CIA review faults Bush prewar plans

[W8EFA]

Quote[/b] ] newly released report published by the CIA rebukes the Bush administration for not paying enough attention to prewar intelligence that predicted the factional rivalries now threatening to split Iraq.

Policymakers worried more about making the case for the war, particularly the claim that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, than planning for the aftermath, the report says. The report was written by a team of four former CIA analysts led by former deputy CIA director Richard Kerr.

"In an ironic twist, the policy community was receptive to technical intelligence (the weapons program), where the analysis was wrong, but apparently paid little attention to intelligence on cultural and political issues (post-Saddam Iraq), where the analysis was right," they write.


USA Today Article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20051012/ts_usatoday/ciareviewfaultsprewarplans)

[wd0ct]

More nails in this administration's coffin. DFP will be along any minute now claiming this never happened and is all a liberal lie.

[w5klb]

The CIA relied on a false report from an Iraqi that was on the "fast tract" and favored to be Interim Priminister for Iraq. In other words, the CIA gave faulty intellegence to the Administration in the first place. And here they are "rebulking" the adminstration "for not paying enough attention to pre war intellegence"? There's something wrong with that picture.

If you will recall history, George Tenet, a Klinton holdover, resigned over the faulty intellegence his spooks gave to the Bush Administration at the beginning of the war.

Now, Mr. Diamond wants to draw our attention to a "report" from this very same agency that gave us this faulty intellegence. I think if there's any "rebulking" to do, we need to look no further than our CIA.

Like poor "marksmen", the libs are aiming at the wrong target and keep shooting themselves in the foot.

CT,

Better stick with being a good amateur. It appears carpentry isn't your forte. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[W8EFA]

First of all there were numerous people that warned Bush that the intelligence was faulty. Richard Clarke the head terrorist Czar for one documented very well that the Bush Administration did not want to look into the credibility. That is what they had actually asked for - any excuse to invade. A competetent administration would not go to war on one man's opinion.

However they refused to listen to the good intelligence we had on the makeup and difficulties we would encounter once we got there. They didn't care. As a result a lot of lives have been lost from Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfelds arrogance and incompetence.

From Tim Russert Interview
Quote[/b] ]Cheney, March 16, 2003: 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. . . .

Q: If your analysis is not correct, and we're not treated as liberators, but as conquerors, and the Iraqis begin to resist, particularly in Baghdad, do you think the American people are prepared for a long, costly, and bloody battle with significant American casualties?

Cheney: Well, I don't think it's likely to unfold that way, Tim, because I really do believe that we will be greeted as liberators. . . . The read we get on the people of Iraq is there is no question but what they want to the get rid of Saddam Hussein and they will welcome as liberators the United States when we come to do that.



At the time Cheney had the CIA intelligence of the problems we would be facing but he lied once again.

Too bad we can't recall the President like we do Governors!

[w5klb]

So Bill, OM EFA,

What does troop casulties and being liberators have anything to do with your orginal post on bad intellegence?

Oh... wait... now it get it... this was a non-sequintor thrown in just to keep conservatives like me "off balance". A "If you can't dazzle them with brillance..." type situation. Good try, but your going to have to do better than that.

I see that you have no nothing of substance to refute my facts. Just a lot of smoke and mirrors and conjecture. As much as you and your liberal friends would want to rewrite history, you guys will never change the facts.

I'm spinning the VFO on this thread. Buh-Bye.

[KE7DFP]

Quote[/b] (wd0ct @ Oct. 12 2005,08:01)]More nails in this administration's coffin. DFP will be along any minute now claiming this never happened and is all a liberal lie.
Actually, I don't have time to adress the ABLE DANGER #story. #I'm having too much fun in the other thread looking at your kooky pals in the Anti-Bush movent. #Wow!!! Some demonstration. #I think I spotted EFA in one of the photos, hard to tell though, he had a red bandana with a hammer and sickle covering his face. #Why don't you find another source than USA Today, and I'll get back later with my 3 cents worth.

[nx6d]

Quote[/b] (KE7DFP @ Oct. 12 2005,11:36)]Quote[/b] (wd0ct @ Oct. 12 2005,08:01)]More nails in this administration's coffin. DFP will be along any minute now claiming this never happened and is all a liberal lie.
Actually, I don't have time to adress the ABLE DANGER #story. #I'm having too much fun in the other thread looking at your kooky pals in the Anti-Bush movent. #Wow!!! Some demonstration. #I think I spotted EFA in one of the photos, hard to tell though, he had a red bandana with a hammer and sickle covering his face. #Why #don't you find another source than USA Today, and I'll get back later with my 3 cents worth.
keep the change, dfp.

now you're pulling your "guilt by association" number on efa, as well.

just how low will you go?