Middle East News
Pentagon criticizes Iraq intelligence push (Roundup)
Feb 9, 2007, 16:19 GMT
On the Web
Similar articles
- Senate confirms Petraeus for Central Command
- Top commander in Iraq to head US forces in Mideast (Roundup)
- Top Iraq commander Petraeus to become regional chief (1st Lead)
- Top Iraq commander Petraeus to become regional chief
- US officers reprimanded in connection to Haditha killings
Latest Headlines in Middle East
- 1. Syria rejects UN human rights accusations
- 2. Syria shells Homs for 10th day as EU threatens new sanctions
- 3. Clashes in Bahrain as protesters mark anniversary of uprising
- 4. Report: First opposition protests held in Tehran in 12 months
- 5. British government in discussions with Jordan over radical cleric
Older Talkback
page: 1
talk about stating the obvious, we all know bush and blair lied, the disgrace is that nothing will be done about it
When is someone going to stop this administration? Well over half the country is ready for this presidency to be over. Will the Democrats grow a pair and provide some meaningful opposition before we get too far down the war path with Iran? Those of us who watched in disbelief as this administration made the case for war with Iraq are getting an unpleasant dose of 'deja vu all over again'.
My conscious doesn't bother me about this at all. Only those who voted for President Bush should be concerned as they are responsible.
It is a shame to see a country like the US stating its policy on lies. And how many lies still to be discovred.
Bush said he 'took responsibility for the intelligence errors.' What does that mean?
You can always depend on the fact that truth cannot be held hostage to lies. This adminstration can't any longer think that we (70%), of this country seen through the blatent lies, they create and spread. The last thing they worry about is our demoracy or the Iraqi people, it's about OIL; Power and the rich.I really don't know how they can even look themsels in the mirror; knowing the thousand of innocent people they are responsible for killing in the name of oil. Who are the biggest terrorist, we seemed to invaded lots of nations,for what ever purpose that to enrich us with no regard other than to steal what resources they own, And we call oursels a demoracy,sound like corupt bullies to me. I love my country dearly but let's face it we're probably the terrorist like nation at this time. And sometimes the truth hurts; 'The Truth will always prevail.
That we are in Iraq is now a mute point. How we got there is the usual hysterical American reaction to a threat...kill it. (Why kill it? Because you can't reason with or bribe a religious fanatic. Sorry Democrat party, but it can not be done.)
What is sad is that it took a bunch of civilians to die on the streets of America to motivate us to action. The Marines died in Beruit, no action, a sailor was murdured on an air plane and his body dumped on the tarmac of an airport, no action, the USS Cole was blown out of the water, no action, each done by terrorists but no action why is that? The reason; the ignorant (remember when it started most Americans couldn't find Iraq on a map), weak willed, self indulgent american populace was busy watching network TV and were not made affraid, they wern't being attacked or threatened, their lives were not changed, and soldiers are paied to die for us, please pass me the keys to my Hummer. They didn't care that our military members were being murdered, but when it got closer to home we panicked and screamed for retribution. It was in that atmosphere of fear we gave the administration the power to launch the invasion of Iraq. That they did is really not a problem for me, it is the mis-management of the war that has me angry. Another issue that has me angry is that the previous administration had opportunities to negate the real genisis of our threat but did not. It shows so vividly the truism of 'You can pay me now or pay me later'.
In their own words:
BIN LADEN: ' The most important and serious issue today for the whole world is this Third World War, which the Crusader-Zionist coalition began against the Islamic nation. It is raging in the land of the two rivers. (Iraq) The world's millstone and pillar is in Baghdad, the capital of the caliphate.'
ZAWAHIRI: 'So we must think for a long time about our next steps and how we want to attain it, and it is my humble opinion that the Jihad in Iraq requires several incremental goals: The first stage: Expel the Americans from Iraq.'
Zarqawi: “…and our most generous brothers in al-Qaeda came to understand the strategy of the Tawhid wal-Jihad organization in Iraq, the land of the two rivers and of the Caliphs, and their hearts warmed to its methods and overall mission. Let it be known that al-Tawhid wal-Jihad pledges both its leaders and its soldiers to the mujahid commander, Sheikh 'Osama bin Laden' (in word and in deed) and to jihad for the sake of God”
What would these monsters have been doing if not fighting us in Iraq? Regardless of how we got there, we are there now and by their own admission Iraq is where al-Qaeda is hoping to defeat us. With Carl Levin's help of course.
I wonder why Dick Cheney's name isn't coming up very often. It known for quite a while that Rumsfeld and Cheney worked together since the 60's and always tried to push the defense department into the forefront. I think that there should be court procedings against Cheney and Rumsfeld. They were the ones that put all of the effort into the Iraq-AlQuaida relationship. The CIA was pushed aside when they said that the link was probably false and came from an unreliable source.
Re: 'The truth always comes out.'
Don't be too sure about that. How would we know if it didn't? How much of what we accept as truth today is actually yesterdays lies that were never uncovered?
With Carl Levin's help??!!! No, with George Bush's help.
George Bush has played right into the hands of Bin Laden and Zawahiri. Bin Laden was hoping to get us bogged down in Afghanistan which was a gamble he may have lost, but thanks to Bush and company invading Iraq his chances of winning were significantly increased. Invading Iraq lost us allies and increased support for Al Qaeda, gave our enemies access to stockpiles of ammo and explosives and a population ripe for civil war... Bin Laden must be convinced that Allah is indeed great!
Bin Laden: 'So we are continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy. Allah willing, and nothing is too great for Allah...even more dangerous and bitter for America is that the mujahidin recently forced Bush to resort to emergency funds to continue the fight in Afghanistan and Iraq, which is evidence of the success of the bleed-until-bankruptcy plan.
Democrats and Republicans must unite and clean house of surely the most incompetent and dangerous adminstration in our history. Once we do that and return to our principles of freedom and human rights we can win the war on terror.
'Democrats and Republicans must unite and clean house of surely the most incompetent and dangerous adminstration in our history.'
Shouldn't the first priority be defeating a very real threat from a very real adversary?
Look, the reality is as follows:
1) You have Bush until 2008, after that he is gone.
2) We are fighting terrorists in Iraq as well as Afghanistan. Terrorists who are committed to our destruction.
Without a time machine none of those facts can be changed.
3) This country has defeated bigger threats before and lost to smaller ones. It is a matter of political will. If we allow our political will to erode for internal petty partisan politics we will embolden a very serious threat to our country. One that has attacked us before and will do so again as soon as the opportunity presents itself.
You say that Democrats and Republicans must unite, I agree. The sad fact is that shortly after 9/11 some made the equation that when the war isn't going well then Bush looks bad, therefore in order to get rid of Bush and get 'our team' into office we need to accentuate the negative as much as possible. It is an incredibly short sighted, self-defeating strategy that is practically begging for more attacks on the country.
'We are fighting terrorists in Iraq as well as Afghanistan. Terrorists who are committed to our destruction.'
Don't forget that 'terrorists' cannot be defeated by force. Terrorism is fueled by people who are possessed with an ideology they are willing to die for. Murdered terrorists are seeds that flourish and bear fruit at a rapid pace. If terrorism is to be defeated, it must be challenged on an ideological level by those who are 'man' enough to talk with terrorists and wise enough to compromise.
It's easy to respond to terror with overwhelming terror, but throwing fire on fire will never quench fire.
'Don't forget that 'terrorists' cannot be defeated by force. '
Not exclusively, but killing them is one way of ensuring they wont strap bombs on themselves and blow you up on your morning commute.
'Terrorism is fueled by people who are possessed with an ideology they are willing to die for.'
Radical Islam... check.
' Murdered terrorists are seeds that flourish and bear fruit at a rapid pace. '
Killing a terrorist isn't 'murder'.
'If terrorism is to be defeated, it must be challenged on an ideological level by those who are 'man' enough to talk with terrorists and wise enough to compromise.'
How do you talk to someone who considers you a sub-human infidel and wants to kill you so he can go to paradise and collect his 72 black eyed virgins. Isn't it immoral to 'negotiate' with the likes of Bin Laden? He has outlined the terms for negotiation by the way, all we have to do is completely withdraw from the middle east, abandon our allies there and convert in masse to Islam. No thanks, the idea of negotiating with that is stupid.
'It's easy to respond to terror with overwhelming terror'
Not that we are doing that exactly but...It is easier still to naively believe that if we could all come together and sing Kumbaya then these brainwashed zombie zealots will give up their aspiration to a worldwide caliphate. It isn't the case, nor should it/will it happen, but it is easy to play pretend on the internet.
I'm disgusted by this report... it leaves the same taste in my mouth that I had following the investigation into the possible Foley scandal cover up. It boils down to 'well, we think that they didn't act properly, and they possibly even acted inappropriately, but we really don't think any action needs to be taken against anybody. Move along, nothing to see here.'
Non-binding resolutions and toothless slaps on the wrist seem to be the only thing this congress is capable of producing. I hope that historians in the near future can come up with a more creative name than 'do-nothing congress,' because the only concrete things our legislative body seems to be capable of producing are pay raises for itself.
It is so depressing to see the principles this country was founded on undermined by partisan loyalty and political hackery.
In response to the individual who identified his or herself by 'LOL... Your own little reality':
You imply that those who believe that violence begets violence are living in a dreamworld, yet you offer no alternative whatsoever. You seem to simply argue that we will be in a constant state of 'war' against an enemy that cannot be defeated.
'killing them is one way of ensuring they wont strap bombs on themselves and blow you up on your morning commute.'
You must be able to see past the tip of your own nose. Killing a terrorist only creates more terrorists. Every single terrorist who is killed by American forces becomes infinitely more dangerous than he was alive: he becomes a martyr. He becomes a symbol used by the remaining tens of thousands of terrorists to recruit more, and gives those living terrorists even more evidence to show their recruits that America is an evil that must be eradicated.
Clearly, you have a point in that the most radical of these terrorists can not be negotiated with. But you are just as naive as you claim your ideological antagonists are if you think we can merely fight our way out of this mess.
I also think it is funny that you don't even recognize your own hypocrisy: you give the supposition that the radical Muslims see us as 'sub-human infidels' as reason that killing them does not constitute murder. So, what you're saying is that it is wrong for them to consider us sub-human, but we are completely justified in considering their lives to be less valuable than anyone elses'?
I'll grant you that they are for the moment our enemy, but until both sides begin recognizing the sanctity of human life, this whole quagmire is only going to get worse.
Several of the comments in here remind me of why America always ends up in these no-win situations. We are incapable of rational debate at the national level because much of our population is incapable of rational debate period. For several years anyone that suggested we were on the wrong course was branded a traitor. It's still happening today - how many times have you heard the phrase 'emboldens the enemy' in recent weeks? Criticizing the President emboldens the enemy. Questioning the rationale for invasion emboldens the enemy. How long until Freedom of Information Act requests will embolden the enemy? How long will the public allow these politicians to take advantage of our irrational fears?
The real question we should be asking ourselves is: do we want a failure of a President to be in charge during this highly volatile period in the middle east, Iran, and North Korea? To me, that prospect is far more frightening than President Hillary.
I actually think most of the comments in response to the article were much more thoughtful than the article, itself.
What's new in the article is the 'intelligence' the Bush-Cheney team touted in big speeches was brainstormed by a policy DOD group, not any of the professional intelligence agencies. The article continues to imply, that for this purpose, perhaps because Bush & Co. called it intelligence, that the policy group was part of the intelligence community. Yes, I understand that the Undersecretary for Policy should not be held accountable for 'intelligence' mistakes and did 'nothing illigal' for proposing fiction to be used as propaganda. That article doesn't emphasize that fact as an actionable item, but simply states it. However, alert readers and responsible citizens would have appreciated knowing this at the time Bush was insisting that 'the last resort', military invasion, was the only option left on the table.
Most responders, however, get it that the article (along with Congress) is not enough and too late.
My 2 cents: killing a 'terrorist' (Islamic, neocon, or any other style) is still killing, and therefore against very basic rules of morality. Also, torture is never justified and never works. My best wishes for those who support it.
“You imply that those who believe that violence begets violence are living in a dreamworld,”
I imply that you are ignoring the fundamental aspects of the enemy we are facing which is the equivalent of not facing them at all. But after reading the rest of your text allow me to express it explicitly; You are living in a dream world.
“yet you offer no alternative whatsoever.”
An alternative to fighting Islamist terrorism? We have none other then to capitulate. Are there better ways of confronting this? Perhaps, but we are at war with them quite simply because they declared war on us.
“You seem to simply argue that we will be in a constant state of 'war' against an enemy that cannot be defeated.
“
Who says they cannot be defeated?
“You must be able to see past the tip of your own nose”
I literally have 20/10 vision, it is the best my ophthalmologist was able to measure. With it I was able to stand, horrified and helpless on Montague Terrace in New York and watch 2 aircraft full scared helpless human beings being deliberately flown into buildings full of human beings. THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE CAPABLE OF. UNDERSTAND THAT. They are also capable of filling school gyms full of children and setting off bombs, they are also capable of beheading teachers because they taught girls… As of this morning they have committed some act of violence 7427 times since 9/11.
“Killing a terrorist only creates more terrorists.”
How did you come to that conclusion? You say these things with such certainty.
“Every single terrorist who is killed by American forces becomes infinitely more dangerous than he was alive: he becomes a martyr.”
Main Entry: 1mar·tyr
Pronunciation: 'mär-t&r
Function: noun
: a person who voluntarily suffers death as the penalty of witnessing to and refusing to renounce a religion
You have stumbled inadvertently on the crux of the problem, a theology that considers some savage that would destroy innocent life a “Martyr”. Again, before you talk past me, how do you negotiate with that mindset? Knowing that it is 2007 on the calender and they want to turn it back to the 1st century, how do you negotiate with someone who believes that they are going to get “clear waters” and “72 black eyed virgins” in “paradise” for killing the “kauffer”?
If we were to “negotiate” what kind of reward are you willing to give them for their violence? Behead someone on the internet and we abandon our bases in Saudi Arabia? Blow up a commuter bus and we abandon our allies in Israel? What are you willing to give to these monsters to make them go away for the time being? Who are you willing to sell out?
No, killing terrorists, people who target innocent life in order to effect political/religious change is an act of human hygiene, not murder.
“But you are just as naive as you claim your ideological antagonists are if you think we can merely fight our way out of this mess.”
Point out where I said we exclusively fight our way out of this? I do not believe that at all. I think we need to show their target audience that those terrorists were not “Martyrs” but idiots, dupes who blew themselves to pieces for someone else’s glory and power. Rubes who bought into a fairy tale and ended the only life they are going to get at the direction of some evil SOB who has something to gain by their horrible death and the horrible deaths of others. Show what brainwashed zombies they are and maybe the next person who is asked to be a Martyr will laugh in their face.
That, and the Madrassahs/schools/mosques and institutions of any kind that brainwash them in the first place need to be shut down.
“you give the supposition that the radical Muslims see us as 'sub-human infidels' as reason that killing them does not constitute murder.”
No, I don’t care what they think; it is their actions and potential actions I care about. It is the violent “jihad” against us and the rest of the unbelievers that negates the charge of murder, do you deny there is a violent “jihad” against us?
“So, what you're saying is that it is wrong for them to consider us sub-human, but we are completely justified in considering their lives to be less valuable than anyone elses'?”
When you are wishing for martyrdom you obviously have made the decision that this life isn’t worth anything compared to the next. I consider my own life to be quite valuable, thank you. As were the lives of the people who I knew who were incinerated at their desks for the crime of being an infidel Americans.
“'ll grant you that they are for the moment our enemy,”
That is the way they define themselves, that is their core belief and if it is them or me I want it to be them. “Recognizing the sanctity of human life” is lovely, these monsters DO NOT. Until they start, good riddance.
I can not believe there is anyone who would make excuses for self avowed terrorists... dream world.
'My 2 cents: killing a 'terrorist' (Islamic, neocon, or any other style) is still killing, and therefore against very basic rules of morality. '
AAAAhhh yes, it is so easy to proclaim your moral superiority on the internet without any perceived consequences. Bill is morally superior, just ask him, he will tell you so.
Bill, you can give them a big wet kiss on the lips if you want, just don't expect the rest of us to share your Darwin award.
democrats be damned. The soul of America is weakening. We believe in police state freedom, the power of the people is nill. America is a hatefull country. We imprison the poor and enrich the rich. Face the facts: America is not the best brand of freedom.
Reality check: Vote for the democrats. Protest the war. Read from a variety of domestic and foriegn resourses. Remember our history.
best way to combat the terrorists: Declare a doctrine of passifism based on religion: Don't harm thy nieghbour. We live in a global village now, better start acting like it.
To the person that made this comment
'No, killing terrorists, people who target innocent life in order to effect political/religious change is an act of human hygiene, not murder.'
Didn't Hitler also consider extermination of the Jews to be human hygiene?
page: 1
Your Talkback on this Story