T Nation

CIA Warnings on Iraq

NBC reports…

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18854414/

[quote]The United States will face negative consequences with Iraq, the region and beyond which would include:

  1. Anarchy and the territorial breakup of Iraq;
  2. Region-threatening instability in key Arab states;
  3. A surge of global terrorism against US interests fueled by (militant) Islamism;
  4. Major oil supply disruptions and severe strains in the Atlantic Alliance.

These should have been very sobering reports, says Michael O’Hanlon, military analyst at the Brookings Institution. The administration should have taken them very serious in preparing plans for a difficult post-Saddam period. And yet the administration did not do so.

William Harlow, part of Tenet’s senior intelligence staff and co-author with Tenet on his book, added: Although the intelligence got the WMD case in Iraq wrong, it got the dangers of a post-invasion Iraq quite right. They raised serious questions about what would face U.S. troops in a post invasion Iraq. The intelligence laid out a number of issues of concern. It’s unclear if administration officials paid any attention to those concerns.

It is likely that Democrats and Republicans on the Hill will question how the administration could have predicted a short, easy war given these warnings and why it has taken more four years for them to surface.[/quote]

D’oh!

I blame the democrats on the Intelligence Committee.

For instance jay rockefeller the current Chairman of the Senate Intelligence.

Here’s our boy in 2002 after making a trip to the Middle East.

Where were the democrats with access to the same CIA information?

Voting to authorize.

Oh, they’re brave with their “in hind-sight” crap.

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:
I blame the democrats on the Intelligence Committee.

JeffR[/quote]

LOL! You blame the Democrats for everything.

At least you’re consistent.

The CIA warned us that invading Iraq would cause the exact problems we’re seeing now; instability in the region and an increase in terrorism. Too bad no one listened to them.

Dustin

[quote]JeffR wrote:
I blame the democrats on the Intelligence Committee.
[/quote]

Well, I have to blame the Pres for not looking and listening to the facts given to him.

I’m not saying what he did was wrong. I’m saying that how he did it, to this day, is.

[quote]JeffR wrote:
I blame the democrats on the Intelligence Committee.

JeffR[/quote]

You would.

[quote]JeffR wrote:
I blame the democrats on the Intelligence Committee.

For instance jay rockefeller the current Chairman of the Senate Intelligence.

Here’s our boy in 2002 after making a trip to the Middle East.

There has been some debate over how “imminent” a threat Iraq poses. I do believe that Iraq poses an imminent threat, but I also believe that after September 11, that question is increasingly outdated. It is in the nature of these weapons, and the way they are targeted against civilian populations, that documented capability and demonstrated intent may be the only warning we get. To insist on further evidence could put some of our fellow Americans at risk. Can we afford to take that chance? We cannot!" http://www.senate.gov/~rockefeller/news/2002/flrstmt0102002.html

Where were the democrats with access to the same CIA information?

Voting to authorize.

Oh, they’re brave with their “in hind-sight” crap.

JeffR[/quote]

Gawd you can pretend to be stoopid sometimes.

It seems like the admin was painting a rosy scenario pre-invasions, a scenario that was at odds with the intel they were given. (trans: they misled–that’s bad.)

Also, because we need more and better democrats does not erase the administrations deceptions, does it?

Also authorized what? I’m pretty sure not a pre-planned war.(I seem to remember caveats in that AUMF…)

Oh, I guess I need to point out the obvious: (the peanut gallery appears restless/reckless) both parties looked at the same info. and came to the same conclusion.

Therefore, the “Bush lied, everyone died” crap is getting very old.

Let’s argue about something else, shall we?

Thanks in advance,

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:
Oh, I guess I need to point out the obvious: (the peanut gallery appears restless/reckless) both parties looked at the same info. and came to the same conclusion.

Therefore, the “Bush lied, everyone died” crap is getting very old.

Let’s argue about something else, shall we?

Thanks in advance,

JeffR[/quote]

This:

“both parties looked at the same info. and came to the same conclusion.”

is still not true.

and knuckle-dragging comments like this:

“Therefore, the “Bush lied, everyone died” crap is getting very old.”

are just insulting to those who factually lost life or limb on large account of the President and his admin living in my little pony land.

Surely you can admit that the admins public predictions did not square with what they had been told would happen. Yet they made warplans according to those fairytale predictions, and of course it’s all worked out beautifully hasn’t it?

[quote]100meters wrote:

“both parties looked at the same info. and came to the same conclusion.”

is still not true.[/quote]

No? Then prior to the resolution authorizing force, you must have information that says those Democrats that voted in favor it actually thought otherwise?

(it doesn’t do to provide evidence by those who voted against it, they were in the minority)

I look forward to reviewing the evidence you present.

Did you cheerleaders actually read the OP?

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
100meters wrote:

“both parties looked at the same info. and came to the same conclusion.”

is still not true.

No? Then prior to the resolution authorizing force, you must have information that says those Democrats that voted in favor it actually thought otherwise?

(it doesn’t do to provide evidence by those who voted against it, they were in the minority)

I look forward to reviewing the evidence you present.[/quote]

Again, despite your distraction, the admin clearly does not have the same information as those voting on AUMF. It’s silly that it even needs to be said.

and again those who voted for the AUMF did so (and most said so at the time) in the trust that we had a responsible leader at the time, they were dead wrong to trust him (war as a last resort), and those with balls have said so. And of course you know this, but have to pretend not to—