ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

At least post the link to the whole piece HERE which provides a somewhat different perspective than the excerpted bit does.

You can see the dilemma in the CIA though. George Tenet, a Clinton appointee and who assisted with the research that brought the Clinton administration and key members of Congress, both Democrat and GOP, to agreement that we had to deal with Saddam Hussein, had told George Bush that WMD in Iraq was a slam dunk.

He had to have a horrible knot in his stomach as he began to realize that his 'slam dunk' might be an air ball. I believe Tenet honestly did believe the intelligence, however, and believed he would be exhonerated with further investigation. I believe he believes that to this day. And, for all we know, the theory that those 12 weeks Bush tried to solve the situation diplomatically through the UN, Iraq managed to ship its WMD to Syria or whatever will still prove to be right.

If not, the decision to go to war was not made in a vacuum, and it was not made without consent and advice from a lot of people. I'm pretty sure that if Bush had refused to go to war despite the opinions of most of his administration, the previous administration, the majority of members of Congress, etc., and Iraq had committed some major atrocity, GWB would now be damned and condemned for being a chicken hawk and for refusing to take necessary action when he had the chance.

The other issues in the Middle East now facing the previous administration, the present administration, and the administration that will be put into power next January, are no less complicated and no less controversial.

You can see the dilemma in the CIA though. George Tenet, a Clinton appointee and who assisted with the research that brought the Clinton administration and key members of Congress, both Democrat and GOP, to agreement that we had to deal with Saddam Hussein, had told George Bush that WMD in Iraq was a slam dunk.

He had to have a horrible knot in his stomach as he began to realize that his 'slam dunk' might be an air ball. I believe Tenet honestly did believe the intelligence, however, and believed he would be exhonerated with further investigation. I believe he believes that to this day. And, for all we know, the theory that those 12 weeks Bush tried to solve the situation diplomatically through the UN, Iraq managed to ship its WMD to Syria or whatever will still prove to be right.

...
It is not true that congress agreed with Bush that something had to be done about Saddam. It passed a resolution, which was obtained by fraud, merely giving Bush the authority to act against Iraq SHOULD THIS BE NECESSARY.

www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf
Public Law 107-243 107th Congress Joint Resolution Oct. 16, 2002 (H.J. Res. 114) To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq
...
Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens;
...
Whereas it is in the national security interests of the United States to restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region:

Now therefore be it, Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, Authorization for use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002. 50 USC 1541
...

I don't know what Tenet believed. I know Tenet had a huge chunk of his reputation on the line and he could understandably desperately want to be exhonerated in all that. Of course he wouldn't immediately accept one person's version as opposed to two decades of intelligence that suggested otherwise? I know that any member of Congress who now says they believed George Bush and didn't check out, question, verify, read, look at, debate, discuss the intelligence themselves should be drummed out of Congress.

All had the same information and the same ability to check it out.

At any rate, this belongs on the Iraq thread and not here.

George Tenet's book shows that he remains, first and foremost, a politician - with no clue as to the proper role of intelligence work. He is unhappy about going down in history as "Slam-Dunk Tenet." But, George protests, his famous remark to President Bush on Dec. 21, 2002, was not meant to assure the president that available intelligence on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was a "slam dunk." Rather he meant that the argument that Saddam Hussein had such weapons could be enhanced to slam-dunk status in order to sell war on Iraq. Those of you who tuned in to CBS' 60 Minutes Sunday night heard Tenet explain what he meant when he uttered the words he now says everyone misunderstood or distorted in order to blame him for the Iraq war. What he says he meant was simply:

"We can put a better case together for a public case." [sic]

Tenet still doesn't get it. Those of us schooled in the craft and ethos of intelligence remain in wide-mouthed disbelief, perhaps best summed up by veteran operations officer Bob Baer's quip:

"So, it is better that the 'slam dunk' referred to the ease with which the war could be sold? I guess I missed that part of the National Security Act delineating the functions of the CIA - the part about CIA marketing a war. Guess that's why I never made it into senior management."

George's concern over being scapegoated is touching. But could he not have seen it coming? Not even when Rumsfeld asked him in the fall of 2002 (that is, before the war) whether he had put in a system to track how good the intelligence was compared with what would be found in Iraq? The guys I know from Queens usually can tell when they're being set up. Maybe Tenet was naive enough to believe that the president, whom he describes as a "kindred soul," would protect him from thugs like Vice President Cheney and then-Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, even when - as was inevitable - someone had to take the fall. Or did he perhaps actually believe the Cheney dictum that U.S. forces would be greeted as liberators?

So now George is worried about his reputation. He tells 60 Minutes:

"At the end of the day, the only thing you have … is your reputation built on trust and your personal honor, and when you don't have that anymore, well, there you go."

The president, unimpressed by the presentation of satellite photographs and intercepts, pressed Tenet and McLaughlin, saying their information would not "convince Joe Public" and asking Tenet, "This is the best we've got?" Woodward reports.

According to Woodward, Tenet reassured the president that "it's a slam dunk case" that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

It is unlikely Iraq shipped banned weapons material into Syria before the 2003 U.S.-led invasion, according to report released by the Iraq Survey Group, a CIA/Pentagon team searching for Iraqi weapons programs.

[quote="Advi, quoting "bulldogreporter.com""]As the article below argues, it's time for Israel to defeat its enemies definitively.

Perhaps Advocate can explain to us how Israel might go about "defeating" the Palestinians - backed up as they are by Iran and indeed most of the principal Arab states.

georgeob1 wrote:

Perhaps Advocate can explain to us how Israel might go about "defeating" the Palestinians - backed up as they are by Iran and indeed most of the principal Arab states.

I imagine that Israel will have to visit on the Pals very harsh and damaging retaliation, in the nature of its actions in Lebanon. Since the latter, Hezbollah has not engaged in any significant terrorism in Israel.

This conversation goes around and around. Pro Israel or pro-Palestine and a lot of talk about Iran-Iraq. World War III began in 1914 (then called the 'Great War', that included the Battle of Armageddon [see Battle of Megiddo 1918], the belligerents had a rest then WW II, rest then Korea, rest then Vietnam...... throw in a few side campaigns like the Six Days War, Yam kippur-Ramadan War, Cold War coups and revolts in Europe and the Third World and right up to the present defeat of Israel in Lebanon and US in Iraq).
War on Iran may happen but probably not unless Israel drops the big one on them. Israel will then become even more unpopular (even in the US) when Iranians shut down all shipments of oil through the Persian Gulf and raise hell in Iraq with consequent higher oil prices.
WWIII is not over; taking settlers out of the West Bank and recognizing the democratically elected government in Gaza will not stop it, nor will walls and fences.
The collusion of corporate profit and arms sellers will keep it going by exploiting, enflaming or inventing enemies so they may weaken the masses through wrecked economies and governments, divide and rule and profit from sales to both sides in any conflict (like Prescott Bush and his son, the father of the current President of the US). All industrial nations, (even peaceful Sweden) are in on the trade. Where is the uzi manufactured/ Where is it sold? PALESTINIANS use them too!
WWIII will end when the flipside of globalization is realized ie. globally enforced labour and environmental standards and global human rights are judged by a viable world court. Until Mars colonies are established to escape to, CEOs will keep war at a 'safe' level.