We Didn’t Know Nothing
Click here for a link to a declassified US study on why no WMDs were found in Iraq. It is heavily redacted but enough of it comes through to trace the general narrative. The basic finding is that the CIA had been getting it wrong since the early 1990s.
Tragedy of Errors
Foreign Policy calls it a “classified mea culpa”. It highlights this section. “Given Iraq’s extensive history of deception and only small changes in outward behavior, analysts did not spend adequate time examining the premise that the Iraqis had undergone a change in their behavior, and that what Iraq was saying by the end of 1995 was, for the most part, accurate.”
There was no sudden intelligence failure caused by Blackwater, George Bush and Dick Cheney. The intelligence community had been getting it wrong for a long time. Analysts determined that Saddam Hussein had been engaged in a policy of “cheat and retreat” from 1991 and onward and thereafter saw things through that prism.
Once the lens had been fixed, it stayed fixed.
The report on page 4 says that the defection of Hussein Kamel al-Majid, “the son-in-law and second cousin of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. He defected to Jordan and assisted United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspection teams assigned to look for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq” marked the turning point in Iraq’s program of deception. Probably believing the CIA now knew the truth, Saddam decided to play it straight. But as the report on page 4 says, the intelligence community didn’t believe Saddam even then.
The report will doubtless comfort those who never believed that George W. Bush had distorted intelligence to justify the invasion of Iraq. But its principle significance is the manner in which it documents a decade long screw up. The question it implicitly raises: why should anyone think that US intelligence is getting it right on Iran now?
The Iranians could have:
- more
- fewer
- many more
- no
nuclear weapons in development. Choose one answer and make sure you mark it heavily. The exam will be graded by history in a few decades. How do we know which the correct answer is? Well let’s ask the CIA. What could go wrong?
Belmont Commenters
How to Publish on Amazon’s Kindle for $2.99
The Three Conjectures at Amazon Kindle for $1.99
Storming the Castle at Amazon Kindle for $3.99
No Way In at Amazon Kindle $8.95, print $9.99
One of the great paradoxes is that we need to learn what we don’t know, but we will never know what we don’t know. The problem is that the more certain we are, the harder it is for us to find the Truth. (See DNC)
Once you realize this truth, and realize you will never know, it is the start of wisdom.
The exam will be graded right after the flash and thunder have gone and the fallout is wafting its way back to earth. The CIA cannot be trusted because they have been infected by the same partisan Democrat disease that has infected most of the rest of government. The Party comes before the country. The IC threw GWB under the bus. They no longer serve the People but are an apparatus to preserve state power for unconstitutional war making against US citizens both here and abroad. They serve their despots well because they are aligned with them, but not all of them mind you. Just the ones they choose.
ps – I am having trouble with the link…
EdO@3 – yeah humint is best. That is why free societies fail and tyrannies do so well. How is the humint goin’ on North Korea you suppose? You wont find it on WikiLeaks that’s for sure. Traitors inside China get executed. Traders to the US get speaking engagements. Daniel Ellsberg should have had a bullet put in his head but he blamed Kennedy’s and Johnson’s war on Nixon. That got him a pass.
As has been said here and elsewhere, nothing beats human intelligence sources in country and on the ground. So what if you can read a newspaper from 200 miles up? That doesn’t tell you what the newspaper’s reader is thinking. All this high-tech eye-in-the-sky stuff is (literally) for the birds.
Selah.
Ed O.
So those of us (me included) who speculated that Iraqi WMDs ended up in Syria are wrong, according to these documents.
I still disagree.
20 tons of varied WMDs were captured in Jordan not too long after the fall of Iraq in an attempt to punish Jordan’s ruler for the assistance he gave the US.
Jordan’s secret service foiled the plot, which was simplistic (throw it all at the ruling area and make a toxic cloud of so many different WMDs that they can’t possibly treat the dying people). The WMDs came in from Syria, who of course were not reputed to have such large stores of the WMDs that were captured, nor would they be likely to throw them away on a marginal plan like this.
Funny how the Syrians were willing to toss away so many WMDs shortly after those trucks drove over the border from Iraq…
This is one of the primary reasons that I believe a bombing campaign is not the best choice. As I often state, a Reconnaissance-in-Force is a better option. The idea is that we have a real, close look, and deal with what we find, real time. If done properly the loss of life (theirs) will (could) be small.
I am still thinking that several brigades (9-12) running cross country (from three or four directions) visiting each site, not initiating combat (Combat would be COMPLETED, just not sought or initiated!) could do the trick. Certainly it would be a major effort, but so would an air campaign of enough intensity to make the probability of success greater than 95%.
For every pair of boots you get a pair of eyes.
Think Sherman’s march to Savannah, living off the land (fuel), supported by airborne created supply lagers leapfrogged in advance of the column, and significant CAS.
ta
I vote for more under development, based on nothing more than their unbridled Islamic arrogance and stated genocidal intent.
For what it’s worth, I also predict that by 2023 full nuclear detonation, a fizzled nuke, or dirty bomb will be detonated by Muslims, probably in multiple simultaneous acts. It will be Sunni terrorists, not Shiites, who detonate the first Islamic bomb or series of bombs. That is based on vastly more terror funding done by Sunnis, vastly more Sunnis located outside Dar ul Islam, unlimited coffers available for Sunni funding, vastly more access to Sunnis for Western technology in schools and businesses, and well established Sunni/Saudi/UAE/Qatar links to (primarily) Sunni terror-state and nuclear rogue Pakistan …
I also predict Iran will continue to develop its nukes no matter what Israel does next month. I also predict they will produce fully operational nuclear bombs despite all international efforts. It is also highly likely that the first nuke which Muslim terrorists detonate already sits in Pakistan on a shelf, in a bunker, or possibly already in transit. I aslo predict we will learn at some point that Saudi Arabia has already purchased nukes from Pakistan, or own part of the Pakistani inventory. So what do I win if I am right?
AM @ 2
Nixon’s actual Vietnam policies were hugely informed by the exact same conclusions as the Pentagon Papers: JFK/LBJ were totally on the wrong track — and that American needed to unwind/ offload the ‘project’ — to the locals.
It’s of extreme irony that Nixon went after Ellsberg because he was a LEAKER — of a critique of LBJ’s / McNamera’s war.
And all the while Ellsberg became famous/infamous — Nixon was unwinding the war faster than LBJ ever screwed things up.
Among my Democrat associates — 100% opine that Vietnam was Nixon’s war!
NONE ever connect JFK to the fiasco.
Nations were finding casus belli centuries before nuclear weapons were invented.
Iran has captured the US Embassy in Tehran, Bombed the Khobar Towers and the Marine barracks in Lebanon. Declare war on the coc__ukers and bounce the rubble.
When the Mad Dog Mullahs are sitting in the dark (because the US knocked out the power grid), hungry (because the USA has destroyed every bridge and railroad tunnel in Iran and no food goes anywhere) waiting fir a JDAM to find them maybe they will figure it out. Pissing uncle Sam off was a bad idea.
Safe shower days at Penn State are now over.
“Given Iraq’s extensive history of deception and only small changes in outward behavior, analysts did not spend adequate time examining the premise that the Iraqis had undergone a change in their behavior, and that what Iraq was saying by the end of 1995 was, for the most part, accurate.”
This is a silly and shallow report, redactions aside. It ignores the context.
OK, what it says is what EVERYONE knows, that Iraq acted AS IF they were hiding something. This in a situation after 9/11 when the US had *serious* concerns about the issues, had already been bombing Iraq for ten years, and was itching to attack any Moslem country that provided any convenient excuse.
Iraq asked for it, and they got what they asked for.
Not much else to say, but “oops”.
… and of course, we WERE so leisurely in getting about it that we don’t know to this day if there really were WMD and if they are even now still in bunkers in Lebanon or Syria.
Does this tell us anything about wassup with Iran? Sure! And it’s the same damn thing. We have *serious* and legitimate concerns, and no probative evidence either way. The broader context is not QUITE the same as in 2001/2002, not to mention Iran is a bigger country, and has been hiding their nuclear resources and building defenses, expecting attack. For the US to decide on an attack, the game theory equations are challenging. For Israel the motivation is much stronger – but the means to effect it are much weaker. Europe? Russia? Whatever. The UN? Yeah right.
The most likely solutions remain bad ones, either Iran builds their bombs and then whatever happens happens, or the US gets a new president and assists Israel on a major preemptive attack, probably more an attack on the regime than on the nuclear facilities (oops, did I just say that out loud?). All other solutions are far less likely to occur, and far less likely to lead to good outcomes. Israel attacking alone? Almost inconceivable to attempt, and strategic success even less conceivable.
The details of the quality of our “intelligence” reporting doesn’t really matter, compared to the public details.
I will add the hopefull note that we don’t know all the covert resources that are in play. It is *barely* possible that these are significant and the real threat much less so, and even that the Iranians know it, and know that we know, and we know that they know that we know, and that all we’re seeing on both sides is a dumb show. This is what it turned out was the case with Osama bin Laden – we were watching him for years, before paying him a visit. Maybe that’s even what Saddam thought he was doing and would be allowed to get away with. Didn’t turn out that way. As Joebiden said, don’t bet against the US of A.
A ‘civilization’ which will do this will do ANYTHING… Do not click through if you are squeamish. This incident happened earlier this year but is just making the rounds in the anti-Jihad with translation…
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/muslims-burn-3-gay-men-alive-allah-and-his-minions
By the way, this is a perfectly acceptable Sharia punishment. A jewish American scholar named Noah Feldman advised George Bush to enshrine Sharia law into the Constitutions of both Iraq and Afghanistan. And he did.
We should be prepared to do anything to protect ourselves from a civilization that does this. We must be prepared to do anything, and I mean anything, to stop this obscenity. Not sure winning their hearts and minds was such a good idea. Not sure Noah Feldman had it right. Not sure George Bush 2 should have been building roads and schools and hospitals, or letting patriots die to bring civilization to such savages. Not sure we learned the right lesson so far from the Muslim curriculae.
Oh, I’m pretty sure this Religion of Peace exhibit happened in Iraq…
The problem with restrospective reports like this is that they presume to have perfect knowledge know about a subject they hadn’t a clue about then. This is like a bug fix to a program that has just totaled your computer. It’s good this time, eh? Well it’s the same programmers doing the fix right?
The only safe conclusion is that there appears to be a good of variance in the intelligence estimates. It can be completely or mostly wrong on very substantial matters. And that is probably as true today about Iran as it was about Iraq.
Bureaucracies, like people, see with their minds. They don’t see in the first instance with their organs of sight. The eyeball just sends a bunch of signals. What we make of it is another story.
Hence, it might be best avoid any “step” functions in the future. The best way to treat intelligence is something in a very closed loop that gets updated with each cycle. But this business of staking the fate of the region on a single throw of the dice seems a dangerous proposition.
If you look at Iran policy, it is structured exactly like a step function. The West is ‘holding back’ until it receives definite intelligence of an Iranian breakout. This is perilous. It might be better to have started covert ops against Iran already, and in that way gain intelligence, rather than stay all calm and peaceful for decades in the belief that one can unleash hell at precisely the right moment. At our level of intelligence gathering, this all-or-nothing approach is probably going to be no better than a crap shoot.
Morton @7
I also predict Iran will continue to develop its nukes no matter what Israel does next month. I also predict they will produce fully operational nuclear bombs despite all international efforts. It is also highly likely that the first nuke which Muslim terrorists detonate already sits in Pakistan on a shelf, in a bunker, or possibly already in transit. I aslo predict we will learn at some point that Saudi Arabia has already purchased nukes from Pakistan, or own part of the Pakistani inventory. So what do I win if I am right?
Nobel War Prize
re a previous thread – It looks like Canadians are asking Was Jennifer Granholm Drunk? Or just Canadian? The comments are interesting.
There’s something that has puzzled me for a long time. Why would a country dribble out “assistance” in building a nuclear weapon rather than sell the blueprints or an actual device?
It’s obvious Saddam was one of them. Today he lives on a beach in the Aegean, where kids pay nickels to see him make sand angels with his large bulky physique.
The true danger of WMD can’t be understood without context, which isn’t possible given the present ways of science and religion. It might be better to blackout the media than to fill it with lies like they’ve done.
A grandmaster can play fifty games of blindfold chess and win forty-eight of them against ranked players.
Information? You won’t get it!
6. michael hoskins NO! Your plan sounds like what the Japs came up with a Midway.
You never split your forces when attacking superior numbers.
Boots on the ground brings us down to their level. Never give a sucker an even break.
Never fight fair. The best shot is one in the back BEFORE they know you are there.
War is the province of chance. Air war reduces the ‘fog of war’ tremendously.
Ground war is only neccessary if you plan on conquering a nation to add to your empire. If you just want to make a point, bombing is better. Here is what I think of putting ground troops into Iran;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ovdm2yX4MA
In5an3!
Iran has too large a population to invade without a significant logistical base in a nation like Iraq or Afghanistan. I can’t see it.
The reality is that nuclear weapons are technology that are over 70 years old. Imagine telling a nation you cannot build a 1945 Chevrolet? With advances in the technology it is getting easier and easier to make the weapons. With nations like the PRC shortsightedly willing to sell blueprints or give the nations desirous of nukes other aide non-proliferation is a losing battle.
The US and Israel should work on interception and retaliation
Simply tell the Muslim nations that if a nuclear weapon is used against the US then the the cities of Mecca and Medina will be reduced to tritonite and the Kabah will be captured ground up mixed into concrete and then poured into a mold that looks like Elvis Presley so that the Hadji can really worship the king
Back in the mid-90’s when Pakistan exploded its first nuclear weapons and India responded with additional tests of its own, I was struck by an NPR report on why the intelligence community missed these developments.
The report said that the CIA analysts had heard the clear statements by the leaders of Pakistan and India, but “assumed that the leaders were lying, based on their experience with US politicians, who often lie.”
Remember, this was during the Clinton Admin.
So, based on Slick Willie’s performance, the analysts assumed that the leaders of Pakistan and India were lying about building nukes. And that Saddam was lying about not having WMDs.
The analysts could not handle politicians who tell the truth.
fm @ 19: The reality is that nuclear weapons are technology that are over 70 years old. Imagine telling a nation you cannot build a 1945 Chevrolet?
…
Simply tell the Muslim nations that if a nuclear weapon is used against the US then the the cities of Mecca and Medina will be reduced to tritonite and the Kabah will be captured ground up mixed into concrete and then poured into a mold that looks like Elvis Presley so that the Hadji can really worship the king
There is much to what you say. We have small standing to tell them what they can and cannot build. We have full standing to tell them what we will or won’t do.
Of course that lumps Shia Iran with Sunni Saudi Arabia, … not that it bothers me any, but let’s pick some additional targets, not like there’s any shortage of “holy cities”, we can show them what holey is really all about. They keep saying we can’t declare war on 1.5 billion people. But that’s the same kind of dare we’re just reading that Saddam Hussein kept putting on us, “you won’t dare call my bluff”. We might just do it by accident. Oops. Anyway the direct targets in Iran and Arabia barely total 100m, and most of those primitives, primitives with very nasty pretensions.
The brute truth of the matter is we could do it in an hour and not miss dinner, and that’s without much special preparation.
… which is part of what I have against the restraint (if that’s the word) we have showed in Iraq and Afghanistan. May not be making entirely clear to the goatherds of the world exactly what the real game is, and after all it’s only fair to warn them – but Dubya’s strategy of dropping big bombs outside of Baghdad as a demonstration was a total failure. Obviously something more direct is needed to establish the point. It’s all marketing, you know. Diplomacy if you will. Very hot, loud diplomacy.
“Iraqi WMDs ended up in Syria are wrong, according to these documents.”
Or the documents are wrong. If they were wrong the first time, why believe them this time? I think they are way behind the curve, that they are wrong most of the time.
Humint is more dangerous then overheads. You can hide with overheads but it is very difficult to lie with one. Trickery is more difficult. Happens all the time with humint. Spy lie, it is part of the spy thing. They get turned and burned. What works best is a combo.
1. Iran does not yet have a working A-bomb. If it had one, it would set it off in a test shot to prove that it works, and to show the rest of the world that it had one.
Pancho was a bandit boy.
His horse was fast as polished steel.
Wore his gun outside his pants,
For all the honest world to fear.
2. A US-Israel air attack on Iran could destroy its industrial capacity and therefore its ability to build an A-bomb. Kill their electric grid and their oil wells, and they are pretty much dead in the water. Underground factories are just pre-dug graves.
3. George Bush’s biggest mistake was not firing everyone above the rank of Sargent in the CIA and the FBI on 9/12/2001.
4. His second biggest mistake was in not inflicting punishment, instead of nation building after 9/11. He should have vaporized Mecca and Medina and left it at that. Islamic societies are not fixable unless Islam is extirpated.
That CIA report is a lie. Saddam suddenly decided to play it straight? What a load of rubbish….lol He had WMD. He had them in the 1980′s, the 1990′s and on the eve of the US invasion in 2003. Russian Spetsnaz and European special operations got them out of there in truck convoys marked “UN”. They took them to Syria. CIA knows that, and so does Fuhrer Obama. He, Patraeus (a registered Demotard who admitted publicly having voted for Obama) are putting this out now to keep the cover up going on for the Russian and European masters. It’s for this reason none of them want to touch the Syrian rebellion. Because when Assad finally falls, there is too much chance this truth will get out.
Do I trust the American Intelligence Community to be working primarily for the United States? No, they have proved time and again in this century that they are working for the political agenda of one party.
Do I trust the new claim that there were no weapons? No, because the source is intrinsically untrustworthy as to means and motivation. There were convoys leaving Iraq that deposited unknown cargo in Syria. I will assume that entities that bid defiance and hostility [by word and deed] to this country actually mean what they say. I will include domestic political entities and their allies in that.
Do I believe that Iran has, or is close to having, nuclear weapons? Yes. Political evidence includes alternating claims that they are in that position, and denials that they are. When on the receiving end of threats, one threat outweighs a whole lot of protestations of innocence. That factor, by the way, is more probative for Israel than it is for the US, because they receive most of the threats. Not all, mind you. In Farsi publications and broadcasts [which do not make it into our media because it does not suit their agenda] we get a lot of threats. Remember, we are the “Great Satan” and Israel is the “Lesser Satan” to Iran.
Physical evidence includes the nuclear infrastructure that they have built or are building that we can see. They claim that they are merely enriching uranium, preparing to fuel power reactors. This when nuclear power reactors make no economic sense in a country sitting on lakes of oil, but short of refining capability. A fraction of the investment in their nuclear program would give them sufficient refineries and power plants to furnish all the electrical power that they could ever need. After all, there is no EPA in Shia Iran.
Without going into the details of the use of gaseous diffusion centrifuges for uranium enrichment, I will note that fuel for nuclear power plants is only enriched to 3-5% U-235. Nuclear weapons require 70% enrichment. There are reports that the fuel furnished [both directly and financed on Iran’s behalf] was 9% enriched already. If that is true, then if they are running it through the centrifuges to enrich it, they are going for weapons grade. If it is not true and it was plain yellowcake ore [and it does not seem to be]; then over the years and number of centrifuges in operation they are either trying to enrich it to weapons grade, or they are stockpiling enough 3% U-235 fuel for more nuclear reactors than they can ever dream of building [the stuff does have a half life, and breaks down over time].
Ockham’s Razor: their statements backed by physical evidence makes the most likely explanation that they are doing what they say they are doing. Especially since they are going out of their way to keep us from confirming or denying the truth of their threats, and are constantly making further threats. If they are lying, the consequences should be on them.
Do I believe that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia may have purchased nuclear weapons? It is quite possible. I reference the Saudi missile force.
In 1987 China sold several dozen (reportedly between 36 and 60) outmoded DF-3 missiles to Saudi Arabia, minus their nuclear warheads. The DF-3 normally has a range of 2,780 kilometers, with a maximum altitude of 550 kilometers. With depressed trajectory, the DF-3 travels 1,550 kilometers at 100 kilometers altitude. The warhead weight is about 2,150 kilograms with a CEP of 1000-4000 meters. For those not conversant with the acronym, CEP is Circular Error Probability. 50% of the missiles fired will land their warhead inside a circle of that size. That is an awful expensive way to throw 2000 kilos of high explosive that only has a 50% chance of coming within 2/3 of a mile of the target. IRBM’s only make sense with nuclear warheads. The DF-3 can carry 1-3 nuclear warheads.
The missiles and 8-12 TEL’s are based at Al Sulayyil Missile Base 20°43’07″N 45°35’01″E
In March 1988 China sold Saudi Arabia 120 CSS-2 IRBM’s with a range of 2,500 kilometers and a CEP of 2.5 kilometers. Yes, they can carry conventional warheads or chemical warheads, but once again they make much more strategic sense with nuclear warheads. 60 missiles and 6 concrete launch pads each at Al Sulayyil Missile Base and at al-Joffer, 100 km south of Riyadh. All data above about Saudi Arabia is open source and findable if you look.
Times will become interesting in the Middle East, soon. To Obama’s joy and with his connivance if he is re-elected. To Romney and America’s chagrin if Obama is not.
Subotai Bahadur
the freedom fried were hard to swallow though
this forged official discourse is like today’s discourse of the eurozone elite berating Greece, Spain and Italy for more reforms
they just are hiding that this is not these countris that they want to save, but the world banking system
BTW a British Iraki family has been killed in France by professional killers in a ambush, and we don’t know why, as the mobile wasn’t for robbing them.
The man was a aeronautic ingener, whose father fled saddam regime in the seventies
Also there’s a report that says that Saudi Arabia oil will dry up in 30 years
The Saudi, the American good friends that pressed for the war on Irak
I think, that, we the people, from whatever country, are fooled by the politicians
“George Bush’s biggest mistake was not firing everyone above the rank of Sargent in the CIA and the FBI on 9/12/2001.”
GWB brought in Goss Porter to clean up. Didn’t work. It couldn’t be reformed and GW didn’t have the ice in his blood to try to force the issue.
Were there Iraqi Chemical, Biplogical or Nuclear Weapons Programs and Chem & Bio Weapons? I read the paper.
YES There Were!!! They admitted it. We (US/ GB / AUS/ UN) Found weapons, remains of weapons and documentation of the weapons. (Never Mind they also gassed the Kurds too.)
Did Iraq deny the programs? Yes, they denied the programs, then when the inspections found proof, they AGAIN denied it, and tried to conceal their lies. They destroyed the material, records of the material and RECORDS OF THE DESTRUCTION of the material.
So, we were supposed to believe this disfunctional, despotic regime when they lied multiple times previously about not having this crud, that yes they really did destroy the chemical and bio weapons and the nuclear program? The same weapons they denied ever existed? When they had NO records of the destruction?
“Honest, even though we lied to you multiple times and you caught us, we really did destroy all the forbidden material. Proof? Sorry we destroyed the records of the material and it’s destruction.”
“Ignore the other officials that say we have these weapons. We really destroyed them, even though we denied having them and we just told those other Iraqi guys we had them to appear strong and invincible.”
GIVE ME A BREAK!
Based on the IRAQI’s own stories and actions, no one can say for sure what is or was the truth anymore. I think it is quite reasonable that Saddam and the Russians transported a lot of something out of Iraq in 2003. Whether it was cash, drugs, art, illegal spare parts, or WMD, I do not know. Someone does, but they aint talking. Was that the source for the Jordanian plot? (#5 Luagha above) We do not know… And we do not have clearance to know what “the experts” believe or have guessed already.
Will someone find chemical weapons or bio weapons in Iraq? Do not know… There are stories in the press that we did. They were pooh-poohed, as old previously known weapons. But why were these odd ball weapons there, when they were all supposedly destroyed by Saddam?
Sorry Iraq, you lied, and you lied again and again, and we did not trust you. But is sure as heck is not OUR fault. Even though certain Americans and Europeans want to blame certain Americans.
Does Iran have a Nuclear Weapons? Probably not yet (even though there are stories of missing Rusian weapons in the 1990′s). Do they want a Nuclear Weapon Program? Sometimes they say no, but they also have said yes, and they sure seem to be working on it. Why do you put enrichment facilities underground? Noise Pollution? Yeah, sure….
Do we need to be concerned about Iran with the bomb? Just because they support terrorist organizations and threaten to destroy Israel, US, and the West in general every few weeks? No, it is all bombast, just like Tojo’s Southern Resource strategy, Mein Kampf, and the 1948, 1967, and 1973 Arab Governments positions on Israel.
Besides, if we are wrong, well it is just a few million Israeli Jews and Arabs and possibly some Americans…
And then a few tens of millions of persians and arabs.
Hopefully it stops there, and does not spread to Pakistan, India, China, or Russia,
What could go wrong?
“remains of weapons”
yes, those that were sold in the eighties and early nineties
and everyone knew from which companies they were supplied
what a big farce
The drunk looks for his keys under the street light.
Whenever someone swears that they’re going blow your brains out with a shotgun, and then they brandish that shotgun and begin loading it, your response is pretty damn simple. If the local constabulary later produces proof that the SOB’s “shotgun” was a hollow pipe with cardboard for a stock and banana’s for shells, i.e. that the poor soul was “just kidding”, then too bad, tough shit, you’re dead, I’m alive, and let the chips fall where they may.
That’s how I felt with Iraq. That’s damned certain how I feel about Iran. Plus, we KNOW Iran has killed American serviceman, when we were not at war with Iran. I’d like to see a 1000 to 1 kill ratio in revenge. I don’t care about justice, I don’t care of Iranian leaders are deranged and “might” be just kidding around. They are a real and present threat to millions of Americans, and responsible for the murder of 100′s or 1000′s of Americans through their surrogates and directly.
We know enough about Iran. Take them at their word; they DO intend to kill the “Great Satan” and little Satan too. Kick their asses into the Stone Age, be prepared to absorb their “hit alpha” and maybe “hit bravo”, then then kick their asses again. And for damn certain, DO NOT WASTE A LIFE OR A NICKEL rebuilding anything.
O.S.
“A ‘civilization’ which will do this will do ANYTHING… Do not click through if you are squeamish. This incident happened earlier this year but is just making the rounds in the anti-Jihad with translation”
Yikes!
My Uncle burn German woman and children on his way to liberate concentration camp. Now the Germans are our friends but not so much to the Greek people so it seems. Islam must be taught not to do this to their brothers when they can be useful in frontlines in war with Evil Empire
“We should be prepared to do anything to protect ourselves from a civilization that does this.”
John The Baptist preach become holy by water baptism but the one that comes after he is not fit to untie his sandel would come bringing fire
This is why the beast whore wanted his head on a platter- Jesus brought the fire of love but in war fire may lead to love in afterlife so it seems/ I can see this is a difficult subject for a civilization that has thrown millions and millions of innocent babies in womb into the “fire”
I have to confess to selfishness here. I live in a town that might have been problematic in WWIII as it was projected before the end of the Cold War – 15 miles away from a major airbase – but unlikely to be a target for shitheads like this. They would far prefer more spectacular targets in Central London or some major city in the USA. With any luck they will choose the City of London or Wall Street and do us all a favour.
But little by little, the world sleepwalks towards Armageddon. Whether it will be civil war between the Muslims and indigenes in Europe, or a slow-motion apocalypse punctuated by mushroom clouds over Western cities, I don’t know. But one way or another, sooner or later we in the clvilised West are going to tire of it and write (1.5E9) on one side of the ledger.
7 things about the above comments::
1. The CIA problem began with Operation Camelot (see book), when the CIA asked professors traveling abroad, especially in South America, in the early 60s, to let them know what they saw or discovered. They were not told; they were asked. They went ballistic. Refused. Then the Church Commission gutted the CIA. And PC did the rest. Now most CIA “operatives” are analysis desk jockey.. Hence, few on the ground, few gathering real intel.
2. When JFK told NYT Editorial page editor Scotty Reston that Khrushchev had wiped the floor with him at the Vienna Summit and perceived him more of a boy that Khrushchev’s youngest son (who was older than JFK), Scotty asked him what he would do. Scotty reported, in an interview, that JFK said he’d show him he was a man. Where? In Vietnam. LBJ pressed on: he said he would not be beaten by a bunch of little guys in Black pajamas.
3. As a draftee at the time, we all rejoiced at the Jan 1968 Tet offensive of the No Vietnamese, as they gave their last gasp. We thought it was over. Walter Cronkite said in his evening news program: “we have lost.” Others picked it up. General Giap (North Vietnamese, of course) wrote in his memoir that Tet was it, that they didn’t win the war in Vietnam, that they won it on the college campuses of the U.S. and in the U.S. media.
4. The South Vietnamese lost the war 2 years after our last combat troops left, because the Democrats pulled the funding for the air cover we promised South Vietnam (a repeat of JFK pulling air support at Bay of Pigs). John Kerry said that the Vietnamese would only kill a couple hundred. They killed 2 million and enabled Pol Pot’s 3 million killing fields in Cambodia. Gorbachev said the Vietnam war bankrupted the USSR, hence their small war in Afghanistan. It also enabled the Four Tigers to develop while the USSR and China were distracted by Vietnam. Unintended consequences all over the place.
5. Recall the reports just prior to the Iraq war of convoys going into Syria. Speculation ranged from WMDs to huge cache’s of cash.
6. Technology has continues to keep the USA propelled at the head of advances in military technology. Therefore, future wars will be fought with drones guided by young people who have great thumb reflexes, before putting boots on the ground. No one else is capable of that. And in the sands of the kill zones of the Middle East, we may again put a bunch of bulldozers moving forward “online” as they bury the forward troops as they go forward after the initial bombing. The weak link for both sides of the Jihad War are the would be martyrs: they won’t hold back. Too much glory and pleasure await them to reward their tasks (when fanatics know the truth they know their truth will set them free in paradise). It is said only 10% of Islam are hard core against us. 10%. Real world translation: 100 million. Plenty to recruit from for “the next ones.”
7. I agree with a commentator who was quoted as saying 2012 will either be the harbinger that 1976 was or the change that 1976 harbingered that was 1980. It will be the witness of history regardless of ideology:: Deng in 1978, the KGB in the mid-1980s, and Putin in 2000, agreed that centralized command control economies can’t and won’t work, and thus must be incentivized with a market economy. You can have capitalism without democracy, but you cannot have democracy without capitalism.
Hum, pdf document “Created 8/31/2012 12:49:58 PM, Modified 8/31/2012 1:14:56 PM”
That is very convenient time for this document to be released. It’s almost like Axelrod was preparing a surprise for 0bama’s faltering campaign. And, yes it was heavily redacted.
There is an Iranian warship that supposedly is going to be cruising near the East Coast of the US soon. What if that Iranian ship has a missile or two that can be launched high enough in the atmosphere to detonate a EMP-style nuke?
The Iranians have told us repeatedly that they are on a mission from Allah to destroy the “Great Satan”–the United States. I for one believe them, or rather, I believe that they think they have been ordered by their bastardized version of God to kill the unbelievers.
I think that, given their decades of threats and their clear intention of making nuclear weapons, they should be given an ultimatum–immediately surrender all nuclear material and offensive weapons, or face annihilation. And then, decapitate their government. Allow the Iranian people, who have no desire to attack anyone and have expressed the desire to be free, to recreate their society free of the mad Mullahs.
None of this, of course, will happen. We will instead blunder into a hideously destructive war that will cost far more lives (and cities?) than a directed purposeful and more limited strike.
12. wretchard
The problem with restrospective reports like this is that they presume to have perfect knowledge know about a subject they hadn’t a clue about then. This is like a bug fix to a program that has just totaled your computer. It’s good this time, eh? Well it’s the same programmers doing the fix right?
The problem is not the “fix”.
The problem is the program, which is like an infinite loop because its compare functions are out of whack. There’s no way to stop the loop because there’s no way to introduce an asynchronous/external interrupt to this program which is hermetically sealed and protected from user feedback/reality. When was the last time you heard a State Dept official or CIA employee get prosecuted for boneheaded estimates, leaks, selling information, etc?
Meanwhile, this infinite loop is eating up computer resources and generating bad outputs based on erroneous inputs (it pulls values out of the ass). Like a virus, it has no utility beyond its own perpetuation, depriving more useful programs of resources, and ensuring it’s the last to go down in a system crash.
But as you bloggers might say: “this is a feature, not a bug”, which calls into question whether or not this is, in fact, a legitimate program in an “unintended” loop. It actively attacks the network security, leaves back doors, key-loggers, transmits to promiscuous ports, etc and even has a nice habit of rewriting your protocols and replicating itself amidst other legitimate programs.
The problem with restrospective reports like this is that they presume to have perfect knowledge know about a subject they hadn’t a clue about then.
Which is not the intended point.
This report is not a “fix”. It’s a phony registry or re-certification meant to hide/protect a malicious program trying to escape detection, quarantine and deletion by the user.
Josh @ 21: “part of what I have against the restraint (if that’s the word) we have showed in Iraq and Afghanistan. May not be making entirely clear to the goatherds of the world exactly what the real game is”
We should have told the Iraqis (and ought to be telling the Afghanis) that, this time, we came as liberators. And that if we have to come again, we’ll come as crusaders.
“The Bush administration laid blame on the CIA, criticizing its officials for “failing to investigate” doubts about Curveball, which emerged after an October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate. In May 2004, over a year after the invasion of Iraq, the CIA concluded formally that Curveball’s information was fabricated. Furthermore, on June 26, 2006, The Washington Post reported that “the CIA acknowledged that Curveball was a con artist who drove a taxi in Iraq and spun his engineering knowledge into a fantastic but plausible tale about secret bioweapons factories on wheels.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curveball_(informant)
Richard,
However poor their record of providing correct intelligence on Iraq’s WMD and in other matters, I give a pass to the CIA on Iraq. Why? After the Gulf War, it was not the CIA’s mission nor the US and UN’s burden to prove Iraq’s WMD-related stocks, programs, and intent. The presumption of guilt on Iraq was the foundation of the UNSC resolutions, US policy on Iraq, and the standard that Iraq was required to satisfy in order to prove its rehabilitation to the international community. In other words, the test for Iraq’s compliance that ultimately triggered Operation Iraqi Freedom was based on Iraq’s BEHAVIOR – not on the US demonstrating Iraqi WMD stocks.
In contrast, opponents of the US mission had sought for years to shift the burden of proof from Iraq to behave correctly to the US to demonstrate Iraqi WMD. President Clinton understood the critical importance of the distinction and made sure his public rhetoric matched US policy when the US and UK bombed Iraq in Operation Desert Fox in 1998. In 2003, President Bush ordered Operation Iraqi Freedom using substantively the same standard, based on Iraq’s behavior, used by Clinton for Operation Desert Fox. However, where Clinton had based his public argument on Iraq’s behavior, Bush made the critical, since-compounding error of basing his public argument on affirmative knowledge of Iraqi WMD stocks. In effect, Bush adopted our opponents’ frame on Iraq.
One consequence of Bush’s public deviation from Clinton’s case to bomb Iraq is the CIA is now blamed for mistaken conclusions on Iraqi WMD despite that proving Iraqi WMD was not supposed to be the CIA’s responsibility. It was not the CIA’s job to find WMD in Iraq; Iraq’s guilt on WMD was presumed. Rather, it was Iraq’s responsibility to comply with the UNSC resolutions. The CIA was initially tasked only to help the inspections (UNSCOM, UNMOVIC) verify Iraqi compliance. Then, like a Good Samaritan’s nightmare, the CIA that had been asked to help with Iraq ended up as the fall guy for others’ mistakes and bad acts.
Richard, I recently wrote about the Iraq issue for a Nation Security law seminar and then a follow-up post on my blog. I’d appreciate your and your readers’ feedback. Thank you.
Term paper: Regime Change in Iraq from Clinton to Bush
http://learning-curve.blogspot.com/2012/05/regime-change-in-iraq-from-clinton-to.html
Follow-up post: A problem of definition in the Iraq controversy: Was the issue Saddam’s regime or Iraq’s demonstrable WMD?
http://learning-curve.blogspot.com/2012/05/problem-of-definition-in-iraq.html
Just for the record, it is my understanding that Saddam exported his program to Libya. The day we pulled him (and his documents) out of that spider hole, Libya mysteriously and voluntarily gave up its WMD program run by Iraqi scientists.
” Simply tell the Muslim nations that if a nuclear weapon is used against the US then the the cities of Mecca and Medina will be reduced to tritonite and the Kabah will be captured ground up mixed into concrete and then poured into a mold that looks like Elvis Presley so that the Hadji can really worship the king”
This has got to be the most mind-numbingly stupid idea, not to mention a horribly immoral one, that I have ever heard. It was stupid and immoral when Tom Tancredo said it some years ago, and it’s stupid and immoral now.
One, can you actually believe that making such a threat would result in their backing down? Can you not see how making such a threat would inflame them into even greater paroxysms of rage resulting in even more attacks on us?
Two, there is no justification for bombing innocent civilians in as a retaliatory measure period. The Just War doctrines of discrimination and proportionality both speak against it. That we did it in WWII does not in the least justify it then or now.
I read this blog often, though usually don’t comment. But I can’t let that sort of thing go by unchallenged.
Add to comment 41: In a better world, the CIA would have provided better intel on Iraq to President Bush and, before him, President Clinton. However, the CIA should not have been placed in the position where a claim based on CIA intel was the cornerstone of President Bush’s case for Operation Iraqi Freedom. Clinton is open that he did not know the actual state of Iraq’s WMD when he bombed Iraq. As we’ve since learned, Bush knew the same as Clinton about Iraq’s WMD. But Iraq – not the CIA – was responsible to make us know about Iraq’s WMD stocks, programs, and intentions. Therefore, Clinton’s case for Operation Desert Fox and the US policy on Iraq enforced by both Presidents were based on Iraq’s failure to make us know. Iraq’s noncompliant behavior constituted material breach of the UNSC resolutions and was demonstrable without CIA intel. Bush’s case for Operation Iraqi Freedom should have followed Clinton’s case precedent with Operation Desert Fox.
#43 Tom the Redhunter
“…that if a nuclear weapon is used against the US …”
I note that the premise is that nuclear weapons are used against us first. It is in the context of the drive by Iran, which has directly threatened the US and Israel with nuclear strikes, to procure weapons to do so. And the existence of a worldwide terrorist network that does Iran’s bidding.
1) Such a strike would certainly involve the deaths of a large number of innocent American civilians. Are they expendable? Are their deaths moral and acceptable, and only the deaths of those civilians who would be killed in a retaliatory strike by some special mechanism mortal sin? What relative value do you place on the two groups of civilians?
2) Given the specific premise and context under discussion, and noting that the credible threat of massive retaliation as imperfect as it is has managed to forestall a nuclear exchange for well over half a century; what alternative means would you propose as a response to such an attack? And would that means forestall a repetition?
3) What means would you propose to prevent such an attack by Islamic nuclear weapons other than such a declaration; noting that it was just such specific public and private exchanges of declarations that kept that peace noted in #2 above? Are Islamic states incapable of the same rational calculations made by the Former Soviet Union and Peoples’ Republic of China? If they are incapable of such, what basis is there to negotiate with them if they are not rational?
4) Would you comment on the practical realities of the mandatory choices contained in Wretchard’s Three Conjectures?
Subotai Bahadur
it’s all blah blah, there was a doctrine going on since the Clinton, preemptive wars for remodifying te geopolitical influence since the falling down of the Berlin wall, and to justify NATO existence, and today, a organisation like Africom, is ment to protect the american interests in Africa, those that bought arable soils through banks tradings, ie JP Morgan (BTW, Draghi’s son is a trader there, who deal with “african” properties)
There was a theorician, I don’t remember the name, who wrote all on how modifying ME and the Arab world
oh, and revisit who were the Neocons, not true conservatives and or Republicans
Brezinski was among those that promoted a green belt, still during the Soviet Regime
More Context:
1. Libia was caught with a nuclear research site and Iraqi money and Iraqi scientists. Daffy ran back to his tractor when Uncle Sam caught him.
2. Irag used chemical weapons against his enemies.
3. He funded, supplied and supported many international Islamic terrorist organizations.
Why would anyone disbelive Sadam when he said he had or was working on nuclear weapons? He had been caught with his money and his nuclear scientists in Libia. He used chemical weapons on the Iranians and on the marsh arabs. He hung out with folks who want Israel and the US destroyed.
You don’t reason with mad dogs, you put them down.
He was