flyingbronco05
Posts: 3484
Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 11:43 am

Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 12:34 am

Seems like the truth is coming out. Let's see all you Bush supporters defend this....

"WASHINGTON (AP) -- The key U.S. assertions leading to the 2003 invasion of Iraq -- that Saddam Hussein had chemical and biological weapons and was working to make nuclear weapons -- were wrong and based on false or overstated CIA analyses, a scathing Senate Intelligence Committee report asserted Friday."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/09/senate.intel.ap/index.html
Never Trust Your Fuel Gauge
 
b757300
Posts: 3914
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 10:27 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failure

Sat Jul 10, 2004 12:57 am

What's to defend? The CIA obviously had a problem, not the administation. President Bush acted on the information provided to him. Information that he expected to be accurate and correct. It is not the administation's job to fact check everything that comes out of Langley. Oh, and the exact same information was provided to Congress and was believed by plenty of Democrats as well.

"When I left office, there was a substantial amount of biological and chemical material unaccounted for." -Bill Clinton on Larry King Live July, 2003

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and Senators and including other prominent Democrats, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." -Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." -Sen. Robert "Sheets" Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -Sen. John F'ing. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" -Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." -Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...." -Sen. John F'ing. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -Patty "Osama Mama" Murray, October 9, 2002

"Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

Speaking about the WMD's, "The consensus was the same, from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration, It was the same intelligence belief that our allies and friends around the world shared." -Senator Hillary Clinton, April 20, 2004 on Larry King Live
"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
 
Boeing757/767
Posts: 2179
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 1999 11:05 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 1:26 am

While everyone was duped, it was King George who picked his leadership team. He bears some responsibility.
Free-thinking, left-leaning secularist
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 1:48 am

There is somthing i dont undestand about some people

On one hand they claims that WMD existed and they are hidden in the dessert somewere,or they were moved.. Therefore the war was justified. On the other hand, when reports like these come out (which have been several) they claim that intelligence was wrong and everyone was duped. Usually in the same day

Im sure many people (democrats, french, germans) agreed that Iraq "MAY" have WMD program, i dont think that is an issue. The issue is the "HOW" to make sure that Saddam was complying.

I hope im explaining myself, it is not the "end" but the "means" of accomplishing this task.

As I see it there were two choices:

1. By force
2. By diplomacy

#1 was chosen by Bush. He should be responsible for the course of action not the intelligence. And that is were is mistake (IMHO) was.

[Edited 2004-07-09 18:55:39]
Step into my office, baby
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 1:50 am

Again, B757300, you could name every Democrat alive. They don't have the power. You make yourself look like a bloody idiot every time you try to heap the blame on the Democrats for this, when it was your president, the man you so revere, who made the decision, and then became a revisionist after the weapons weren't found.

Keep doing it though. You bury yourself deeper in irrelevancy here every time you do-excpet with the likes of L-188, James86, Jcs17, and the others who have swallowed this man's propoganda hook, line and sinker.
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15323
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 2:17 am

"Again, B757300, you could name every Democrat alive. They don't have the power"

He's not blaming the Democrats. He's simply showing that just about everyone and their mother (including the French) agreed that there were WMDs, so now this Monday Morning Quarterback act is ludicrous. So is blaming the Bush administration for believing the same intelligence that aaaaaaaaaaaaaaall those Democrats had believed as well at the time yet now are backpeddling like Lance Armstrong in reverse.
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15323
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 2:34 am

"The issue is the "HOW" to make sure that Saddam was complying."

The French specifically stated they had no interest in making sure Iraq complied with UN resolutions, nevermind enforcing any consequences of non-compliance.
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 2:49 am

The French specifically stated they had no interest in making sure Iraq complied with UN resolutions

Id love a source for this.

Correct me if im wrong, the UN asked for 1 month to loo for WMD, if the US told them were to look, but nooo "our sources are too important"...


Wait.. we didnt have a month.. just 45 min.. right?


[Edited 2004-07-09 20:03:15]
Step into my office, baby
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15323
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 3:23 am

"Id love a source for this."

I Michael Moored it a little, but their famous moment came in March 2003 when they said "Whatever happens, France will vote 'no'."

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/iraq_03-10-03.html
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
WellHung
Posts: 3299
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 8:50 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 4:10 am

How long until Cheney says THIS committee is mistaken, too?  Insane
 
iakobos
Posts: 3255
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2003 6:22 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 4:17 am

Thanks for the link MaverickM11,
besides the "banner" did you also read the article ?
To this day it seems Chirac was correctly assessing the situation, the "threat", and the consequences.
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 4:49 am

"I Michael Moored it a little, but their famous moment came in March 2003 when they said "Whatever happens, France will vote 'no'."


Ok Micheal "MaverickM11" Moore, you really should read the articles before you post. It proves my original point. It was the "HOW"!

""Whatever happens, France will vote 'no'.""

This was true for that one particular resolution which gave iraq 7 days. The UN wanted 1 month.
Step into my office, baby
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

MaverickM11

Sat Jul 10, 2004 4:52 am

MaverickM11: I Michael Moored it a little, but their famous moment came in March 2003 when they said "Whatever happens, France will vote 'no'."

From your own source, a few lines down:

Chirac: France will vote 'no' because she considers tonight that there is no reason to wage a war to reach the goal we set ourselves, that is the disarmament of Iraq.

It´s exactly the opposite of what you´ve claimed!
 
keesje
Posts: 8863
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:13 am


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2842493.stm

BTW, is this the same congress ?

To all the flag burners, wine spillers, fries renamers, ban France advocates. Wind back the TV tapes, dig up the old newspapers, watch, read & be embarrassed.

You were blinded by flag waving, forgot to keep your eyes open & picked the wrong site. Learn from it.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:24 am

"Will you have freedom fries with your crow, Senator?"  Wink/being sarcastic
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15323
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:27 am

"MaverickM11: I Michael Moored it a little, but their famous moment came in March 2003 when they said "Whatever happens, France will vote 'no'."

From your own source, a few lines down:

Chirac: France will vote 'no' because she considers tonight that there is no reason to wage a war to reach the goal we set ourselves, that is the disarmament of Iraq. "

How are those opposites? France literally said, "whatever happens, France will vote no". The reason France gave for this was that they wanted a peaceful disarmament of Iraq, as did conceivably everyone else. What is missing is that France was opposed to any forceful intervention whatsoever, even when the likelihood of Saddam complying with UN regs was near zero. Yes, this was one resolution, but it was one resolution following dozens of others (that extra month they wanted was also on top of 150+ previous months). France wanted to "reach the goal we set ourselves" but changed its mind when reaching that goal looked like it may require military intervention. In fact it was foolish at the time to believe that the Iraq conflict would end peacefully. France did not allow for any other option.
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:55 am

Maverick, the U.S. obviously did not allow for any other option. Even with the report that the WMD intel was terribly flawed, and outright false (not a lie by the administration, but that the intel was not true), Bush said that despite that, he'd still have gone to war. He is, in my book, very dishonroable. The reason he went to war was false, but he'd had gone anyway.

So you can scream at France all you want. The Administration wanted it's war, and it's clear that, with this report, it wasn't about making America safer, it was about getting Bush re-elected.
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15323
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 8:22 am

"Maverick, the U.S. obviously did not allow for any other option"

It absolutely did. If Saddam came clean the US administration stated multiple times that it would not go to war. Whether this is the truth or not is a whole different story. Never did the administration say outright "whatever the result, we will go to war."
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 8:32 am

It absolutely did. If Saddam came clean the US administration stated multiple times that it would not go to war.

How can you say that, when Bush himself today said he'd had gone to war if the intel said Saddam didn't have the weapons! Bush said that Saddam was a meneace either way, and he'd have given the order!

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040709_1544.html

So, we would have gone to war anyway. And that's where I take exception with this administration. They would have done ANYTHING to get this war, and that's what makes them dishonorable in my eyes.
 
Schoenorama
Posts: 2305
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 5:15 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 8:39 am

Maverick:

"If Saddam came clean the US administration stated multiple times that it would not go to war."

Saddam did come clean. Remember the 12,000 pages document he provided? The Bush Administration already said it wasn't accurate enough before they even read it. And, not less important, the UNSC, the organisation which imposed the resolutions in the first place, did NOT approve a pre-emptive war against Iraq.

"Never did the administration say outright "whatever the result, we will go to war.""

That's complete bullsh!t, Maverick. They were very keen to go to war, but Powell convinced them to go to the UN first. They though they had clean case convincing the UN, which they hadn't. They weren't able to convince the UN but went to war nevertheless, with a very small "Coalition of the Willing". Did you know that this "Coalition of the Winning" is called so entirely for "Domestic Consumption"?

Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

MaverickM11

Sat Jul 10, 2004 8:45 am

Your claim:

MaverickM11: The French specifically stated they had no interest in making sure Iraq complied with UN resolutions, nevermind enforcing any consequences of non-compliance.

Reality:

Chirac: France will vote 'no' because she considers tonight that there is no reason to wage a war to reach the goal we set ourselves, that is the disarmament of Iraq.

Opposite. Clearly.
 
mt99
Posts: 6166
Joined: Wed May 26, 1999 5:41 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 10:08 am

If Saddam came clean the US administration stated multiple times that it would not go to war

Incredibly.. he did.. If he hadn't, and was lying, US trops would be sitting on piles opon piles of WMD.


Step into my office, baby
 
MaverickM11
Posts: 15323
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 1:59 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 10:12 am

Klaus, you completely changed the wording from your first try to your second, aka you were wrong the first time.

"MaverickM11: The French specifically stated they had no interest in making sure Iraq complied with UN resolutions, nevermind enforcing any consequences of non-compliance.

Reality:

Chirac: France will vote 'no' because she considers tonight that there is no reason to wage a war to reach the goal we set ourselves, that is the disarmament of Iraq.

Opposite. Clearly.
"

Still doesn't change the fact that they said, "whatever you want, NO".

""Never did the administration say outright "whatever the result, we will go to war.""

That's complete bullsh!t, Maverick"

So you know exactly what this administration was thinking? Nonsense. Whether they intended to go to war regardless of the inspections outcome they still feigned an effort to show that there was a peaceful solution. Whether that is reality or not is not for you or I to decide beyond a personal opinion. Vis a vis the coalition, Iraq could comply and avert war, or not comply and be invaded, all under a predestined timeline. France would hold no timeline, nor military consequence for Iraq, no matter what, IN SPITE of the fact that they wanted to see Iraq disarmed (after all who didn't?).
E pur si muove -Galileo
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 12:15 pm

If there is blame to be placed at G.W.'s feet then let it be some that he deserves.

Namely keeping Tenet at the helm of the CIA.


Bush had way too much loyalty to that man.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
User avatar
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 1:34 pm

Our intel abilities have been going down hill since Bubba's days.

What is it they say about hindsight?
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 2:16 pm

JeffM.

I would go back farther to Carter.

But Bubba's presidental order that prohibited the CIA from working with people of questional human rights background is what really hurt.

Like it or not, those are the type of people that tend to hang around the people we want the CIA to monitor.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Schoenorama
Posts: 2305
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 5:15 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:11 pm

MaverickM11:

"So you know exactly what this administration was thinking? Nonsense."

There is enough documentation available now on the processes which describe in detail the position of some key-players prior to the Iraq Invasion, what they wanted to do and what they said and did. It was Powell and his State Department which somehow managed to persuade 'the rest of the gang', mainly comprised of Cheney and Rumsfeld, to go to the UN. Specially Cheney was far less convinced of the UN. He believed it was a waste of time and that the US needed to act fast to get rid of Saddam's WMD's.

"Whether they intended to go to war regardless of the inspections outcome they still feigned an effort to show that there was a peaceful solution."

But there was a peaceful solution, but it was completely ignored by this US Administration. It was ridiculed, labeled unimportant, and insulted. Key elements within this Administration had their mind set on war and absolutely nothing was going to stop them, not the UN, not the numerous long-standing allies which disagreed with the US over Saddam's WMD and his alleged links with al-Qaeda.

"Vis a vis the coalition, Iraq could comply and avert war, or not comply and be invaded, all under a predestined timeline."

It certainly looks like Iraq did comply with the UN resolutions. And if Iraq did comply, the UN Security Council would have had to comply their part of the resolutions, namely lifting the sanctions. And that's exactly what the US was trying to avoid as their main goal, over all these years and through numerous administrations, was a regime change. The WMD item was a mere excuse people like Cheney, Wolfowitz, Perle and Rumsfeld needed to convince the American public a pre-emptive war on Iraq was necessary. Wolfowitz even admitted this some time ago ("The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on which was weapons of mass destruction as the core reason.", Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, during an interview with Sam Tannenhaus of Vanity Fair magazine. http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/06/findlaw.analysis.dean.wmd/index.html), can't get link to work so use copy-and-paste.

The only reason they went to the UN was because they thought they had a 'clear case' or a 'slam dunk' to use Tenet's words. They didn't. That should have been a good warning they were wrong, that their intelligence was wrong. Unfortunately, your leaders didn't see it.
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 8:20 pm

If a Democrat made the mistake that GWB did - which is much much more important than a blowjob and cost a lot more lives - would you list all the Republican senators who agreed with the Democrat, B757300?

No, of course you wouldn't. Your blind love of GWB makes you contribution here pointless.

The fact is GWB had power. He and he alone sent the US to war, he and he alone should pay for that mistake.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
FDXmech
Posts: 3219
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2000 9:48 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 8:21 pm

>>>Again, B757300, you could name every Democrat alive. They don't have the power.<<<

The Congressional Democrats couldn't vote, No?
You're only as good as your last departure.
 
cptkrell
Posts: 3186
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 10:50 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 9:02 pm

Well, then, shouldn't we view the report as a slam on themselves (the Senate "Intelligence" Comittee) also? Regards..Jack
all best; jack
 
JeepBoy
Posts: 256
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2004 10:12 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 10:58 pm

Alpha says:

***So you can scream at France all you want. The Administration wanted it's war, and it's clear that, with this report, it wasn't about making America safer, it was about getting Bush re-elected.***

It's not about the chimp being re-elected. It's a squabble about securing some of the last remaning oil reserves left. And Halliburton + Connoco Phillips feathering the GOP's nest. BUSH is nothing more than a puppet for those guys. Quite sad that it is but that is the way.

Even I could stand there after a snoot of coke and mimic the chimp.

JB

*yay*
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 11:37 pm

The Congressional Democrats couldn't vote, No?

They are the minority party in Congress, no? Do the math, genius.
 
User avatar
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 11:37 pm

"..Bubba's presidental order that prohibited the CIA from working with people of questional human rights background is what really hurt.

I can tell you having been involved with the "fringe" of that community, that policy un-did a lot of serious hard work. It would take years to get that kind of information flowing again.
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 11:45 pm

Yes, JeffM to the rescue to blame Clinton for Bush's shortcomings. Gee, why am I not surprised.

Oh, and we've had such limitations on the CIA since the mid 1970's, I hate to tell you. That was a fallout of Vietnam, not of Bill Clinton.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 11:46 pm

I think "Will take years" is the correct phrase.

Hopefully we have actually started on that path.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sat Jul 10, 2004 11:51 pm

I think "Will take years" is the correct phrase.

Since restrictions on the CIA have been in place for years, you're correct, it will take years to correct. And it does need correction. To infiltrate the scum of the earth, you do need the scum of the earth to be the one's sometime, to get close to them.

And maybe since JeffM was on the "fringes" of such stuff, allegedly, that explains why he is how he is.  Wink/being sarcastic
 
FDXmech
Posts: 3219
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2000 9:48 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sun Jul 11, 2004 1:29 am

>>>They are the minority party in Congress, no? Do the math, genius<<<

So the minority must vote in step with the majority?

You're only as good as your last departure.
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sun Jul 11, 2004 1:34 am

No, genius. The minority has no real power when you know the Majority will vote in lock-step with the Administration. The Democrats had no control on the vote in Congress. The Republicans have a majority in both houses, and the war resolution would have passed no matter what. Ergo, the Democrats had no real say-so in us going to war.

Doesn't take a genius to figure that one out.
 
FDXmech
Posts: 3219
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2000 9:48 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sun Jul 11, 2004 1:43 am

>>>the Democrats had no real say-so in us going to war.<<<

Regardless, why didn't they vote......NO.

And why the sarcastic replies? Did my question upset you that much or did you forget your Prozac in Florida?
You're only as good as your last departure.
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sun Jul 11, 2004 1:50 am

They didn't vote no based on the flawed intelligence given to them and the
Administration by the intel community. I do think, had we known then what we know now, many Democrats, and a few Republicans would have voted no.

And who says I'm upset? You jump to a conclusion that is not accurate. Maybe you work for the Intel community?  Wink/being sarcastic
 
FDXmech
Posts: 3219
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2000 9:48 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sun Jul 11, 2004 1:55 am

Ahhh, I'm sorry. XXXOOO
You're only as good as your last departure.
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sun Jul 11, 2004 2:08 am

The opposition and the US general public were so scared that their brains collectively turned to jelly. Not exactly your brightest hour.

Still, there was one person who would have had the responsibility to look at the evidence and to ask what the actual quality of the sources was - and that´s after hearing Tenet´s claim of it being a slam dunk! At that point a responsible commander in chief, knowing that the ultimate responsibility would be on him, would have had the duty to not just uncritically believing what he was being told, but to challenge those assertions and to find out if he really had the solid standing to make a decision to go to war. Moments like that define a leader as a lightweight or a heavyweight. And just guess what the historical verdict on Bush will be.

That is what you need intelligent people for in positions of power: They´ve got a better chance to notice when something´s smelling funny. And when it´s about matters of life and death, it´s simply not possible to settle for a moron whose primary qualification is appearing to be "folksy" on TV.

And that´s even disregarding this administration´s obvious obsession with Iraq and Saddam right from the start.

Watching Bush run away from his responsibility instead of owning up to it is simply embarrassing.
 
FDXmech
Posts: 3219
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2000 9:48 pm

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sun Jul 11, 2004 2:31 am

>>>The opposition and the US general public were so scared that their brains collectively turned to jelly. Not exactly your brightest hour.<<<

Agree or disagree fine. But don't act so high and mighty when it wasn't your country attacked. Your condescending attitude is quite....should I say it......arrogant.

>>>Watching Bush run away from his responsibility instead of owning up to it is simply embarrassing.<<<

Mr Bush's responsibilty lies foremost in protecting this country. Your embarrassment is an acceptable byproduct.



You're only as good as your last departure.
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sun Jul 11, 2004 2:34 am

Agree or disagree fine. But don't act so high and mighty when it wasn't your country attacked. Your condescending attitude is quite....should I say it......arrogant.

I would imagine at least a few Germans died in the attack, my friend. You're the one acting high and might, with the premise that since we were the target, we have the right to run roughshod over the rest of the world, the facts be damned. Sorry, but it can't work that way.
 
Schoenorama
Posts: 2305
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 5:15 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sun Jul 11, 2004 2:57 am

I agree with what Klaus just pointed out in reply number 41 regarding the President's ultimate responsibility. I'd like to add the fact that at least one person within his Administration believed the intel to be shaky before the war started: Colin Powell was given CIA intel prior to going to the UN Security Council. According to different sources, including Bob Woodward, he didn't like that CIA intel a bit and at first said it wasn't good enough for the UNSC.

We all know what happened next. He did go, he did present the data and the UNSC was not impressed.

I do not believe the blame for the mistake to go to war can be put entirely on the faulty CIA intel. I believe some within this Administration simply wanted to go to war and remove Saddam, for whatever reason or reasons. The WMD issue and the fear of the American public for more terrorist-attacks was a perfect opportunity to reach their objectives, which had nothing to do with WMD's, the gassing of the Kurds, or the War on Terror.


FDXmech:

"But don't act so high and mighty when it wasn't your country attacked. Your condescending attitude is quite....should I say it......arrogant. "

Is it OK for me to critisize because my countra was attacked? Come'on! We're talking about a global issues here, whether it was the 9/11 attacks or the pre-emptive attack on Iraq. These things have major global consequences. Yes, you're country was attacked but ever since the invasion of Iraq, global terrorism hasn't decreased. That's exactly what many countries feared before the invasion and I believe Germany was one of them.
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
 
Klaus
Posts: 20622
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

FDXmech

Sun Jul 11, 2004 3:09 am

FDXmech: Agree or disagree fine. But don't act so high and mighty when it wasn't your country attacked.

What part of "Iraq was in no way connected to the planning or execution of the 9-11 attacks!" don´t you understand?


FDXmech: Your condescending attitude is quite....should I say it......arrogant.

Having been looked down to, ridiculed, insulted, vilified and threatened in the run-up to the war for saying back then almost exactly what your very own commission is saying now did in fact create a certain amount of anger in the rest of the world, myself included.

I´m no better than you are, nor is anybody else or vice versa. But still having to hear excuses for this monumental cock-up despite all the warnings makes me angry. Not at you, but at the idea that nothing was wrong about it in any way.


FDXmech: Mr Bush's responsibilty lies foremost in protecting this country.

The rising tide of terrorism and the declining influence of your country on the worldwide stage don´t look like proof for successful protection.


FDXmech: Your embarrassment is an acceptable byproduct.

I hate watching people make fools of themselves, even if it´s someone like George Bush and company. And I definitely hate watching them drag down a whole nation that would have deserved a lot better.
 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: Report Slams CIA For Iraq Intelligence Failures

Sun Jul 11, 2004 11:40 am

>> " But don't act so high and mighty when it wasn't your country attacked" <<

This 'we were attacked' cry-baby chant is getting old, we weren't the only counrty to ever get attacked. How doesn't matter, people like you act like no one else has ever experienced terrorism -- on top of that insult to the world having lot thousands over the decades, you wanted their help in protecting YOU!

We went there on the premise of protecting American interests, that is like talking down your poorer neighbors but then expect them to help you catch a theif. I'm surprised we had a coalition at all.

Tell me again, what did Iraq and 9/11 have to do with each other? Before and after the war?

Please try to answer without being emotional, i.e. ignorant, i.e. assuming you are already right.
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: agill, MaverickM11 and 10 guests