Presidential Comission

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Both points are irrelevant to the discussion of bad intelligence and accountability.

 

Bush could not have said to the American people, "I want to go overthrow Saddam in Iraq because he's a bad guy and it's right to spread democracy" back in 2001-2 and been in any way within his Consitutional powers. So instead, he sang the clear and present danger song, which we now know is "dead wrong." Bad intel got us into a friggin war. Doesn't that bother you? What if the next bit of bad intel is about China? Ready to start a war with them over bad info? The people that got us into one war are still the ones at work today. I appreciate that intelligence is not exact, but this was a collossal failure with extreme consequences- not misreading a building location on a map.

292227[/snapback]

 

Was there an breakdown in intel? Yes. What was the cause, though?

 

I fully admit to not being read-up on the topic, but is it not at least possible that whatever WMD Iraq had under Saddam are now in Syria?

 

Is it not possible these weapons were in Iraq-pre-war?

[UConn James]

Both points are irrelevant to the discussion of bad intelligence and accountability.

 

Bush could not have said to the American people, "I want to go overthrow Saddam in Iraq because he's a bad guy and it's right to spread democracy" back in 2001-2 and been in any way within his Consitutional powers. So instead, he sang the clear and present danger song, which we now know is "dead wrong." Bad intel got us into a friggin war. Doesn't that bother you? What if the next bit of bad intel is about China? Ready to start a war with them over bad info? The people that got us into one war are still the ones at work today. I appreciate that intelligence is not exact, but this was a collossal failure with extreme consequences- not misreading a building location on a map.

292227[/snapback]

 

Nevermind that if Iraq indeed had the WMD that the admin said they had, it certainly would not have been "bloodless." That they counted on Saddam using chemical/biological weapons but it didn't happen isn't reason to jump up and down clapping about the decision after the fact.

[Alaska Darin]

Kim Jong Il only has control of a small portion of his country? 

292247[/snapback]

Aw, don't stop him now. He's rolling.

[UConn James]

Kim Jong Il only has control of a small portion of his country? 

292247[/snapback]

 

That's the concept of centralized power. He's the King of Pyongyang, but as you get out into the rural parts of the country where people are starving and the state isn't as omnipresent, there is less control. Until control is moved there in the form of ThoughtPolice, etc. KJI is very good at doing this, but the govt is going to implode sooner rather than later. Things Fall Apart. I concede that it's not exactly the same as Saddam's control of Baghdad and vicinity and tribal outside of that, but it's correlative.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Nevermind that if Iraq indeed had the WMD that the admin said they had, it certainly would not have been "bloodless." That they counted on Saddam using chemical/biological weapons but it didn't happen isn't reason to jump up and down clapping about the decision after the fact.

292257[/snapback]

 

I believe that the mid-level Iraqi commanders, seeing that the war was going against them, would NOT have pulled the trigger of a chemical attack for fear of repercussions from the US. In addition, the use of chemical weapons would ahve IMMEDIATELY turned the support of much of the world against Iraq.

[KRC]

That's the concept of centralized power. He's the King of Pyongyang, but as you get out into the rural parts of the country where people are starving and the state isn't as omnipresent, there is less control. Until control is moved there in the form of ThoughtPolice, etc. KJI is very good at doing this, but the govt is going to implode sooner rather than later. Things Fall Apart. I concede that it's not exactly the same as Saddam's control of Baghdad and vicinity and tribal outside of that, but it's correlative.

292270[/snapback]

 

He still has complete control over the rural areas. He dicates to the farmers what they can and cannot grow. His minions are omnipresent in the rural areas. Where do you think the gulags are? The rural areas. He monitors cell phone usage in the rural areas. Don't even think about getting close to the borders (again, rural areas).

 

KJI has complete control over the entire country. It is engrained in the Juche philosophy which is the basis for their entire way of life. The masses need the guidance of the leader in order to survive.

[KRC]

Aw, don't stop him now.  He's rolling.

292269[/snapback]

 

[chicot]

What is the actual cost in human life?

 

Yes, I realize you will say one is too many, but put into historical perspective, this has been one of the most bloodless wars in history from an American military casualty viewpoint. Put another way, more people died in ONE DAY at the Battle of Hastings in 1066 than have died in three years in Iraq...this despite the fact that weaponry has had nearly a thousand years to progress. I think it's a testament to our civilzed nature that this is so.

292057[/snapback]

 

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but are you actually saying that the fact that there has been so few casualties on the American side is a testament to the civilized nature of the US?! That seems to be an utterly bizarre viewpoint. By that measure you could say that the British that landed in Australia and proceeded to slaughter the native aborigines were civilized since they suffered so few casualties on their side

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but are you actually saying that the fact that there has been so few casualties on the American side is a testament to the civilized nature of the US?! That seems to be an utterly bizarre viewpoint. By that measure you could say that the British that landed in Australia and proceeded to slaughter the native aborigines were civilized since they suffered so few casualties on their side

292378[/snapback]

 

I should have added the statement that it is also my belief that there have been far fewer Iraqi casaulties than there could have been, largely due to the restraint and professionalism of our military.

[John Adams]

Was there an breakdown in intel? Yes. What was the cause, though?

 

I fully admit to not being read-up on the topic, but is it not at least possible that whatever WMD Iraq had under Saddam are now in Syria?

 

Is it not possible these weapons were in Iraq-pre-war?

292248[/snapback]

 

Even the President says Iraq had no WMDs. The Intel was "dead wrong.".

 

Your argument is that even though the man who lead the war admits he was wrong, and the Intel community has been chastised by a presidentially appointed comittee as "dead wrong," ... somehow, some way, maybe WMDs got out of the country.

 

Look, it's possible, but even the Republicans in power can't agree with that. That's how far you're willing to go with your own beliefs.

 

MY point is simple. We thought there were WMDs based on bad intel (and or for biased reasons as Ken points out). That bad intel drove us to take over a foreign country and cost us a lot of money. Despite such a monstrous error, there is not a blood bath of firings. Just a reorganization.

 

If I screwed up my job this badly- the results of which would be on a much smaller scale than launching a war- I would not only lose my job, I would be dis-barred, and maybe even go to prison.

 

But in our government, there are just a few reshufflings. I would think that the socialist Republicans would at least give lip service to how badly the intel community did, and demand some firings and cleansings. But no. I guess you guys have slipped further to the left than even *I* thought.

[Terry Tate]

That's the concept of centralized power. He's the King of Pyongyang, but as you get out into the rural parts of the country where people are starving and the state isn't as omnipresent, there is less control. Until control is moved there in the form of ThoughtPolice, etc. KJI is very good at doing this, but the govt is going to implode sooner rather than later. Things Fall Apart. I concede that it's not exactly the same as Saddam's control of Baghdad and vicinity and tribal outside of that, but it's correlative.

292270[/snapback]

I know a few things about North Korea. I recommend listening to KRC on this subject; he appears to have read up on it quite a bit.

[Campy]

Regardless of what the reason was for going over there, things will obviously be left in a better state than when we arrived.

292036[/snapback]

Same thing was said about the Philipines. And that took only 48 years.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Even the President says Iraq had no WMDs. The Intel was "dead wrong.".

 

Your argument is that even though the man who lead the war admits he was wrong, and  the Intel community has been chastised by a presidentially appointed comittee as "dead wrong," ... somehow, some way, maybe WMDs got out of the country.

 

Look, it's possible, but even the Republicans in power can't agree with that. That's how far you're willing to go with your own beliefs.

 

MY point is simple. We thought there were WMDs based on bad intel (and or for biased reasons as Ken points out). That bad intel drove us to take over a foreign country and cost us a lot of money. Despite such a monstrous error, there is not a blood bath of firings. Just a reorganization.

 

If I screwed up my job this badly- the results of which would be on a much smaller scale than launching a war- I would not only lose my job, I would be dis-barred, and maybe even go to prison.

 

But in our government, there are just a few reshufflings. I would think that the socialist Republicans would at least give lip service to how badly the intel community did, and demand some firings and cleansings. But no. I guess you guys have slipped further to the left than even *I* thought.

292521[/snapback]

 

Again, YOU GUYS? I am no Republican.

 

Simply because I supported this war doesn not make me a republican.

 

Now, you're correct--I believe--in your statement. I was merely raising a theoretical question. And yes, I agree with you, there should be firings. In fact, they should scrap both the CIA and FBI and reorganize them, consolidating both functions into one department.

 

That's JMO, however.

[Campy]

In fact, they should scrap both the CIA and FBI and reorganize them, consolidating both functions into one department.

 

That's JMO, however.

292934[/snapback]

Holy Stevestojan! I agree with JSP on something!

 

This can't be good.

[KRC]

Again, YOU GUYS? I am no Republican.

 

Simply because I supported this war doesn not make me a republican.

 

Now, you're correct--I believe--in your statement. I was merely raising a theoretical question. And yes, I agree with you, there should be firings. In fact, they should scrap both the CIA and FBI and reorganize them, consolidating both functions into one department.

 

That's JMO, however.

292934[/snapback]

 

What about the multitide of other intel agencies? Should they be scrapped and consolidated?

[KRC]

I know a few things about North Korea. I recommend listening to KRC on this subject; he appears to have read up on it quite a bit.

292828[/snapback]

 

Thanks. I have been studying the DPRK for several years.

[Campy]

Thanks. I have been studying the DPRK for years.

292944[/snapback]

Dumb and Presumptuous Responses to Ken?

[KRC]

Dumb and Presumptuous Responses to Ken?

292946[/snapback]

 

Yeah, that's it.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

What about the multitide of other intel agencies? Should they be scrapped and consolidated?

292941[/snapback]

 

I think the NSA and NRO should stay independent of the new CIA/FBI amalgamation.

 

The DIA and the Army and Navy intelligence services, however should be drawn in to the overall intelligence reform.

 

As a side note, I think the military should be uniform in command and rank structure, under one leadership structure. No more competing branches, a unified military.

[KRC]

I think the NSA and NRO should stay independent of the new CIA/FBI amalgamation.

 

The DIA and the Army and Navy intelligence services, however should be drawn in to the overall intelligence reform.

292967[/snapback]

 

I do not agree. NSA and NRO need to be part of the same intelligence structure. Why would they be separate?