THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, TENTH THREAD.

McG

I'm suggesting that it is delusional in the extreme for Ican to ignore the findings of 16 combined intelligence agencies where their conclusions aren't happily received in his noggin.

I'm also suggesting that this sort of behavior or response is so typical of a whole bunch of you folks supporting Bush that it represents a real danger to rational discourse and rational policy in the US.

But I gather, from the manner in which you've asked this question, that there is something in either this NIE report or in some earlier NIE report which you'd like to point to.

Please do.

blatham wrote:

McG

I'm suggesting that it is delusional in the extreme for Ican to ignore the findings of 16 combined intelligence agencies where their conclusions aren't happily received in his noggin.

I'm also suggesting that this sort of behavior or response is so typical of a whole bunch of you folks supporting Bush that it represents a real danger to rational discourse and rational policy in the US.

But I gather, from the manner in which you've asked this question, that there is something in either this NIE report or in some earlier NIE report which you'd like to point to.

Please do.

I don't think the NIE should be ignored either as it represents a culmination of all the Intelligence information regarding the topic. Gelisgesti also linked a previous NIE. Many, on YOUR side, that do not support the war, feel that NIE should be ignored.

So, I ask you, should we only support the NIE that fits our point of view?

Democrats singled out CIA Director George Tenet, saying that during a private meeting in July Tenet told the panel that the White House pressured him and that he agreed to back up the administration's case for war despite his own agents' doubts about the intelligence it was based on.

"Tenet admitted to the Intelligence Committee that the policymakers wanted him to 'say something about not being inconsistent with what the president had said,'" Intelligence Committee member Carl Levin, D-Mich., told reporters Friday.

Tenet also told the committee that complying had been "the wrong thing to do," according to Levin.

"Well, it was much more than that," Levin said. "It was a shocking abdication of a CIA director's duty not to act as a shill for any administration or its policy."

Should we have invaded Iraq?

Yes!

The probability was/is very high that the al-Qaeda allowed sanctuary in Iraq would rapidly grow to be at least as great a threat to humanity as was al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.

Quote:

Should we have invaded Iraq?

Yes!

The probability was/is very high that the al-Qaeda allowed sanctuary in Iraq would rapidly grow to be at least as great a threat to humanity as was al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.

That's a lot of bull. Ridiculous. Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden were not friends or allies. Saddam was not giving any aid or sanctuary to Al Qaeda. This was verified in the recent Senate report.

Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden were not friends or allies prior to 9/11 but we don't know about after. However, that, xingo, is irrelevant.

Your believing in a fairy tale.

The probability was very high that Saddam's regime would not attempt to remove the al-Qaeda established sanctuary in northeastern Iraq.

The probability was/is very high that the al-Qaeda sanctuary in Iraq would have rapidly grown to be at least as great a threat to humanity as was al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, if the USA had not invaded Iraq.

Quote:

The probability was very high that Saddam's regime would not attempt to remove the al-Qaeda established sanctuary in northeastern Iraq.

The probability was not high, it was excellent. Saddam was not allowed to go into northeastern Iraq. It was off limits to him. We were the ones enforcing those off limit rules.

Incredible! We, the USA, requested him to remove Al Qaeda from northeastern Iraq. By virtue of that request he had our permission to satisfy our request and go into northeastern Iraq. He did not go there.

Therefore Saddam can not be held responsible for any Al Qaeda bases in northeastern Iraq.

Xingu, for the sake of reason, listen up! For the umpteenth time! I do not hold Saddam responsible for any al-Qaeda bases in northeastern Iraq. I hold al-Qaeda responsible for al-Qaeda bases in northeastern Iraq.

That was our responsibility since we were the ones enforcing the rule. If the Al Qaeda base was to be taken out it was up to us to do it. Bush refused three times to do it because he needed Zarqawi alive to spread the lie that Saddam was giving sanctuary to Al Qaeda.

It was/is irrelevant whether Saddam was giving sanctuary to Al Qaeda. All that's relevant is Saddam did not try to remove al-Qaeda. Saddam's reason for not doing that is irrelevant.

It's unbelievable that there are some people out there that still believe Saddam was giving sanctuary to Al Qaeda., even after the Senate report came out and said it wasn't so.

I don't know who believes or still believes Saddam was giving sanctuary to Al Qaeda. I don't care whether none, one, or many believe that. What I care about is that al-Qaeda possessed sanctuary in Iraq until they were removed from that sanctuary after the USA invaded Iraq.

Please get this into your head. It was al-Qaeda possessing sanctuary in Iraq that constituted the threat to humanity and not who else besides al-Qaeda is responsible for al-Qaeda possessing sanctuary in Iraq.

The same is true about al-Qaeda possessing sanctuary in Afghanistan. It was al-Qaeda possessing sanctuary in Afghanistan that constituted the threat to humanity and not who else besides al-Qaeda is responsible for al-Qaeda possessing sanctuary in Afghanistan.

Why is this so difficult for you to understand?

Quote:

The probability was/is very high that the al-Qaeda sanctuary in Iraq would have rapidly grown to be at least as great a threat to humanity as was al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, if the USA had not invaded Iraq.

I take exception to this. There is no way that AQ would have grown at the speed it did in Afghanistan, as they lacked the support of a friendly gov't, who provided them with material and hiding places - something that Saddam most certainly did not do.

Cycloptichorn

The war in Iraq has become a "cause célèbre" for Islamic militants, "breeding a deep resentment" of the United States in the Muslim world, according to declassified excerpts from a major intelligence report that were released late this afternoon.

"The Iraqi jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives; perceived jihadist success there would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere," the excerpts said. The report cites four factors fueling the spread of Islamic militancy: entrenched grievances and a sense of powerlessness; the Iraq "jihad"; the slow pace of reform in Muslim nations; and "pervasive anti-U.S. sentiment among most Muslims."

The unclassified portions of the Intel report can be seen here.

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/politics/nie20060926.pdf

Quote:

Bush Makes Public Parts of Report on Terrorism
By BRIAN KNOWLTON International Herald Tribune

WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 --

...

"The Iraqi jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives; perceived jihadist success there would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere," the excerpts said.

...

The excerpts from the intelligence report pointed to a spread of terrorist activity globally for at least the next five years and said terrorists were adapting to the tactics used against them. "If this trend continues, threats to U.S. interests at home and abroad will become more diverse, leading to increasing attacks worldwide," they said.

...

"The Iraq conflict has become the 'cause célèbre' for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of U.S. involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement" the declassified document said. "Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight."

...

The document asserted that American-led counterterrorism efforts had seriously damaged the leadership of Al Qaeda and disrupted its operations. "However, we judge that Al Qaeda will continue to pose the greatest threat to the homeland and U.S. interests abroad by a single terrorist organization," it said.

...

The report cites four factors fueling the spread of Islamic militancy: "entrenched grievances and a sense of powerlessness; the Iraq "jihad"; the slow pace of reform in Muslim nations;" and "pervasive anti-U.S. sentiment among most Muslims."

...

Counting jihadists, she said, was far from an exact science. Much of the report's determination reflected increased jihad-related Internet traffic. "It's difficult to count the number of true jihadists that are willing to commit murder" she added. "They don't nominate themselves to be counted."

She said that leaving Iraq would do nothing to stop the terrorist's threat. "Shrinking away from them, withdrawing from them, will not alleviate this problem," she said.

She underlined language in the report that said that "should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight."

Ms. Townsend emphasized the damage and disruption inflicted on Al Qaeda "including thousands of terror suspects killed or captured" and the importance of the long-term goal of promoting democracy. "The president has frequently made the point that freedom is the antidote to terror," she said.

The report, she noted, had been completed before the killing in Iraq of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, someone it had posited could eventually "pose a global threat."

...

Ms. Townsend, like Bush, was harshly critical of those who had divulged details of the intelligence estimate to reporters. "With every unauthorized disclosure of classified information, it does harm to our national and homeland security," she said, and can hand "victory to our enemies who plot to kill us."

...

While Mr. Bush declined to confront those criticisms, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice did not shy from doing so in an interview published in The New York Post today.
She directly challenged a claim by Mr. Clinton that he had done more to pursue Osama bin Laden than many of his conservative critics, including some in the Bush administration, had been willing to do before Sept. 11, 2001.

"What we did in the eight months was at least as aggressive as what the Clinton administration did in the preceding years," Ms. Rice said, according to a transcript provided by the State Department.

And she rejected Mr. Clinton's assertion that he had left behind a comprehensive plan to fight Al Qaeda.

...

Most Iraqis Want US Troops Out Within a Year

Quote:

Say US Presence Provoking More Conflict Than it is Preventing

Approval of Attacks on US-led Forces Rises to 6 in 10

A new WPO poll of the Iraqi public finds that seven in ten Iraqis want US-led forces to commit to withdraw within a year. ...