Bush told Iraq war has helped al-Qa’eda

[DeadCanDance]

Bush told Iraq war has helped al-Qa’eda

By Tim Shipman in Washington
18/07/2007
Telegraph UK

President George W Bush was facing increasingly blunt criticism of his Iraq policy last night as a US intelligence report suggested that the war has made al-Qa'eda attacks on American soil more likely.

Senator George Voinovich, a close ally of Mr Bush, delivered a withering assessment of the situation in Iraq, declaring that the Bush administration had "f****d up the war".

The Ohio senator revealed that he warned Karl Rove - the President's chief political adviser - last week that Mr Bush must devise a new plan for Iraq or he would vote with Democrats on Capitol Hill to withdraw troops from Iraq.

He spoke out as a declassified National Intelligence Estimate of the terrorist threat to the US indicated that the Iraq war has helped al-Qa'eda "raise resources and to recruit and indoctrinate operatives, including for homeland attacks".

continued

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...F4AVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2007/07/18/wiraq118.xml

.

 

[Gunny]

So? Bush is accused of fucking up by a bunch of professional fuckups. Yippee.

 

[DeadCanDance]

Bush fans like to kick the CIA around, as a way of excusing their own piss poor policy decisions.

But the fact is, the CIA made a lot of good predictions. Predictions that were ignored by Bu$hCo.

CIA correctly predicted the post war situation, which conflicted with the rosy scenarios Bush admin officials were predicting:

CIA warned of risks of war in the Mideast
Pre-war reports say agency predicted dangers of toppling Saddam's regime

...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.

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 guerilla warfare either by themselves or in alliance with terrorists.”
Story continues below ↓advertisement

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."

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.”

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

With regard to WMD:

-CIA correctly predicted that Saddam was unlikely to cooperate with Al Qaeda, unless we invaded and attacked him. CORRECT. Post war intelligence findings show that Saddam considered Al Qaeda a threat to his own regime, and never helped them.

-Nukes: NIE assessments were MIXED. CIA correctly predicted saddam didn't have nukes, or a fully developed nuke program. But, that he was probably reconstituting a nuke program. INR on the other hand totally nailed it: they said there was no evidence the uranium tubes were intended for a nuke program, and that there was no significant active nuke program in Iraq. INR nailed it.

-Chem-Bio weapons: Here's where they screwed up. They incorrectly judged that Iraq had reconstitued bio-chem weapons. But, that was really the very least of our worries. Mustard gas and Sarin are not strategic weapons that really threaten the united states. They are really only useful as tactical battlefield weapons, and even then only under limited conditions. We certainly didn't wage a half a trillion dollar war over the "threat" from mustard gas or sarin.


http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/iraq-wmd.html

 

[dilloduck]

Bush fans like to kick the CIA around, as a way of excusing their own piss poor policy decisions.

But the fact is, the CIA made a lot of good predictions. Predictions that were ignored by Bu$hCo.

CIA correctly predicted the post war situation, which conflicted with the rosy scenarios Bush admin officials were predicting:




With regard to WMD:

-CIA correctly predicted that Saddam was unlikely to cooperate with Al Qaeda, unless we invaded and attacked him. CORRECT. Post war intelligence findings show that Saddam considered Al Qaeda a threat to his own regime, and never helped them.

-Nukes: NIE assessments were MIXED. CIA correctly predicted saddam didn't have nukes, or a fully developed nuke program. But, that he was probably reconstituting a nuke program. INR on the other hand totally nailed it: they said there was no evidence the uranium tubes were intended for a nuke program, and that there was no significant active nuke program in Iraq. INR nailed it.

-Chem-Bio weapons: Here's where they screwed up. They incorrectly judged that Iraq had reconstitued bio-chem weapons. But, that was really the very least of our worries. Mustard gas and Sarin are not strategic weapons that really threaten the united states. They are really only useful as tactical battlefield weapons, and even then only under limited conditions. We certainly didn't wage a half a trillion dollar war over the "threat" from mustard gas or sarin.


http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/iraq-wmd.html

And the democrats plan for dealing with al queda is--- ? Are you ever going to figure out that no one knows what's going on or are you to keep pretending that bashing the Bush helps?

 

[uscitizen]

Heck I predicted that invading iraq would boost AQ support before we even invaded.

 

[dilloduck]

Heck I predicted that invading iraq would boost AQ support before we even invaded.

No one has the slightest idea how much support AQ had before we attacked Iraq so to try to claim they have more now and that it's a direct result of America invading Iraq is hogwash.

 

[DeadCanDance]

No one has the slightest idea how much support AQ had before we attacked Iraq so to try to claim they have more now and that it's a direct result of America invading Iraq is hogwash.

If you would have turned off the Fox News in 2002, you would have learned that many people were saying that Saddam was highly unlikely to be allied with al qaeda, and even less likely to help them. He was a secularist who considered al qaeda a threat to his own regime.

Your war in iraq did nothing but act as a recruiting poster for al qaeda, and boost their brand-name image in much of the arab world. Bin Ladin is laughing his ass off that you invaded and occupied iraq.