CIA painted bleak picture on Iraq
July 12th, 2007 . by TexasFredCIA said Iraq instability seemed ‘irreversible’
Hayden painted bleaker picture than Bush to Iraq Study Group
Early on the morning of Nov. 13, 2006, members of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group gathered around a dark wooden conference table in the windowless Roosevelt Room of the White House.
For more than an hour, they listened to President Bush give what one panel member called a “Churchillian” vision of “victory” in Iraq and defend the country’s prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki. “A constitutional order is emerging,” he said.
“A constitutional order is emerging”, and in his speech today Bush admitted that the Iraqis had met 8 of the 18 benchmarks set forth for them…
For those of you not familiar with military nomenclature, this is what’s called Pissing UP a rope, you’re gonna get wet regardless, all Bush has is an ever shrinking rooting section, a whole bunch of Rah-Rah and he’s the head cheerleader…
Later that morning, around the same conference table, CIA Director Michael V. Hayden painted a starkly different picture for members of the study group. Hayden said “the inability of the government to govern seems irreversible,” adding that he could not “point to any milestone or checkpoint where we can turn this thing around,” according to written records of his briefing and the recollections of six participants.
“The government is unable to govern,” Hayden concluded. “We have spent a lot of energy and treasure creating a government that is balanced, and it cannot function.”
Later in the interview, he qualified the statement somewhat: “A government that can govern, sustain and defend itself is not achievable,” he said, “in the short term.”
And if you’ve been reading this blog you’d almost think I was privy to some inside information, maybe I’m just psychic, maybe I pay attention, maybe it’s because I’m not a blind Bush Bot, but it sure seems that a lot of the subjects I’ve hammered Bush on in the past few months have come to fruition lately, amazing, simply amazing…
And the CIA director sits there and tells them the truth, and I would bet serious bucks that after he did, he was ordered to keep his mouth shut in the future, the CIA took a lot of the blame for the invasion of Iraq, for providing Bush with the justifications for going into Iraq, they we’re held accountable for a lot of bad Intel work when the truth is, a lot of GOOD Intel was laid out before the invasion as well, but most, if not all of it was ignored because it didn’t support George W. Bush and his insane desire for revenge on Saddam…
The story goes on to detail the failings of the administration and their continued efforts to ignore any and all individuals or groups that aren’t solidly in the Bush camp concerning the war in Iraq, and how best to bring Bush’s idea of democracy in Iraq to fruition…
It’s a bit of a long read, there’s some ‘he said, you said’ but it’s a well written piece in my opinion, and yes, it points out the obvious, a conclusion that many of us reached quite some time ago, until someone gets control of Bush or we get a president in office that has a reasonably intelligent train of thought and will actually listen to his learned advisers and stop shooting from the hip, we’re going to be in Iraq a long while…
Full Story Here:
CIA painted bleak picture on Iraq
Trackback URL:
http://texasfred.net/archives/339/trackback/
Well, I had to get done with laughing my ass off at the pissing up the rope analogy and the rest of that paragraph before I could even try to comment…
That couldn’t of been said any better.
I too believe Bush was warned and HIGHLY advised that it would be a mistake by the Intel folks. They aren’t that stupid, they know what kind of fanatics they are, their history and culture.
Loyalty is a mutual respect, it seems alot of folks have tried to be that way. Live by that code, only to be kicked in the balls and stabbed in the back by him.
But it goes back to the fact that he was dead set on the invasion no matter what.
REVENGE.
If this would have been handled like Japan or Germany when We knew what the hell we were doing everything would be going far better. These people needed that long and forced occupation like a MacArthur.
If it wasn’t for all the screw ups currently running our government and the Media failing to get behind our troops I think it would be different.
Iraq needed doing one way or another. You can’t do war PC. You can’t give constant comfort and information to the enemy. You can’t screw our troops like the Hadetha case. War is a whole lot of death and destruction and winning means theirs not ours.
Damn this stuff pisses me off.
Ya, like Gunz, I liked the pissing up the rope comment…rofl.
Great post and I think you are right with the CIA officer being told to keep his mouth shut, we cant let Bush look bad now can we…wink, wink.
And as Ablur said, if we had handled Iraq as we did with Germany, massive B52 non-stop bombings… or Japan with 2 nukes (untold civilian collateral damage??!!) then we wouldn’t still be carping on this sorry situation. You fight a war to win, to save ourselves, and our troops. Civilians get caught up in the fight, well maybe they should have not supported their dictators and their mad schemes.
If we bring our men and women warriors back home will the terrorists follow?
Probably, but then that might be an incentive for us to really bring the fight to them in a way that Fred and Gunz and I were trained to do so long ago.
‘Nuff said
1. Gen. Patreous will give his report in September
a. It will be a postive report of improvement
2. A huge fight will ensue between libdems and the Bushco faction
3. Bushco will come to the podium (again) and declare mission accomplished (again)
4. Our military will once again have died for defeat
5. We are screwed.
Damn it I forgot to add that Bush will announce his own withdrawl plan during his mission accomplished statement. JUST in time for the ‘08 elections.