That's what the U.S. Military says. I think you should check a better source.
This discussion isn't appropriate for this forum; feel free to email me if you want to discuss this further.
back
1 comments
I'm referring to the findings of the US Senate, widely reported in the media. I don't know what their sources were, but I think there is little doubt that beheadings and bombings of civilians in Baghdad started after the invasion.
You can be sure that the US Senate got their information from US Military and intelligence sources. I'm asking the source for a good reason: what's the more likely scenario?
A) The US invades Iraq and suddenly tens of thousands fly there (not the US) to do their bombings and beheadings.
or
B) The US ends a dictatorship that kept the 65% Shiia majority down and there's civil war, which includes bombings and beheadings, and the US Military declares it to be Al-Queda to give soldiers the idea that they're "fighting evil" rather than just killing the people that live there.
I think it's very likely that both A and B have some truth to them. I have heard many comments from Iraqis confirming that there are indeed a lot of foreigners present. You wouldn't need tens of thousands of them in order to be effective. They don't have to do all the bombings themselves.
What we don't know, and probably never will, is what share of attrocities has been committed by which group. I do share your skepticism about information coming out of partisan sources.