us that negotiations do happen in the dark zône.

[Cygnus]

To buy more time and publicity...

[ElHombre]

there was a discussion of the 'truce' offer i heard this morning. apparently, it's based on religious grounds. one is supposed to make an truce offer before attacking. the offer in this case would mean that AQ is ready to make another attack on the US and with the US refusal the operation will now begin.

[Laworkerbee]

there was a discussion of the 'truce' offer i heard this morning. apparently, it's based on religious grounds. one is supposed to make an truce offer before attacking. the offer in this case would mean that AQ is ready to make another attack on the US and with the US refusal the operation will now begin.

That sounds more Cultural than something based out of the Quron, but thats a damned good way of looking at it.

[RBIH_Troop]

... but most likely a truce would entail leaving iraq and afghanistan.. so much for reconstruction - it would be open season on Iraqis and Afghans who won't support a Taliban-style state.

Well Afghan Insurgents fight for a taliban state, but Iraqi Insurgent's fight for the Loss of America. There arent enough Taliban in Iraq to someday form a Taliban state. And a large number of Insurgent's just want the US out and to take over the government and form a Islamic-known state.....which is not Taliban style. Like one US general who was against the war in Iraq said on CNN which is "Those resistance fighter's arent against Democracy but against occupation". I wish I could find out his name

[LazerLordz]

It's true what some of you have said.The truce offer is an obligation, in the viewpoint of OBL, to garner legitimacy before another round of attacks.