Pre-war reports say agency predicted dangers of toppling Saddam’s regime
In a move sure to raise even more questions about the decision to go to war with Iraq, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence will on Friday release selected portions of pre-war intelligence in which the CIA warned the administration of the risk and consequences of a conflict in the Middle East.
Among other things, the 40-page Senate report reveals that two intelligence assessments before the war accurately predicted that toppling Saddam could lead to a dangerous period of internal violence and provide a boost to terrorists. But those warnings were seemingly ignored.
Well I’ll be damned, imagine that, the CIA actually warned the ‘Little Prince’, gave him an accurate and legitimate assessment of the ramifications of toppling Saddam, and Bush ignored the report, I am shocked, just SHOCKED I tell you…
In January 2003, two months before the invasion, the intelligence community’s think tank — the National Intelligence Council — issued an assessment warning that after Saddam was toppled, there was “a significant chance that domestic groups would engage in violent conflict with each other and that rogue Saddam loyalists would wage guerrilla warfare either by themselves or in alliance with terrorists.â€
It also warned that “many angry young recruits†would fuel the rank of Islamic extremists and “Iraqi political culture is so embued with mores (opposed) to the democratic experience … that it may resist the most rigorous and prolonged democratic tutorials.”
And it ALL came to fruition, as I said it would, as I have preached for far too long now, and I have been relentlessly ostracized in certain quarters FOR my assessments, with several saying I knew nothing and had no idea of what was done, why it was done or how it happened…
It appears to me that this story offers some vindication, wouldn’t you think?? Anyone want to take bets as to how many of my detractors will step forward to apologize?? Yeah, I don’t think they will either, but I have to wonder, how does that CROW taste??
None of those warnings were reflected in the administration’s predictions about the war.
In fact, Vice President Cheney stated the day before the war, “Now, I think things have gotten so bad inside Iraq, from the standpoint of the Iraqi people, my belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators.â€
I also wonder, how many MORE ways will the Bush administration have to be pointed out as the most ignorant, illogical and all around idiotic war planners in modern history before the ‘Bots’ finally accept the fact that Lord Bush is worthless as a military leader, and that his incompetence has lead this nation into a place we never should have been??
And forget the untold BILLIONS of our dollars WASTED on this debacle, we can make more money, the real travesty, the truly sad part is the over 3,200 fine young troops that have lost their lives, in vain, lost because Bush was pissed off at Saddam, all because Saddam made a weak threat against Daddy Bush, that ladies and gentleman, is the real reason we went to Iraq, it had NOTHING to do with terrorism, Iraqi freedom, democracy, oil or any other noble cause, we went to Iraq because an impertinent child wanted to impress his Daddy…
The GWoT was nothing more than a convenient excuse to take Saddam out of the picture, and just what has that won us?? Do you feel more secure because we’re getting our troops killed in Iraq by guys that are NO threat to this nation?? Do you feel more secure because ‘we’re fighting them there and not here’?? As other military bloggers have pointed out recently, how do you suppose those threats will make their way to America to conduct this ‘massive assault’ that’s held over our heads as justification FOR the Debacle in Iraq?? If our Homeland Security is up to snuff, if our borders and coastlines are as secure as the Bush administration would have us to believe, then we don’t face ANY threat from outside sources, so, who’s telling the truth??
I’m NOT anti-war folks, not in any way, if we must fight then by God fight to win and use any tactics or weapons necessary to WIN, but when we go to war we need to go for legitimate reasons with a 100% belief of our cause, so far all this Iraq mission has done is weaken our ability to take the fight where the fight really is, and it has cost us a loss of respect that the damage of which hasn’t even begun to surface yet…
It will be left to history to fully judge George W. Bush and his presidency, but early indications are that he has one thing keeping him from being the worst war fighting president in modern times and that would be the worst no-war fighting president of modern times himself, Jimmy Carter, but Bush still has a year and a half to take 1st place…
Full Story Here:
NBC: CIA warned of Mideast war risks
UPDATE: Does this come as ANY surprise to anyone??
Asked about the report at his Thursday news conference, in advance of its release, President Bush stood by his decision to topple the Iraqi regime. He said he firmly believes the world is better off without Saddam Hussein in power.
“Going into Iraq, we were warned about a lot of things, some of which happened, some of which didn’t happen,” he said. “Obviously, as I made a decision … I weighed the risks and rewards of any decision.”
Full Story Here:
Report Says Iraq Problems Were Expected
Well Mr. President, can you let us in on just what those rewards might be??
“This did not come from Fox News,” said the Bush Bot.
“No, it came from the CIA,” said educated American.
“I don’t believe anything the Citizens Against America has to say,” Said the Bush Bot.
“It’s not Citizens Against America you moron, it’s the Central Intelligence Agency,” said the educated American.
“Name calling is not allowed, you’re banned,” said the Bush Bot.
According to the book “What Was Asked of Us”, there was internal conflict within the cabinet about what would happen after Saddam fell. Powell and the State Dept felt that we had to guard against an insurgency and focus on the aftermath rather than the battle itself, and keep the Iraqi army intact to help us in that regard. The Pentagon disagreed and felt that all remnants of Saddam’s regime needed to be eliminated or else risk a constant imminent threat of him returning to power. They felt it was the only way to get rid of him once and for all (and thus the only way the Iraqis would embrace their newfound freedom) and wanted to just steamroll his entire army.
As you can see, both made compelling arguments. And for every bit of intelligence telling Bush what this post says, there was intelligence backing the Pentagon’s argument as well. Obviously, it wasn’t an easy decision and hindsight shows who was right after all. I’m not a blind Bush-backer, my own blog will attest to that, but I think it’s fair to give Bush the benefit of the doubt. He chose to go with what his military leaders and his SecDef was telling him rather than the State Dept. Can’t say I blame him there. Of course, they were wrong, but if I were him I think I would’ve done the same. After all, in a military engagement, I’m gonna listen to my military people. Unfortunately, we just don’t have the quality military leadership that we once had.
Your thoughts?
State Dept vs DoD… HmmmÂ
Trust the advice of General Colin Powell, a man who’s been there in EVERY sense of the word and was the Sec of State at the time and was giving the best advice Bush ever had or trust Donald Dumbsfeld, who was giving all the ‘Oh hell yeah Mr. President’ that was needed to encourage Bush on??
I’d be going with Gen. Powell personally…
And I’ll bet right about now, Bush wishes he had too, but Bush will NOT listen to his military leaders…
I think he has a hangup about their power or something of that nature, a mental hangup and he has to exercise his ego and feed the ‘little man syndrome’, but that’s just me thinking out loud…
Personally, I think he’s a moron that can’t chew gum and walk…
You can call me faithless. But in any event, I will say now and forever that this administration has been remarkably HORRIBLE in these two venues:
1. Communications. There is NO president WORSE than Bush in terms of speaking “on his feet,” or in terms of continuing to ENFORCE his various programs. The populace needs to HEAR, then, now, and in the future, about various plans. These plans need to be enforced with ANGRY rhetoric pronounced FROM THE GUT. Bush’s approval ratings ONLY climbed when he managed to GET PISSED.
2. Management of the Offensive. Little teensy-weeny airstrikes and covert actions manage not to get the JOB DONE. When we listen to how OTHERS portray our actions, we diminish our effectiveness. We have a military. Our military exists NOT to patch wounds or coo into the ears of others. Our military exists to KILL PEOPLE and BLOW SHIT UP.
If you are NOT willing to KILL PEOPLE and BLOW SHIT UP then do NOT deploy our military. We have been HELD BACK in Afghanistan and in Iraq. We can win ANY war we determine to win.
The ONLY reason we do not? Because we have not COMMITTED to same.
Bush is holding back and, for that, he is RESPONSIBLE for EVERY troop death extant.
Does ANYONE doubt that, if applied, we could win ANY war?
BZ
Unless the good Lord intervenes in the administration’s last days you may well be enjoying your last memorial in a nation internally at peace. The only laws that are enforced are the ones against its own citizens, selective at best. I voted for the bastards twice, but I’d be the first to tell you I pray God gives us some relief from these traitors, and I don’t give a damn who doesn’t like it.