WTF ... IS WTF!?
We are a collective of people who believe in freedom of speech, the rights of individuals, and free pancakes! We share our lives, struggles, frustrations, successes, joys, and prescribe to our own special brand of humor and insanity. If you are looking for a great place to hang out, make new friends, find new nemeses, and just be yourself, WTF.com is your new home.

Headlines Intel Officials Have Bleak View for Iraq

voiceofreason

Seeker of Truth
1,329
0
0
#1
Associated Press

WASHINGTON - The National Intelligence Council presented President Bush this summer with several pessimistic scenarios regarding the security situation in Iraq, including the possibility of a civil war there before the end of 2005.

In a highly classified National Intelligence Estimate, the council looked at the political, economic and security situation in the war-torn country and determined that — at best — stability in Iraq would be tenuous, a U.S. official said late Wednesday, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

At worst, the official said, were "trend lines that would point to a civil war." The official said it "would be fair" to call the document "pessimistic."

The intelligence estimate, which was prepared for Bush, considered the window of time between July and the end of 2005. But the official noted that the document draws on intelligence community assessments from January 2003, before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and the subsequent deteriorating security situation there.

This latest assessment was performed by the National Intelligence Council, a group of senior intelligence officials that provides long-term strategic thinking for the entire U.S. intelligence community.

Acting CIA Director John McLaughlin and the leaders of the other intelligence agencies approved the intelligence document, which runs about 50 pages.

The estimate appears to differ from the public comments of Bush and his senior aides who speak more optimistically about the prospects for a peaceful and free Iraq. "We're making progress on the ground," Bush said at his Texas ranch late last month.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, this IS a surprise, I really believed him when he said "We're making progress on the ground"...

LYING SACK OF SHIT!
 

tzedek

Original Member
2,515
3
38
#2
i dont understand why they would have a civil war. Would it be between people still loyal to Saddam and people who are for the new government? Im not surprised one bit about this new information tho... it just goes to show you how bad this administration really is. If only the mass of Americans would do some research instead of mindlessly believing in W...
 

DanGeo23

Resident Conservative
1,218
0
0
#3
U.S. official said late Wednesday, speaking on the condition of anonymity.
maybe this same "U.S. official" also typed memos "on the condition of anonymity"... I love anonymity.. cause U can say anything you want and nobody can dispute it.. cause they can't prove the source was BS
 

MaxPower

You're my number two
Staff
16,900
3,363
487
#4
DanGeo23 said:
maybe this same "U.S. official" also typed memos "on the condition of anonymity"... I love anonymity.. cause U can say anything you want and nobody can dispute it.. cause they can't prove the source was BS
You mean the memo that his secretary said she didn't recognize, but did reflected content of other documents?
 
R

RedOctober

Guest
#5
tzedek said:
i dont understand why they would have a civil war. Would it be between people still loyal to Saddam and people who are for the new government? Im not surprised one bit about this new information tho... it just goes to show you how bad this administration really is. If only the mass of Americans would do some research instead of mindlessly believing in W...
Well... I would have to repeat some history for you to be able to understand what happened.
Somewhere in the 60's there was an Iraqi government that had plans to nationalize their oil industry. The Brits and Americans didn't like that, and therefore a coup d'état was organised. The Baath party came into power.
Saddam Hussein sneaked his was into the high ranks, and when he became president, he did what gave him great popularity, and that was nationalizing the Iraqi oil industry. In the 70's Iraq was very wealthy, and Saddam was a popular guy. The problem was, with every dictator, that they always get more suspicious in time.
And at the same time, they get the wrong advises because nobody likes to get his head cut of. That's why he marched into Iran, and I really think he liked to teach the USA a lesson how to deal with muslim fundementalists.
In that period Iraq was a nation where islam was looked at as some kind of prehistoric faith.
Saddam took great pleasure in hitting the Iranians, but he didn't know that America was both helping Iraq and Iran.
When Colonel Oliver North was testifying about Irangate, the shit hit the fan.
From then on Saddam knew that you cannot trust Americans, although he was a villan himself.. But crooks also have some code of honor ;)

I think the photograph of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam says it all.

Saddam had all the time to tell his people that Iraq was fucked by the Americans. And his people knew too well Saddam was a criminal, but killing him would only produce another dictator, which might be even worse.

That was the situation before the American invasion in Iraq.
I knew an Iraqi collegue who told me most Iraqi's wanted a democracy after the first golf war, but the Americans did not want to overthrow the Iraqi regime of Saddam then, because a left wing government would be elected then. And the Yankees didn't want that then!

Now the fundamentelists have gained much more influence, and so America is feeding his future enemy as I see it.
Democracy is further away than ever in Iraq.

The real problem is the American obsession with left wing politics.
And not understanding the Iraqi's, or whatever other people.

The Romans always integrated the culture of a newly occupied country into the Roman Empire. Americans are not used to do that.
And that's why they harvest a lot of negative feelings in the world.

Iraq is a country of tribes, or clans. One person doesn't count.
They don't care about Saddam. That is the misunderstandig the Americans have! The tribe is important! Not a single member of a tribe!
To have Saddam in custody doesn't mean anything to them.

They know the next dictator is already planning his schemes, together with the Americans. I don't say that is true, but that is the way the common Iraqi thinks about it!

You can see Iraq as a new bloody theater. The stupid thing about it is Bush made Americans fight on Arabian soil. Arabs love that.

The funny thing about it is, Americans think very ambivalent.
I rememer the movie "Reds" or something, where the USA is invaded by Communist troops, and young kids move into a maverick kind of guerrilla war against the red invaders.

Pretty much the same way the Iraqi's fight today.
And of course the winner calls them... "terrorists".. :rolleyes:


Don't get me wrong!
I am friendly towards the USA. But I like to tell you my Euro view.
Just think about it. I think that would be fair enough.
Don't forget, we are a band of brothers, but we Europeans don't have aqny say in who's to be the next president of the superpower that is our friend,
but in the same time gives a shit about what we think and feel.

And that's a pity!
 

DanGeo23

Resident Conservative
1,218
0
0
#6
yeah there have been mistakes in the past "you keep your friends close and your enemies closer"...
I think the photograph of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam says it all.
what about the pic of Kerry meeting with the communist leaders of Vietnam in Paris...
RedOctober said:
Americans did not want to overthrow the Iraqi regime of Saddam then, because a left wing government would be elected then.
As I understand it... the UN asked GHWB not to overthrow Saddam...
RedOctober said:
Iraq is a country of tribes, or clans.
I think some sort of "break up" plan might work best.. give each group their own country...
RedOctober said:
The stupid thing about it is Bush made Americans fight on Arabian soil. Arabs love that.
personally I'm glad that it is going on there not here...
RedOctober said:
I rememer the movie "Reds" or something, where the USA is invaded by Communist troops, and young kids move into a maverick kind of guerrilla war against the red invaders.
"Red Dawn"... I understand those feelings.. I was the guy manning a .50cal rolling through the cities of Bosnia.. the young kids hated us.. but the old people that had lived through the years of warfare loved us..well love.. is a strong word.... *insert appreciate*
 
R

RedOctober

Guest
#7
DanGeo23 said:
I think some sort of "break up" plan might work best.. give each group their own country...
That's the whole idea!
The only point is, the oil companies don't like that!
The best solution is to devide Iraq in 3 parts.
Sunnite, Sjia and a Kurd region.


"Red Dawn"... I understand those feelings.. I was the guy manning a .50cal rolling through the cities of Bosnia.. the young kids hated us.. but the old people that had lived through the years of warfare loved us..well love.. is a strong word.... *insert appreciate*
Don't believe that!
They would cut your throat if they would get a chance!
Yougoslavia is a country with a blood soaked history.

Believe me, if I say that there are countries in Europe that have learned a lesson in the past 100 years, and one of them is Spain.
The civil war over there was so bloody, that after a period of almost 70 years, every family still knows what relatives were killed.
Spain has become a democracy out of pain and bloodshed.

That's why the idiot Aznar party was kicked out when there were elections. I still believe the CIA or some American gung ho terrorists planted the bombs in Madrid. I know, that former IRA terrorists work for the American government!
 
2
0
0
#8
RedOctober said:
That's the whole idea!
The only point is, the oil companies don't like that!
The best solution is to devide Iraq in 3 parts.
Sunnite, Sjia and a Kurd region.
Post WWI, Iraq was formed. Prior to that, it was Sunni, Shia, and Kurd. And I agree...it's the best solution. Especially when the first two have a little less than love for each other, and noone like a Kurd haha. Ask the Turks about that. I think the only thing truly standing in the way of the Kurd Region, is Turkey.
 

MaxPower

You're my number two
Staff
16,900
3,363
487
#9
All I know is you have to keep the kurds seperate from the whey, or there'll be problems.
 

DanGeo23

Resident Conservative
1,218
0
0
#10
RedO said:
That's why the idiot Aznar party was kicked out when there were elections. I still believe the CIA or some American gung ho terrorists planted the bombs in Madrid. I know, that former IRA terrorists work for the American government!
you mean you think the US wanted the socialist to win over the US friendly former Frez....