Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
More Details About Intel Failure And "Curveball"  
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1841 times:

Just another brick in the wall, against an administration and a CIA that simply wanted to believe the worst, so they could have their war in Iraq. And, again, it shows just how much the administration and CIA put into this now-discredited sourcs with the codename "Curveball".

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/25/iraq.wmd.reut/index.html

I know some who still were for the war from the beginning will say "old news, this isn't important", but it's vitally important. It shows once again, the tunnel-vision, and the incompetence of George Tennant, and the one-track thinkinig of the administration, that simply wanted this war at any price.

It adds up, again, to a war, that we have to continue, that should never have started in the first place.

I wait (not long, I'm sure), for the recriminations from the right on this forum.

26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineIFEMaster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1837 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Thread starter):
It adds up, again, to a war, that we have to continue, that should never have started in the first place

Which are you referring to; Iraq or Afghanistan?


User currently offlineRichardPrice From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1834 times:

Ok, someone check the state of Hell, Im actually agreeing with Falcon84 on this!

User currently offlineAloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8702 posts, RR: 43
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1828 times:

"You're an un-American terrorist-hugging surrender monkey!"

There, should be good enough as a starting point.  Wink



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1822 times:

Quoting IFEMaster (Reply 1):
Which are you referring to; Iraq or Afghanistan?

Iraq. This was the WMD intel on Iraq. The decision to invade Afghanistan was a no-brainer, which I support to this day.


User currently offlineIFEMaster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1815 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 4):
Iraq. This was the WMD intel on Iraq. The decision to invade Afghanistan was a no-brainer, which I support to this day.

OK, thanks for clarifying.

As a supporter of the war, I must say...this is a compelling report...

That's all I'll say.


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21442 posts, RR: 54
Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1791 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 4):
Iraq. This was the WMD intel on Iraq. The decision to invade Afghanistan was a no-brainer, which I support to this day.

So does almost anybody else. German and other troops have been part of the Afghanistan campaign and they are there to this day, with full support of our population.

Iraq, on the other hand, is exactly the opposite.


User currently offlineBHMBAGLOCK From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2698 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1765 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Thread starter):
I know some who still were for the war from the beginning will say "old news, this isn't important", but it's vitally important. It shows once again, the tunnel-vision, and the incompetence of George Tennant, and the one-track thinkinig of the administration, that simply wanted this war at any price.

You do neglect to mention that Tenet, the apparent force behind "one-track thinkinig of the administration" was a Clinton appointee.



Where are all of my respected members going?
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1765 times:

Quoting BHMBAGLOCK (Reply 7):
You do neglect to mention that Tenet, the apparent force behind "one-track thinkinig of the administration" was a Clinton appointee.

True. That's beyond debate, but Bush kept him, he bought this story from a very dubious source, helped get us into a war we shouldn't have been in, and got a medal for it, which just makes me want to hurl.


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21558 posts, RR: 55
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1748 times:

Quoting BHMBAGLOCK (Reply 7):
You do neglect to mention that Tenet, the apparent force behind "one-track thinkinig of the administration" was a Clinton appointee.

That may have been a mistake of Clinton's, but it doesn't excuse the mistakes that were made in connnection with Iraq.

Interesting that Bush doesn't really play into this - except if he, or other high level members of the administration told Tenet that they wanted justification for a war against Iraq.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineUsnseallt82 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 4891 posts, RR: 52
Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1743 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Thread starter):
More Details About Intel Failure And "Curveball"

I caught this earlier today as well. There is no doubt that certain agencies made mistakes before going to war, but you have to be careful when ex-agency officers come out and start talking. It doesn't take much around the Beltline to get a story going and if you have the credentials of once working in McLean, your story is sure to sell.

That being said, the misgivings of one officer does not constitute an agency-wide consensus that we shouldn't have gone to war. It simply isn't the case.



Crye me a river
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1743 times:

Quoting Usnseallt82 (Reply 10):
That being said, the misgivings of one officer does not constitute an agency-wide consensus that we shouldn't have gone to war. It simply isn't the case.

Maybe, but when does enough of these misgivings of enough people add up, my friend? It's becoming quite obvious the failure was from the intel, all the way to the president. Or maybe it wasn't a "failure" at all, but simply those in power believing what they wanted?


User currently offlineUsnseallt82 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 4891 posts, RR: 52
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1737 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 11):
It's becoming quite obvious the failure was from the intel, all the way to the president.

Like I said, mistakes were made. But that doesn't mean that the reasons for war weren't there. I won't speculate as to what reasons are out there but chances are most of them are of such a operational necessity that their sources cannot be leaked.

The public wants proof....sometimes you just can't have it. Not right now.



Crye me a river
User currently offlineRolfen From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 1807 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1727 times:

Didnt this come out before the Bush reelection?
It seems the people dont care... Saddam is an ugly looser so everyone (including me) likes to see him whipped. But the logical side of my brain says that he should have been left alone, for the sake of all these people who are experiencing civil war now.
Psychology of the masses is intriguing.

[Edited 2006-06-26 03:30:01]


rolf
User currently offlineUsnseallt82 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 4891 posts, RR: 52
Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1717 times:

Quoting Rolfen (Reply 13):
It seems the people dont care... Saddam is an ugly looser so everyone (including me) likes to see him whipped. But the logical side of my brain says that he should have been left alone, for the sake of all these people who are experiencing civil war now.

Very well put. Simple, yet so very accurate.  checkmark 

Quoting Rolfen (Reply 13):
Psychology of the masses is intriguing.

Isn't it though? This is something that never ceases to amaze me.



Crye me a river
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1717 times:

Quoting Usnseallt82 (Reply 12):
Like I said, mistakes were made. But that doesn't mean that the reasons for war weren't there.

Well, when THE MISTAKE about THE REASON the war was started, is so far off, there's a big problem, or, as I and many suspect, the reason didn't really matter.

And there was no reason for this war. None. That's my view.


User currently offlineRolfen From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 1807 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1709 times:

Quoting Usnseallt82 (Reply 14):
Very well put. Simple, yet so very accurate.

Thanks  angel 



rolf
User currently offlineUsnseallt82 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 4891 posts, RR: 52
Reply 17, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1709 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 15):
And there was no reason for this war. None. That's my view.

Exactly. It is your view and I am very thankful to be in a country that allows us all to have our own views. Regardless of what people think, this man infringed on those rights for others and someone needed to take him out. Whether or not we'll be able to prove it to the world, who knows. But the people in Iraq seem to have a different opinion. (hint: the vast majority are extremely pleased to have him gone)

In the meantime, I still enjoy these late night debates with you. Especially when I'm so blatantly right and you are so horribly wrong. Big grin



Crye me a river
User currently offlineSantosdumont From Brazil, joined Dec 2003, 1201 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1677 times:

Quoting Usnseallt82 (Reply 10):
There is no doubt that certain agencies made mistakes before going to war

More than that, and certainly more disturbing is the fact that certain agencies were created in order to produce intelligence favorable to the idea of going to war against Iraq.

Consider the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans (OSP), which was put together by Pentagon Number 3 guy Douglas Feith and staffed by close associates of Vice-President Dick Cheney. Interestingly, General Tommy Franks -- who led the US war effort in Afghanistan -- described Feith as "the fucking stupidest guy on the face of the earth."

The OSP effectively massaged CIA intelligence in order to manufacture the idea that Sadam's WMD posed a clear threat to the United States.

It was Feith who came up with the idea to peg the WMD issue as the main "talking point" in favor of the war.

Quoting Usnseallt82 (Reply 17):
Regardless of what people think, this man infringed on those rights for others and someone needed to take him out.

How many despotic dictators around the world fit this description? Why exactly did someone need to take out Sadam but leave, say, the rulers of Saudi Arabia (who fit the above description quite nicely as well) in place?

Why could that effort not have gone to take out somebody who not only really needs to go, but whose departure would translate into a gold mine of political support for GWB? (Fidel Castro comes to mind)

Could it be that Sadam's government was sitting on something that the US wanted?

Hell, why couldn't the United States have either put Sadam on the back burner or arrange for some type of unfortunate "accident" to befall him so that he wouldn't distract from efforts to eradicate Al-Qa'ida at their source?



"Pursuit Of Truth No Matter Where It Lies" -- Metallica
User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1672 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 8):
Quoting BHMBAGLOCK (Reply 7):
You do neglect to mention that Tenet, the apparent force behind "one-track thinkinig of the administration" was a Clinton appointee.

True. That's beyond debate,

Germane however. Indicates to me that the problems with Intel pre-dated Bush. No one seemed to think anything amiss with the Intel then? Of course, it was largely ignored by the previous residents of 1600 Pa Ave.

Quoting Rolfen (Reply 13):
But the logical side of my brain says that he should have been left alone, for the sake of all these people who are experiencing civil war now.

Good point. However: Allowing him (Saddam) and his    sons to continue their national rampage? How many mass graves have been uncovered? How many people have been reported to have simply "disappeared" while Saddam and his cronies were in power? Seems to me the Iraqi public was damned to a degree either way.

Quoting Santosdumont (Reply 18):
General Tommy Franks

Sometimes I wonder about Gen Franks . . . he was the Commander there, yet he never hesitates to discredit the heirarchy in the Pentagon and in the White House. If he didn't believe in the reasons for this war, why did he accept and continue command? Integrity issues? He doesn't sit right with me.

Quoting Santosdumont (Reply 18):
Could it be that Sadam's government was sitting on something that the US wanted?

What?

And don't say oil, cause that'd be    right off.

Quoting Santosdumont (Reply 18):
Hell, why couldn't the United States have either put Sadam on the back burner or arrange for some type of unfortunate "accident" to befall him so that he wouldn't distract from efforts to eradicate Al-Qa'ida at their source?

And leave his murderous sons in power? Hmmm, why do that?
Edit: typos

[Edited 2006-06-26 14:19:15]

User currently offlineUsnseallt82 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 4891 posts, RR: 52
Reply 20, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1656 times:

Quoting Santosdumont (Reply 18):
Consider the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans (OSP)

Please, by all means, enlighten me on how much power you think the OSP actually has.

(hint: we didn't go to war because of the OSP by itself)

Quoting Santosdumont (Reply 18):
How many despotic dictators around the world fit this description?

Several. Which is why I have a job. As soon as we can get the diplomatic bullshit out of the way, I'll be happy to take care of them as well.

Quoting Santosdumont (Reply 18):
Why exactly did someone need to take out Sadam but leave, say, the rulers of Saudi Arabia (who fit the above description quite nicely as well) in place?

Saudi Arabia has its own share of civil rights issues, but I don't recall the Alibaba's gassing their own people in the last decade.

Quoting Santosdumont (Reply 18):
Why could that effort not have gone to take out somebody who not only really needs to go, but whose departure would translate into a gold mine of political support for GWB?

Now, this is something I think is outside of any particular President for this nation. Castro should have been taken care of a long time ago, which isn't a mistake of this Administration. We tried and failed. So why waste the time and effort to start another shitstorm when the guy isn't going to be around for much longer anyway.

Leaving Cuba alone right now is a wise decision.

Quoting Santosdumont (Reply 18):
Could it be that Sadam's government was sitting on something that the US wanted?

Whenever you want to enlighten us once more with your infinite wisdom, then by all means go ahead. If you want to take the pussy route and say oil, then please have something to back that up with.

Quoting Santosdumont (Reply 18):
Hell, why couldn't the United States have either put Sadam on the back burner or arrange for some type of unfortunate "accident" to befall him so that he wouldn't distract from efforts to eradicate Al-Qa'ida at their source?

Do you even realize how difficult it is to arrange anything close to what you're talking about? Intelligence in that country came to a damn-near standstill after the first Gulf War. Doing something like this was nearly impossible.



Crye me a river
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 1646 times:

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 19):
If he didn't believe in the reasons for this war, why did he accept and continue command? Integrity issues? He doesn't sit right with me.

Agreed. There's something wrong about towing the line, till you're butt's not on the line anymore. That's always bothered me about the guy.


User currently offlineMrmeangenes From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 566 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1638 times:

Assuming the ex-CIA guy is telling the truth,a thinking person would have to wonder who in the CIA re-inserted the X'd out paragraph, and what that person's motivation was.

I assume everybody here is sophisticated enough to know you don't send a rough draft - replete with x-outs and marginal warnings-over to the White House. You send a neatly-typed, professional-looking document,which will be interpreted as your honest conclusion.

On the other hand, if you are part of a small cabal in the CIA,which is desirous of tearing down a sitting President, and replacing him with someone you favor more,you hang on to the heavily edited draft,so it can be publicized right before the 2004 elections (as it was); and, when questioned about the accuracy of CIA assessments,you look shocked, and say: " But we warned them, this guy was unreliable !"

Personally, I think there were quite a few things of this sort that went on, but were kept quiet "for the good of the country".



gene
User currently offlineSantosdumont From Brazil, joined Dec 2003, 1201 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1619 times:

Quoting Usnseallt82 (Reply 20):
Please, by all means, enlighten me on how much power you think the OSP actually has.

(hint: we didn't go to war because of the OSP by itself)

I'd be happy to, 82. First off, no one said that the US went to war because of the OSP alone. But this outfit (whose members self-deprecatingly referred to themselves as "the cabal") was established as a mechanism to facilitate the proper climate for the US to embark on a war which the president arguably had in mind much before September 11th.

Can I prove it? My security clearance doesn't go that high. But I would recommend Ron Suskind's new book "The One Percent Solution," which does provide an intriguing picture into the inner workings of the GWB administration as regards the "War on Terror."

Quoting Usnseallt82 (Reply 20):
Saudi Arabia has its own share of civil rights issues, but I don't recall the Alibaba's gassing their own people in the last decade.

So you honestly think that the one episode where Sadam gassed his own people helped tip the scales in Washington?

Remember, this is a guy with whom Donald Rumsfeld shook hands and who was responsible for the destruction of the USS Stark and the deaths of 37 Navy personnel in 1987.

Considering the verbal beating (not entirely unjustified) Clinton takes for not taking a more aggressive stand toward UBL, it's only fair to recall that Ronald Reagan took Sadam's "apology" at face value.

Quoting Usnseallt82 (Reply 20):
Whenever you want to enlighten us once more with your infinite wisdom, then by all means go ahead

I suspect I've struck a nerve....

Quoting Usnseallt82 (Reply 20):
If you want to take the pussy route and say oil, then please have something to back that up with.

Yeah, looks like it. I was going to haul out that old chestnut about "you are what you eat," but I figured "nah...we're all adults," right?

If oil were not a component in the reason for going to war (only a simpleton would suggest that it was the sole reason), then why did former Defense Department official and neocon darling Paul Wolfowitz say the following during a June 2003 Asian security summit in Singapore: "Let's look at it simply. The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically, we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil." ?



"Pursuit Of Truth No Matter Where It Lies" -- Metallica
User currently offlineUsnseallt82 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 4891 posts, RR: 52
Reply 24, posted (8 years 1 month 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1606 times:

Quoting Santosdumont (Reply 23):
Can I prove it? My security clearance doesn't go that high.

Understandable, but is something that I think most people forget when they go on their rampages of how this Administration pissed away all logic in order to go to war. The fact stands that most people simply don't know, so they lean towards placing all the blame on Bush.

I disagree.

Quoting Santosdumont (Reply 23):
So you honestly think that the one episode where Sadam gassed his own people helped tip the scales in Washington?

Do you honestly think that it didn't?

Quoting Santosdumont (Reply 23):
I suspect I've struck a nerve....

Ha...I wish I still had nerves left to strike. Unfortunately, most were either worn down from a few battles or from the overwhelmingly difficult task of being married.

Quoting Santosdumont (Reply 23):
Yeah, looks like it.

Your perogative. However, I am willing to bet that if your security clearance was a little high, as you mentioned before, you may not think that the black goo was our only concern.



Crye me a river
25 Post contains images Santosdumont : Fair enough. Which is why clear reporting (whether in books or, increasingly, on the net -- I've pretty much given up hope on the corporate media) is
26 Post contains images Usnseallt82 : I agree completely and have said this same thing myself. I don't believe that every piece of information should be publicized, but that which is allo
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Think About This Before You "dial And Drive" posted Tue Feb 5 2002 06:26:14 by CPDC10-30
Mary McCarthy And "Plastic Morality" posted Mon Apr 24 2006 18:14:10 by Mrmeangenes
Golden Globes And "Easy Button" posted Tue Jan 17 2006 02:28:09 by Iflyatldl
National Geographic Channel And "Mafia" posted Tue Jun 14 2005 14:50:42 by TriStarEnvy
Correct Usage Of "was" And "were" posted Wed Feb 9 2005 16:35:16 by UTA_flyinghigh
TSA And "Security" posted Mon Nov 29 2004 13:39:13 by Broke
Difference Between "Latino" And "Hispanic"? posted Wed Sep 8 2004 02:06:55 by ConcordeBoy
Use Of The Words "Lose" And "Loose" posted Wed Mar 17 2004 23:35:27 by Canadi>nBoy
Excessive "Test" And "Hi" Emails posted Sun Feb 1 2004 01:58:22 by BR715-A1-30
Seniors And "Robocop" Sunglasses posted Fri Dec 19 2003 17:26:25 by LHMark