Declassified Key Judgements of the NIE

Captain America said:

I took the liberty to highlight the "if's and maybes" for ya.



The estimate allows evrybody to cherry pick parts to validate their position. Only problem, the way it reads, the war lovers are stuck with speculation to pick from yet the war haters are given more facts for ammuntion. A far cry from "you liberals are gonna eat your words when it gets declassified" don't you think? :mrgreen:

Like I said, you just picked a bad horse in this race but what else would a loyal Republican do? No harm done. Loyalty is a good trait.

If you really want a tip on a winning horse, dog out the democrats for not getting behind voter ID. That's a winner there. :smile:

Glad I could be some help! :2wave:

Click to expand...

It was an assessment just like the entire report was an assessment and the report definately did not assess that a cut and run strategy would be a good thing infact it assessed the exact opposite that if we cut and run it will be a disaster but if we stay and stabalize the country it will sound a death toll for the jihadists. They took the best information that they had and came to conclusions and those were two of them, even in relation to the growing jihadist movement they made it clear that it was only a guestimation in the following quantifying phrase in relation to the jihadis: "Allthough it is difficult to assess with any precision . . . "

Right on ToT. Go ahead and ride that horse. :roll:


I think we all need to agree that the report, so far as we have seen of it, is just inuendo BS full of what if's and maybes. It's prime for cherry picking sentences for support whatever side of the fence you sit on. And it appears to be basically useless.

But I know it's gotta burn your butt that the "liberal whackos" had no crow to eat after the declassified parts were released as many trumpeted they would. (Certainly a lot less crow than the "rightwing whackos" are having to eat for assuming it would.)

Captain America said:

Right on ToT. Go ahead and ride that horse. :roll:


I think we all need to agree that the report, so far as we have seen of it, is just inuendo BS full of what if's and maybes. It's prime for cherry picking sentences for support whatever side of the fence you sit on. And it appears to be basically useless.

But I know it's gotta burn your butt that the "liberal whackos" had no crow to eat after the declassified parts were released as many trumpeted they would. (Certainly a lot less crow than the "rightwing whackos" are having to eat for assuming it would.)

Click to expand...

This is what you said:

Should (that means "maybe or if") jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves to have failed we judge (determine)fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight.

Click to expand...

Yes it can be interpreted to mean "if" but not "maybe" they assessed with certainty that if we win in Iraq then it will be a huge blow to the jihadists but if we lose it will further encourage them, which for me atleast is a huge incentive to make sure that Iraq becomes a stable Democracy IE stay until the job is done.

Yes it can be interpreted to mean "if" but not "maybe" they assessed with certainty that if we win in Iraq then it will be a huge blow to the jihadists but if we lose it will further encourage them, which for me atleast is a huge incentive to make sure that Iraq becomes a stable Democracy IE stay until the job is done

Click to expand...

Excuse me if I have a problem with any certainty declared by our intelligence community.

I assess with certainty that if the dog don't stop to poop, he will catch the rabbit.:mrgreen:

It would be nice for Iraq to become a stable democracy. (Ain't gonna happen without us being there holding a sword over their head, but it would be nice just the same.)

You can lead your horse to water....but you can't make him drink.

Trajan Octavian Titus said:

Well considering that the NIE talked about killing Zarqawi as a key priority I'd say that things have gotten better, even Talabani says that the car bombings have dropped from 10-14 car bombings a day in Baghdad to now between 1 and 4.

Click to expand...

That is because the harsher winter months are coming, not because there is a loss of wanting.

Alex said:

That is because the harsher winter months are coming, not because there is a loss of wanting.

Click to expand...

I happen to think it's because they are finding it difficult to recruit people to blow themselves up, hence the report that they are kidnapping folks, loading their car with bombs, then turning them loose.

Why won't they release the whole document? I hate it when they only release the parts that make them look good and then expect us to believe that none of it says anything negative about them. We aren't stupid, either you release it all or you release none. What the president is doing is just as bad as somebody in the admin leaking out the parts that make them look bad for political gain, Bush is doing the same thing but in the reverse direction. Jesus Christ, the president is supposed to be above all of this petty squabling!

Indy said:

Why won't they release the whole document? I hate it when they only release the parts that make them look good and then expect us to believe that none of it says anything negative about them. We aren't stupid, either you release it all or you release none. What the president is doing is just as bad as somebody in the admin leaking out the parts that make them look bad for political gain, Bush is doing the same thing but in the reverse direction. Jesus Christ, the president is supposed to be above all of this petty squabling!

Click to expand...

I think we should all step back and consider why we are surprised that this war is raging?

It is war, it was indeed our plan to send our guys to these two countries, and to draw them out, and this is exactly what they are doing. Of course it's getting worse, but do we leave everytime a war gets tough? We have done very well thus far, as far as keeping causalities low, in our military forces anyway. The majority of the deaths are of the innocent, and people are seriously suggesting we leave those people to their fate! Talk about creating enemies, this would be a disaster, Iran would sweep right in there, and the religious fanatics would have yet another prime piece of real estate!:shock:

Indy said:

Why won't they release the whole document? I hate it when they only release the parts that make them look good and then expect us to believe that none of it says anything negative about them. We aren't stupid, either you release it all or you release none. What the president is doing is just as bad as somebody in the admin leaking out the parts that make them look bad for political gain, Bush is doing the same thing but in the reverse direction. Jesus Christ, the president is supposed to be above all of this petty squabling!

Click to expand...

On top of that, Democratic leaders in the House requested a SECRET debate on the House floor about the report(s). I will give you one guess as to what happened.

That's right, the Republican majority voted it down. They are obviously hiding something. Probably their inapt handling of the War on Terror.

I knew it would be only a matter of time until the Bush administration messed up its improving approval ratings.

Deegan said:

I think we should all step back and consider why we are surprised that this war is raging?

It is war, it was indeed our plan to send our guys to these two countries, and to draw them out, and this is exactly what they are doing. Of course it's getting worse, but do we leave everytime a war gets tough? We have done very well thus far, as far as keeping causalities low, in our military forces anyway. The majority of the deaths are of the innocent, and people are seriously suggesting we leave those people to their fate! Talk about creating enemies, this would be a disaster, Iran would sweep right in there, and the religious fanatics would have yet another prime piece of real estate!:shock:

Click to expand...

All that will happen no matter when we leave. Should we stay there forever?

Alex said:

All that will happen no matter when we leave. Should we stay there forever?

Click to expand...

Forever is a really long time, lol, no.......not forever, but at least until it begins to look like......well let's say, Germany, Italy, Japan, places like that. Those investments certainly have paid off, and go figure, we are actually friends now, well as much as one can ever claim to be.

It will take time, but we need to show we are not the enemy, that we are not the infidels their propaganda machines have pumped out for many, many years. You can't do that from thousands of miles away, you have to insert yourself directly, we have a record of getting that right, I believe in the mission.

Trajan Octavian Titus said:

Well considering that the NIE talked about killing Zarqawi as a key priority I'd say that things have gotten better, even Talabani says that the car bombings have dropped from 10-14 car bombings a day in Baghdad to now between 1 and 4.

Click to expand...

Not really getting better :-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/5052138.stm?lsm

"The numbers of car bombs, suicide car bombs and roadside bombs all doubled from 2004 to 2005. The number of multiple-fatality bombings has increased from less than 20 a month in 2004 to a peak of 57 in June 2006."

"According to figures collated by Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, from autumn 2003 US officials put the total number of insurgents at 5,000, until late 2004 when they raised their estimates to between 12,000 and 16,000.

By 2006, US military estimates ranged from 8,000 to 20,000, although Iraqi intelligence officials have issued figures as high as 40,000 fighters, plus another 160,000 supporters."

You could also look at the stats for Insurgent attacks and the Baghdad mortuary toll which both show an upward trend.

Despite the incredible speed and efficiency of the initial defeat of Saddams forces the complete incompetence of the planners for post-war Iraq has led to a state of carnage. Admitting mistakes and the real scale of the problem is a necessary step to resolve the situation......however, we can always just stay the course, sustain more casualities and then pass the buck on to the next President :roll:

Indy said:

Why won't they release the whole document?

Click to expand...

Well let's see I guess we should just give away our sources and methodology for collecting intel so you will be satisfied. [sarcastic emphasis added] those who have read the entire report say that this release captures the jist of the NIE. Furthermore; where were you people when the NYT's released one line of one paragraph for partisan political reasons right before the election? The Democrats hopped all over that out of context piece of bullshit then but now that the true nature of the NIE is released and it is a complete repudiation of their cut and run strategy oh no they can't have that.

Alex said:

That is because the harsher winter months are coming, not because there is a loss of wanting.

Click to expand...

AQ itself says that they are losing ground in Iraq:

As War Over Leak Grips Washington, Al Qaeda Quails

By ELI LAKE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
September 27, 2006

WASHINGTON — On a day when much of the capital's attention was focused on leaked excerpts of an intelligence estimate report that suggested the Iraq war was creating more jihadists, the military quietly released an intercepted letter from Al Qaeda complaining that the terrorist organization was losing ground in Iraq.

The letter, found in the headquarters of Al Qaeda's leader in Iraq, Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi, after he was killed on June 7, was sent to Zarqawi by a senior Al Qaeda leader who signs his name simply "Atiyah." He complains that Al Qaeda is weak both in the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region and in Iraq.

A former jihadist who fought in Algeria in the 1990s, Atiyah appears from the text to be speaking for Al Qaeda's Shura Council — the group's decision-making panel chaired by Osama bin Laden. In the letter, he sharply criticizes Zarqawi's leadership, saying he alienated key allies necessary for the implementation of jihad in Iraq.

"Know that we, like all the Mujahidin, are still weak," he wrote in the letter dated December 11, 2005. "We are in the stage of weakness and a state of paucity. We have not yet reached a level of stability. We have no alternative but to not squander any element of the foundations of strength, or any helper or supporter."

http://www.nysun.com/article/40461

Click to expand...

Trajan Octavian Titus said:

where were you people when the NYT's released one line of one paragraph for partisan political reasons right before the election?

Click to expand...

WOOHOO! I count as more than one person now! That take bitches!

Quote (Negroponte said the analysis found that if the U.S. effort to establish a stable government in Iraq succeeded, jihadists would be weakened and "fewer jihadists will leave Iraq determined to carry on the fight elsewhere.")


IF the US effort to establish a stable Gov. in Iraq succeeded. There is that word again " IF ".

How long has the US been in Iraq, are we any nearer to the establishment of a stable government in that country?

A stable Government, let alone a Democratic Government?

It should be perfectly obvious that post Saddam Hussein, Iraq has succeeded in drawing more enemies of the US into not only those in Iraq, but in other countries around the world.

It would be interesting to know if the US has actually managed to establish a Stable Democratic Government in any Country anywhere in the world since the 1950s.

I, offhand cannot think of any.

Trajan Octavian Titus said:

Well considering that the NIE talked about killing Zarqawi as a key priority I'd say that things have gotten better, even Talabani says that the car bombings have dropped from 10-14 car bombings a day in Baghdad to now between 1 and 4.

Click to expand...

And, since the killing of Zarqawi, the murder rate in Iraq due to sectarian violence has doubled. What is your point? I fail to see it. It would seem that the NIE had some hope that killing Zarqawi would prove to be a setback for radical Islam, when in fact, things have only gotten worse in Iraq since his death.

Deegan said:

I think we should all step back and consider why we are surprised that this war is raging?

It is war, it was indeed our plan to send our guys to these two countries, and to draw them out, and this is exactly what they are doing. Of course it's getting worse, but do we leave everytime a war gets tough? We have done very well thus far, as far as keeping causalities low, in our military forces anyway. The majority of the deaths are of the innocent, and people are seriously suggesting we leave those people to their fate! Talk about creating enemies, this would be a disaster, Iran would sweep right in there, and the religious fanatics would have yet another prime piece of real estate!:shock:

Click to expand...

With respect to the bold part, a Question: Since when?
To the italisised part: Iran already has and it's become easier for Iran to do just such through retaliatory mentalities against the US.

jujuman13 said:

Quote (Negroponte said the analysis found that if the U.S. effort to establish a stable government in Iraq succeeded, jihadists would be weakened and "fewer jihadists will leave Iraq determined to carry on the fight elsewhere.")


IF the US effort to establish a stable Gov. in Iraq succeeded. There is that word again " IF ".

How long has the US been in Iraq, are we any nearer to the establishment of a stable government in that country?

A stable Government, let alone a Democratic Government?

It should be perfectly obvious that post Saddam Hussein, Iraq has succeeded in drawing more enemies of the US into not only those in Iraq, but in other countries around the world.

It would be interesting to know if the US has actually managed to establish a Stable Democratic Government in any Country anywhere in the world since the 1950s.

I, offhand cannot think of any.

Click to expand...

If anything the NIE is a call to stay the course in Iraq:

The Iraq conflict has become the “cause celebre” for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement. Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves to have failed we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight.

We assess that the Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives; perceived jihadist success there would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere.

If Democratic reform efforts in Muslim majority nations progress over the next five years political participation probably would drive a wedge between intransigent extremists and groups willing to use the political process to achieve their local objectives.

The jihadists greatest vulnerability is that their ultimate political solution-an ultra-conservative interpretation of shari’a- based governance spanning the Muslim world is unpopular with the vast majority of Muslims. Exposing the religious and political straitjacket that is implied by the jihadists’ propaganda would help to divide them from the audience they seek to persuade.

United States-led counterterrorism efforts have seriously damaged the leadership of al-Qa’ida and disrupted it’s operations.

We assess that the global jihadist movement is decentralized, lacks a coherent global strategy, and is becoming more diffuse.

http://www.dni.gov/press_releases/De..._Judgments.pdf

Click to expand...

To me the NIE clearly illustrates that the Iraq war is indeed the central front in the war on terror, a victory there will sound a death toll for the jihadists, and a loss there would be an unmitigated disaster. If anything the NIE is a reafirmation of the President's stay the course policy and a complete repudiation of the Democrats cut and run strategy.

The NIE, also, says that we have destroyed the AQ leadership and disrupted their operational capabilities, that support for the jihadists overall political solution is not accepted by the majority of the worlds Muslims, and that Democratization of the region will drive a wedge between the jihadis and those willing to use political options to achieve their goals.

And check this out according to a captured AQ communica' they feel that they are infact losing ground in Iraq:

As War Over Leak Grips Washington, Al Qaeda Quails

By ELI LAKE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
September 27, 2006

WASHINGTON — On a day when much of the capital's attention was focused on leaked excerpts of an intelligence estimate report that suggested the Iraq war was creating more jihadists, the military quietly released an intercepted letter from Al Qaeda complaining that the terrorist organization was losing ground in Iraq.

The letter, found in the headquarters of Al Qaeda's leader in Iraq, Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi, after he was killed on June 7, was sent to Zarqawi by a senior Al Qaeda leader who signs his name simply "Atiyah." He complains that Al Qaeda is weak both in the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region and in Iraq.

A former jihadist who fought in Algeria in the 1990s, Atiyah appears from the text to be speaking for Al Qaeda's Shura Council — the group's decision-making panel chaired by Osama bin Laden. In the letter, he sharply criticizes Zarqawi's leadership, saying he alienated key allies necessary for the implementation of jihad in Iraq.

"Know that we, like all the Mujahidin, are still weak," he wrote in the letter dated December 11, 2005. "We are in the stage of weakness and a state of paucity. We have not yet reached a level of stability. We have no alternative but to not squander any element of the foundations of strength, or any helper or supporter."

http://www.nysun.com/article/40461

Click to expand...

And President Talabani clearly thinks that pulling out of Iraq would be a disaster for his country:

On Capitol Hill, meanwhile, Talabani told a group of six senators that setting a deadline for withdrawal of U.S. troops would be a tragedy for Iraq as it works to build its military and police forces, Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., said in a conference call with reporters.

Pulling out now would "encourage the militias and the enemies of a free and independent and unified Iraq," Lieberman quoted Talabani as saying.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/4216141.html

Click to expand...

SouthernDemocrat said:

And, since the killing of Zarqawi, the murder rate in Iraq due to sectarian violence has doubled. What is your point? I fail to see it. It would seem that the NIE had some hope that killing Zarqawi would prove to be a setback for radical Islam, when in fact, things have only gotten worse in Iraq since his death.

Click to expand...

Not according to Iraqi president Talabani and AQ in Iraq themselves:

Talabani projected a vastly different account of the security situation. He said it had improved since last year when many areas were in the control of terrorists.

Last year, he said by way of example, there were 10 to 14 car bombings a day in Baghdad and this year one to four.

Most of the fighting is centered in Baghdad, and since most media are in the capital they provide a slanted picture of Iraq's situation, Talabani said.
"The media is only focusing on the negative and exaggerating it," he said.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/4216141.html

Click to expand...

As War Over Leak Grips Washington, Al Qaeda Quails

By ELI LAKE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
September 27, 2006

WASHINGTON — On a day when much of the capital's attention was focused on leaked excerpts of an intelligence estimate report that suggested the Iraq war was creating more jihadists, the military quietly released an intercepted letter from Al Qaeda complaining that the terrorist organization was losing ground in Iraq.

The letter, found in the headquarters of Al Qaeda's leader in Iraq, Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi, after he was killed on June 7, was sent to Zarqawi by a senior Al Qaeda leader who signs his name simply "Atiyah." He complains that Al Qaeda is weak both in the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region and in Iraq.

A former jihadist who fought in Algeria in the 1990s, Atiyah appears from the text to be speaking for Al Qaeda's Shura Council — the group's decision-making panel chaired by Osama bin Laden. In the letter, he sharply criticizes Zarqawi's leadership, saying he alienated key allies necessary for the implementation of jihad in Iraq.

"Know that we, like all the Mujahidin, are still weak," he wrote in the letter dated December 11, 2005. "We are in the stage of weakness and a state of paucity. We have not yet reached a level of stability. We have no alternative but to not squander any element of the foundations of strength, or any helper or supporter."

http://www.nysun.com/article/40461

Click to expand...

Trajan Octavian Titus said:

Not according to Iraqi president Talabani and AQ in Iraq themselves:

Click to expand...

Wow, imagine that, our little stooge running Iraq is trying to paint a rosy picture. Why as far as he is concerned, it will be a chicken in every pot in Iraq. Amazing, that the fighting in a civil war would be centered around the nation's capital......

The problem is that his own health minister, you know the guy that would actually be counting up the death toll every month disagrees with him. As seen in the following AP article:

BAGHDAD, Iraq - More than 1,500 people died violently in Baghdad last month - nearly the same number as in July - and not the dramatic drop estimated just last week, when U.S. and Iraqi officials announced that their security crackdown was working.

The Iraqi Health Ministry says its final August tally of violent deaths in Baghdad was 1,536. That is nearly three times the same agency's preliminary estimate last week and shows a nearly undiminished epidemic of killings by insurgents and sectarian death squads.

Click to expand...

http://www.theeagle.com/stories/090806/world_20060908012.php

It seems that thing called "reality" can be pretty tenacious.

SouthernDemocrat said:

Wow, imagine that, our little stooge running Iraq is trying to paint a rosy picture. Why as far as he is concerned, it will be a chicken in every pot in Iraq. Amazing, that the fighting in a civil war would be centered around the nation's capital......

Click to expand...

A) It's not a civil war as much as you might wish that it was one.

B) He isn't our little stooge he is the dually elected representative Iraq whom the vast majority of Iraq risked both life and limb to go vote for.

The problem is that his own health minister, you know the guy that would actually be counting up the death toll every month disagrees with him. As seen in the following AP article:

Click to expand...

That was THE peak of casualties; furthermore, the Iraq bodycount project puts the total KIA (Civilian and Combatant) for the entire Iraq war at between 38,725 - 43,140 to put that into perspective in the battle of Okina alone 18,900 American soldiers were killed, as well as, 100,000 dead Japanese.

Trajan Octavian Titus said:

A) It's not a civil war as much as you might wish that it was one.

B) He isn't our little stooge he is the dually elected representative Iraq whom the vast majority of Iraq risked both life and limb to go vote for.



That was THE peak of casualties; furthermore, the Iraq bodycount project puts the total KIA (Civilian and Combatant) for the entire Iraq war at between 38,725 - 43,140 to put that into perspective in the battle of Okina alone 18,900 American soldiers were killed, as well as, 100,000 dead Japanese.

Click to expand...

So you are comparing the war in Iraq against the now 60 year old war against the empire of Japan?

Hell, back in World War I, Britain and France at times lost 100,000 men a month. Just the same, it does not make 40k dead in Iraq look any better. See I don't think you quite get the difference between my view on this and yours. I don't think we can just up and leave. However, I, like the majority of Americans, also think that going in was a mistake, thus, while we cant just up and leave, I am not going to just throw my support behind the guys who got us into this mess in the first place.

I am not happy that Iraq appears to be dissolving into civil war. I am not happy about the fact that despite all the supposed accomplishments trumped out by the Administration and its apologists, the situation in Iraq appears to be getting worse, not better. I am not happy about the fact that thousands in Iraq are being killed in sectarian violence every month. This is not joyous news. I am not happy about it, I am merely accepting the reality of what has happened and what is currently happening in Iraq. You cannot hope to fix a problem if you do not even accept the existence of that problem. Staying the course, is what has resulted in this entire mess. If someone actually cares more about their country than they do their political party, then they have to reject the people and the ideology that put us into this mess. We have to say: "You are wrong", "Your ideology is a failure", "We must never forget that you are wrong and that your ideology is a failure because those who share your failed ideology should never be allowed to run this great nation again".

This is not about rejecting conservatism, as Reagan would probably have never pursued the same course as the Bush Adminstration has. This is about rejecting neo-conservative because it is a well intentioned failure.

SouthernDemocrat said:

So you are comparing the war in Iraq against the now 60 year old war against the empire of Japan?

Click to expand...

Yep just as the war in Japan was a central front in World War 2 so to is the war in Iraq a central front in the global war on terror. Is that not an astute analogy? The fact of the matter is that this war has cost the least lives of any major war in the history of the world.

Hell, back in World War I, Britain and France at times lost 100,000 men a month. Just the same, it does not make 40k dead in Iraq look any better.

Click to expand...

Relatively speaking? Yes.

See I don't think you quite get the difference between my view on this and yours. I don't think we can just up and leave.

Click to expand...

Well that's precisely what your party is want to do.

However, I, like the majority of Americans, also think that going in was a mistake,

Click to expand...

Actually the vast majority of Americans (at the time) were in full support of the war, that's the problem the American people are fickle.

thus, while we cant just up and leave, I am not going to just throw my support behind the guys who got us into this mess in the first place.

Click to expand...

But instead you are throwing the your support behind the people who want to up and leave. And by the way the Democrats voted for this war too if you recall.

I am not happy that Iraq appears to be dissolving into civil war.

Click to expand...

Not according to President Talabani, and I think he would know a damn site better than you and the American media that doesn't leave their hotel balcony from inside the green zone.

I am not happy about the fact that despite all the supposed accomplishments trumped out by the Administration and its apologists, the situation in Iraq appears to be getting worse, not better.

Click to expand...

Not according to AQ in the "Atiyah letter."

I am not happy about the fact that thousands in Iraq are being killed in sectarian violence every month.

Click to expand...

As opposed to the millions killed by the brutal ba'athist regime.

This is not joyous news. I am not happy about it,

Click to expand...

Cry me a river war is not supposed to be a joyous occassion.

I am merely accepting the reality of what has happened and what is currently happening in Iraq.

Click to expand...

Ya it's called a war.

You cannot hope to fix a problem if you do not even accept the existence of that problem.

Click to expand...

Ya the problem is the jihadists.

Staying the course, is what has resulted in this entire mess.

Click to expand...

And what do you suggest? So far the only strategy I've heard out of the Democratic party has been to cut and run.

If someone actually cares more about their country than they do their political party, then they have to reject the people and the ideology that put us into this mess.

Click to expand...

What going on the offensive against the jihadists instead of playing a tit for tat game with them and in most cases not even playing the tat part?

We have to say: "You are wrong", "Your ideology is a failure", "We must never forget that you are wrong and that your ideology is a failure because those who share your failed ideology should never be allowed to run this great nation again".

Click to expand...

I totally agree the Democratic appeasers who did not respond to the '93 WTC bombing, the African Embassy bombings, the U.S.S. Cole, and thanks to that failure to respond, the Clinton Gorelick wall, and Clinton's failure to kill or capture OBL on 10 separate occassions; 9-11.

And the Democratic appeasers who now want to cut and run from Iraq, oppose the Patriot Act, applauded the ludicrous Hamdan decision which not only has temporarily suspended military tribunals of detainees but has, also, given foriegn terrorists protections under Article 3 of the Geneva Convention even though article 3 clearly states that it only applies to "conflicts not of an international character" ie civil wars, who further applauded Justice Taylor's decision which outlawed the terrorist surveilance program which we know has been an instrumental tool in preventing terrorist attacks against the United States (a decision which is legally questionable to say the least), and who want foriegn terrorists protected by the Bill of Rights and afforded the rights of due process and trial by a civilian jury even though they clearly are not entitled to these rights, should never be allowed to hold power again.

If the Democrats want to frame the November debate on National Security, much like GWB, I say: "bring that sh!t on!"

Trajan Octavian Titus said:

Well when it turns out that we are more safe thanks to our actions overseas and that Iraq is the key front in the war on terror I believe it will.

Click to expand...

When will this turn out to be so?

Trajan Octavian Titus said:

Director of National Intelligence John D. Negroponte has already said that we are safer than we were before 9-11 and that the NYT's reporting of the classified NIE is complete bullshit.

Click to expand...

Actually you have gravely misunderstood what you have read.

Negroponte discussed the threat to the US homeland. Negroponte also says in the article that you linked too in another thread that:

So, as you may hopefully now see, the NIE discusses apples and Mr. Negroponte discussed oranges.

It is merely your faulty reasoning and/or comprehension of what was written that has led to the erroneous conclusion that Negroponte said "that the NYT's reporting of the classified NIE is complete bullshit."


I hope you can now see the differences between the two different items.
Good luck w/ your future endeavors