Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terror Threat

[Ban Hammer 12,842]

"Some people have guessed what's in the report and concluded that going into Iraq was a mistake. I strongly disagree," Bush said.

He disagrees with the intelligence agencies? He actually disagrees with reality. I remember that from back in 02/03. He disagreed there, too. Which is why we're in Iraq today.

ah trying to have it both ways. first bad intel, now good intel.

He said he was declassifying part of the report.

OMG, the President will compromise our National Security.

actually, it's his call as pres if he wanted to do that. but if you read the article you would have noted that "bush" is not the one actually declassfying the document. jeesh

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

i know it's a bitter pill for you to swallow, but not everything is done by bush, nor is there any plausible reason for everything to be declassified to sate every curious american.

The reality is that anything that comes into the public domain (from whateover source) becomes part of a wider political debate. In the context of this administration - which has lied/exaggerated/been misled/simple mistakes etc. (whatever you choose to call it), what is happening now is the direct result of the way the adversarial manner in which the administration has acted not just towards the Democrats, but to respected government officials and even the general public.

You lose trust, its not easy to restore. Nor should it be.

[Ban Hammer 12,842]

i know it's a bitter pill for you to swallow, but not everything is done by bush, nor is there any plausible reason for everything to be declassified to sate every curious american.

The reality is that anything that comes into the public domain (from whateover source) becomes part of a wider political debate. In the context of this administration - which has lied/exaggerated/been misled/simple mistakes etc. (whatever you choose to call it), what is happening now is the direct result of the way the adversarial manner in which the administration has acted not just towards the Democrats, but to respected government officials and even the general public.

You lose trust, its not easy to restore. Nor should it be.

actually, i think quite a few people in vj are very predisposed to lose trust with bush over any reason.

[almaty 19]

amen to that

[Marc and Olga 0]

i know it's a bitter pill for you to swallow, but not everything is done by bush, nor is there any plausible reason for everything to be declassified to sate every curious american.

The reality is that anything that comes into the public domain (from whateover source) becomes part of a wider political debate. In the context of this administration - which has lied/exaggerated/been misled/simple mistakes etc. (whatever you choose to call it), what is happening now is the direct result of the way the adversarial manner in which the administration has acted not just towards the Democrats, but to respected government officials and even the general public.

You lose trust, its not easy to restore. Nor should it be.

actually, i think quite a few people in vj are very predisposed to lose trust with bush over any reason.

Believe it or not, I wasn't. It was his desire to RUSH into Iraq while the UN inspectors were saying they needed more time that made me dislike him.

Everything that came after that just strengthened my dislike for the guy and his administration.

As for the intel, I think (and I doubt we will ever know how he received his intel) that he found something that said what he wanted to hear and he went with it...while his intel agencies were saying..."um, you shouldn't use THAT". IF his "intel" ever existed to begin with.

Don't get me wrong, I did not like him to begin with but I accepted he was the president...even though I did not vote for him.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

i know it's a bitter pill for you to swallow, but not everything is done by bush, nor is there any plausible reason for everything to be declassified to sate every curious american.

The reality is that anything that comes into the public domain (from whateover source) becomes part of a wider political debate. In the context of this administration - which has lied/exaggerated/been misled/simple mistakes etc. (whatever you choose to call it), what is happening now is the direct result of the way the adversarial manner in which the administration has acted not just towards the Democrats, but to respected government officials and even the general public.

You lose trust, its not easy to restore. Nor should it be.

actually, i think quite a few people in vj are very predisposed to lose trust with bush over any reason.

Bush's 35 - 40% job approval rating goes well beyond VJ.

[mmmbop1976 1]

once again the bush bashers with their willing accomplices at nyt and wp try to use a leak of classified information for political gain without regard for the harm it may do to national security. funny how they only choose 1 small part of the report and use it out of context for their political gain. here's more from the NIE....

"Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight."

and from reuters news...

But the declassified section, which contained 10 judgments about global terrorism including one on Iraq, reached no sweeping conclusion about the war's ultimate effect on global terrorism.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...=16&t=33696

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

once again the bush bashers with their willing accomplices at nyt and wp try to use a leak of classified information for political gain without regard for the harm it may do to national security. funny how they only choose 1 small part of the report and use it out of context for their political gain. here's more from the NIE....

"Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight."

and from reuters news...

But the declassified section, which contained 10 judgments about global terrorism including one on Iraq, reached no sweeping conclusion about the war's ultimate effect on global terrorism.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...=16&t=33696

Hmmm... Where is the 'harm' to national security. Please point out how this story makes America less safe...?

In any case, your implication seems to be that the Bush administration are not playing party politics with the terrorism issue. That just not quite true is it?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

"Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight."

Interesting that you mention selective quotation while conveniently omitting the passage immediately following the one you quoted:

We assess that the underlying factors fuelling the spread of the movement outweigh its vulnerabilities and are likely to do so for the duration of the timeframe of this estimate.

How's about we look at the meat of the current revelations:

Excerpts: Declassified US terror report

The following are declassified excerpts from the April 2006 National Intelligence Estimate on Trends in Global Terrorism released on Thursday 26 September 2006.

The excerpts were selected by the office of US Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte. Subheadings have been added by the BBC.

United States-led counterterrorism efforts have seriously damaged the leadership of al-Qaeda and disrupted its operations; however, we judge that al-Qaeda will continue to pose the greatest threat to the Homeland and US interests abroad by a single terrorist organization.

We also assess that the global jihadist movement - which includes al-Qaeda, affiliated and independent terrorist groups, and emerging networks and cells - is spreading and adapting to counterterrorism efforts.

Although we cannot measure the extent of the spread with precision, a large body of all-source reporting indicates that activists identifying themselves as jihadists, although a small percentage of Muslims, are increasing in both number and geographic dispersion.

If this trend continues, threats to US interests at home and abroad will become more diverse, leading to increasing attacks worldwide.

Greater pluralism and more responsive political systems in Muslim majority nations would alleviate some of the grievances jihadists exploit. Over time, such progress, together with sustained, multifaceted programs targeting the vulnerabilities of the jihadist movement and continued pressure on al-Qaeda, could erode support for the jihadists.

'Diffuse'

We assess that the global jihadist movement is decentralized, lacks a coherent global strategy, and is becoming more diffuse. New jihadist networks and cells, with anti- American agendas, are increasingly likely to emerge. The confluence of shared purpose and dispersed actors will make it harder to find and undermine jihadist groups.

We assess that the operational threat from self-radicalized cells will grow in importance to US counterterrorism efforts, particularly abroad but also in the Homeland.

The jihadists regard Europe as an important venue for attacking Western interests. Extremist networks inside the extensive Muslim diasporas in Europe facilitate recruitment and staging for urban attacks, as illustrated by the 2004 Madrid and 2005 London bombings.

Iraq

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.

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, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight.

We assess that the underlying factors fuelling the spread of the movement outweigh its vulnerabilities and are likely to do so for the duration of the timeframe of this estimate.

Four underlying factors are fuelling the spread of the jihadist movement: (1) Entrenched grievances, such as corruption, injustice, and fear of Western domination, leading to anger, humiliation, and a sense of powerlessness; (2) the Iraq .jihad;. (3) the slow pace of real and sustained economic, social, and political reforms in many Muslim majority nations; and (4) pervasive anti-US sentiment among most Muslims, all of which jihadists exploit.

'Slow the spread'

Concomitant vulnerabilities in the jihadist movement have emerged that, if fully exposed and exploited, could begin to slow the spread of the movement. They include dependence on the continuation of Muslim-related conflicts, the limited appeal of the jihadists' radical ideology, the emergence of respected voices of moderation, and criticism of the violent tactics employed against mostly Muslim citizens.

The jihadists' greatest vulnerability is that their ultimate political solution - an ultra-conservative interpretation of Sharia-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 audiences they seek to persuade.

Recent condemnations of violence and extremist religious interpretations by a few notable Muslim clerics signal a trend that could facilitate the growth of a constructive alternative to jihadist ideology: peaceful political activism. This also could lead to the consistent and dynamic participation of broader Muslim communities in rejecting violence, reducing the ability of radicals to capitalize on passive community support. In this way, the Muslim mainstream emerges as the most powerful weapon in the war on terror.

Countering the spread of the jihadist movement will require coordinated multilateral efforts that go well beyond operations to capture or kill terrorist leaders.

'Exploit'

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. Nonetheless, attendant reforms and potentially destabilizing transitions will create new opportunities for jihadists to exploit.

Al-Qaeda, now merged with Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's network, is exploiting the situation in Iraq to attract new recruits and donors and to maintain its leadership role.

The loss of key leaders, particularly Osama Bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and al-Zarqawi, in rapid succession, probably would cause the group to fracture into smaller groups. Although like-minded individuals would endeavour to carry on the mission, the loss of these key leaders would exacerbate strains and disagreements. We assess that the resulting splinter groups would, at least for a time, pose a less serious threat to US interests than does al-Qaeda.

Should al-Zarqawi continue to evade capture and scale back attacks against Muslims, we assess he could broaden his popular appeal and present a global threat.

The increased role of Iraqis in managing the operations of al-Qaeda in Iraq might lead veteran foreign jihadists to focus their efforts on external operations.

Other groups

Other affiliated Sunni extremist organizations, such as Jemaah Islamiya, Ansar al-Sunnah, and several North African groups, unless countered, are likely to expand their reach and become more capable of multiple and/or mass-casualty attacks outside their traditional areas of operation.

We assess that such groups pose less of a danger to the Homeland than does al-Qaeda but will pose varying degrees of threat to our allies and to US interests abroad. The focus of their attacks is likely to ebb and flow between local regime targets and regional or global ones.

We judge that most jihadist groups - both well-known and newly formed - will use improvised explosive devices and suicide attacks focused primarily on soft targets to implement their asymmetric warfare strategy, and that they will attempt to conduct sustained terrorist attacks in urban environments. Fighters with experience in Iraq are a potential source of leadership for jihadists pursuing these tactics.

CBRN capabilities will continue to be sought by jihadist groups. While Iran, and to a lesser extent Syria, remain the most active state sponsors of terrorism, many other states will be unable to prevent territory or resources from being exploited by terrorists.

Internet

Anti-US and anti-globalization sentiment is on the rise and fuelling other radical ideologies. This could prompt some leftist, nationalist, or separatist groups to adopt terrorist methods to attack US interests. The radicalization process is occurring more quickly, more widely, and more anonymously in the Internet age, raising the likelihood of surprise attacks by unknown groups whose members and supporters may be difficult to pinpoint.

We judge that groups of all stripes will increasingly use the Internet to communicate, propagandize, recruit, train, and obtain logistical and financial support.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

He said he was declassifying part of the report.

OMG, the President will compromise our National Security.

actually, it's his call as pres if he wanted to do that. but if you read the article you would have noted that "bush" is not the one actually declassfying the document. jeesh

President Bush on Tuesday said ... he was declassifying part of the report.

Bush announced that he had instructed National Intelligence Director John Negroponte to declassify those parts of the report...

Excuse me, he orders it to be declassified. He's still the guy calling the shots on it even though he has others to do the actual deed for him on his directive. Other hairs to split today? jeesh, really.

Bottom line is: All of a sudden it's not a matter of national security anymore.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

He said he was declassifying part of the report.

OMG, the President will compromise our National Security.

actually, it's his call as pres if he wanted to do that. but if you read the article you would have noted that "bush" is not the one actually declassfying the document. jeesh

President Bush on Tuesday said ... he was declassifying part of the report.

Bush announced that he had instructed National Intelligence Director John Negroponte to declassify those parts of the report...

Excuse me, he orders it to be declassified. He's still the guy calling the shots on it even though he has others to do the actual deed for him on his directive. Other hairs to split today? jeesh, really.

Bottom line is: All of a sudden it's not a matter of national security anymore.

Hit the nail on the head!

[Ban Hammer 12,842]

He said he was declassifying part of the report.

OMG, the President will compromise our National Security.

actually, it's his call as pres if he wanted to do that. but if you read the article you would have noted that "bush" is not the one actually declassfying the document. jeesh

President Bush on Tuesday said ... he was declassifying part of the report.

Bush announced that he had instructed National Intelligence Director John Negroponte to declassify those parts of the report...

Excuse me, he orders it to be declassified. He's still the guy calling the shots on it even though he has others to do the actual deed for him on his directive. Other hairs to split today? jeesh, really.

Bottom line is: All of a sudden it's not a matter of national security anymore.

yeah, might as well toss national security out the window as a bunch of people and a few newspapers don't care about it anyways

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Perhaps the problem is that there are too many secrets these days.

BTW - the news today has the Dems calling for the full report to be declassified. As I thought they would.

[Ban Hammer 12,842]

Perhaps the problem is that there are too many secrets these days.

spoken just like a true fis

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The UK government, for example, has for a long time, maintained a culture of secrecy around a whole range of issues. What is classified as a "state secret" does not necessarily pertain to national security, but has rather become a drop-box for things considered inconvenient and embarrassing.