Quagmire....

**barbaro** · 01-10-2006, 12:08 PM

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by surasak

George W. Bush is no FDR.

True but Condi has balls!

How so?

She's a diplomat. She doesn't make policy. She advises. But Rumsfeld has to be ordered to return her calls.

She is now associated with the Iraq disaster. Not very good for her.

**man with no head** · 01-10-2006, 12:12 PM

I had more respect for Condi until the Lebanon-Israeli quagmire a month or so ago. I cannot think of a single member of this administration that deserves my respect now.

At least Colin Powell had the guts to resign when he knew he'd been lied to.

**barbaro** · 01-10-2006, 12:18 PM

Originally Posted by surasak

I had more respect for Condi until the Lebanon-Israeli quagmire a month or so ago. I cannot think of a single member of this administration that deserves my respect now.

At least Colin Powell had the guts to resign when he knew he'd been lied to.

Colin Powell is one of the few people in politics that seem to have integrity.

His 2003 UN presentation is now laughable. He's basically said that he read the draft of the speech, new that it was false, but was 'forced' to go ahead.

I kind of believe it.

Regardless, he was the least travelled Sec. of State in many decades, and I think he was the lone voice of reason in the administration. But Cheney, Rumsfeld, Libby, and others excluded him because he thought different than they did.

As for Condi. She can do many things in the future. But because of here hundreds of false statements about Iraq - she should never go into politics.

We don't even know her real views becuase she has no voting record.

**raycarey** · 01-10-2006, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by stroller

Now you're getting hysteric, folks. And where do you want to go to? Thailand with its military regime? - welcome to reality.

i don't think it's hysterical to think that the US govt. could start rounding up muslims and putting them into camps. once the graduates from the iraqi training ground make it to america, it will be a true test for the constitution.

of course, in theory the US govt. is superior to a militry junta, but look how far we've fallen in practice over just 6 short years. would you ever have thought that the US would invade a sovereign nation that didn't pose a threat, sanction torture, and wiretap without warrants?

and as far as condi rice is concerned, of GWB's cabinet she's probably the most to blame for not being prepared for the attacks on 9/11. and fuck her too for being pushed around by the likes of rummy and cheney.

**Storekeeper** · 02-10-2006, 08:29 AM

What are the Enemy’s Vulnerabilities?

Weaknesses
• Multiple cultural, religious and language dimensions – not monolithic
• Reliant on underground resource network
•Violence, murder and intimidation are their primary tactics
•Oppressive, backward vision for the future
Vulnerabilities
•Loss and isolation of senior leaders and networks degrades operational effectiveness and causes groups to splinter
•Growing effective and legitimate governance erodes support and provides an alternative
• Terrorist networks are increasingly vulnerable to the growth of host nation security forces

Source: Unclassified JCS brief. More than happy to email the entire Power Point point brief to you.

**Whiteshiva** · 02-10-2006, 02:49 PM

And what about the insurgents and Al Qaeda - what are their weaknesses, SK?

**barbaro** · 02-10-2006, 09:42 PM

The subject is basically this, IMO.

Will the U.S. (and coalition) achieve what they want?

I think the answer is 'no.'

Sorry to the link, but here is another article about the interagency fighting, lack of co-operation, and turf in-fighting inside the DOD (Rumsfeld), NSC, and other agencies.

Even after realizing there were serious mistakes made, the administration didn't make changes (replace people) because it "would have looked bad."

Bush was pushed to replace Rumsfeld in ’04

Then-chief of staff Card drew up list of possible candidates

Updated: 8:52 p.m. PT Oct 1, 2006

Entire & Link: Bush was pushed to replace Rumsfeld - washingtonpost.com Highlights - MSNBC.com

**raycarey** · 02-10-2006, 10:26 PM

you know i loathe the GWB admin, but it's the chief of staff's job to recommend replacing cabinet members...especially after re-election.

what's interesting to me, however, is that his stepford wife wanted rummy canned too.

**barbaro** · 02-10-2006, 10:34 PM

^ Rumsfeld isn't very popular by most.

Sorry for the link craziness, but here's a story that we may (or may not) be hearing about in the future.

October 1, 2006

9/11 Panel Members Weren’t Told of Meeting

By PHILIP SHENON
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 — Members of the Sept. 11 commission said today that they were alarmed that they were told nothing about a White House meeting in July 2001 at which, then the director of central intelligence, is reported to have warned, then the national security adviser, about an imminent attack and failed to persuade her to take action.

Details of the previously undisclosed meeting on July 10, 2001, two months before the Sept. 11 terror attacks, were first reported last week in a new book by the journalist Bob Woodward.
The final report from the Sept. 11 commission made no mention of the meeting nor did it suggest there had been such an encounter between Mr. Tenet and Ms. Rice, now secretary of state.
Since release of the book, “State of Denial,” the White House and Ms. Rice have disputed major elements of Mr. Woodward’s account, with Ms. Rice insisting through spokesmen that there had been no such exchange in a private meeting with Mr. Tenet and that he had expressed none of the frustration attributed to him in Mr. Woodward’s book.

“It really didn’t match Secretary Rice’s recollection of the meeting at all,” said Dan Bartlett, counselor to President Bush, in an interview on the CBS News program “Face the Nation.”

“It kind of left us scratching our heads because we don’t believe that’s an accurate account,” he said.
Although passages of the book suggest that Mr. Tenet was a major source for Mr. Woodward, the former intelligence director has refused to comment on the book.
Nor has there been any comment from J. Cofer Black, Mr. Tenet’s counterterrorism chief, who is reported in the book to have attended the July 10 meeting and left it frustrated by Ms. Rice’s “brush-off” of the warnings.

He is quoted as saying, “The only thing we didn’t do was pull the trigger to the gun we were holding to her head.” Mr. Black did not return calls left at the security firm Blackwater, which he joined last year.
The book says that Mr. Tenet hurriedly organized the meeting — calling ahead from his car as it traveled to the White House — because he wanted to “shake Rice” into persuading the president to respond to dire intelligence warnings that summer about a terrorist strike. Mr. Woodward writes that Mr. Tenet left the meeting frustrated because “they were not getting through to Rice.”

The disclosures took members of the bipartisan Sept. 11 commission by surprise last week. Some questioned whether information about the July 10 meeting was intentionally withheld from the panel.

In interviews Saturday and today, commission members said they were never told about the meeting despite hours of public and private questioning with Ms. Rice, Mr. Tenet and Mr. Black, much of it focused specifically on how the White House had dealt with terrorist threats in the summer of 2001.

“None of this was shared with us in hours of private interviews, including interviews under oath, nor do we have any paper on this,” said Timothy J. Roemer, a Democratic member of the commission and a former House member from Indiana. “I’m deeply disturbed by this. I’m furious.”

Link & Entire: 9/11 Panel Members Weren’t Told of Meeting - New York Times

**raycarey** · 02-10-2006, 10:50 PM

it reminds me of when the 9/11 commission asked her about the PDB...and she said.....

BEN-VENISTE: I want to ask you some questions about the August 6, 2001, PDB. We had been advised in writing by CIA on March 19, 2004, that the August 6 PDB was prepared and self-generated by a CIA employee. Following Director Tenet's testimony on March 26 before us, the CIA clarified its version of events, saying that questions by the president prompted them to prepare the August 6 PDB.
Now, you have said to us in our meeting together earlier in February, that the president directed the CIA to prepare the August 6 PDB.
The extraordinary high terrorist attack threat level in the summer of 2001 is well-documented. And Richard Clarke's testimony about the possibility of an attack against the United States homeland was repeatedly discussed from May to August within the intelligence community, and that is well-documented.
You acknowledged to us in your interview of February 7, 2004, that Richard Clarke told you that al Qaeda cells were in the United States.
BEN-VENISTE: Did you tell the president, at any time prior to August 6, of the existence of al Qaeda cells in the United States?
RICE: First, let me just make certain...
BEN-VENISTE: If you could just answer that question, because I only have a very limited...
RICE: I understand, Commissioner, but it's important...
BEN-VENISTE: Did you tell the president...
RICE: ... that I also address...
It's also important that, Commissioner, that I address the other issues that you have raised. So I will do it quickly, but if you'll just give me a moment.
BEN-VENISTE: Well, my only question to you is whether you...
RICE: I understand, Commissioner, but I will...
BEN-VENISTE: ... told the president.
RICE: If you'll just give me a moment, I will address fully the questions that you've asked.
First of all, yes, the August 6 PDB was in response to questions of the president -- and that since he asked that this be done. It was not a particular threat report. And there was historical information in there about various aspects of al Qaeda's operations.
Dick Clarke had told me, I think in a memorandum -- I remember it as being only a line or two -- that there were al Qaeda cells in the United States.
Now, the question is, what did we need to do about that?
And I also understood that that was what the FBI was doing, that the FBI was pursuing these al Qaeda cells. I believe in the August 6 memorandum it says that there were 70 full field investigations under way of these cells. And so there was no recommendation that we do something about this; the FBI was pursuing it. I really don't remember, Commissioner, whether I discussed this with the president.
BEN-VENISTE: Thank you.
RICE: I remember very well that the president was aware that there were issues inside the United States. He talked to people about this. But I don't remember the al Qaeda cells as being something that we were told we needed to do something about.
BEN-VENISTE: Isn't it a fact, Dr. Rice, that the August 6 PDB warned against possible attacks in this country? And I ask you whether you recall the title of that PDB?
RICE: I believe the title was, "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States."
Now, the...
BEN-VENISTE: Thank you.
RICE: No, Mr. Ben-Veniste...
BEN-VENISTE: I will get into the...
RICE: I would like to finish my point here.
BEN-VENISTE: I didn't know there was a point.
RICE: Given that -- you asked me whether or not it warned of attacks.
BEN-VENISTE: I asked you what the title was.
RICE: You said, did it not warn of attacks. It did not warn of attacks inside the United States. It was historical information based on old reporting. There was no new threat information. And it did not, in fact, warn of any coming attacks inside the United States.

CNN.com - Transcript of Rice's 9/11 commission statement - Apr 8, 2004

she believes the title?

****.

**Boon Mee** · 03-10-2006, 06:41 AM

Originally Posted by raycarey

you know i loathe the GWB admin, but it's the chief of staff's job to recommend replacing cabinet members...especially after re-election.

what's interesting to me, however, is that his stepford wife wanted rummy canned too.

Source?

**Storekeeper** · 03-10-2006, 07:13 AM

Originally Posted by stroller

The US have plenty of 'inactive' troops stationed in the Far East. Why don't they just order some of those over to Iraq, where they'd be a much needed contingent, and could take the burden off the young volunteers who are out of their depth there?

I've already told you it's already happening ... for over a year now. It's called "Individual Augmentation". And I've been holding hold out you ... Sailors and Airmen now being called upon to fill Marine and Army billets in Iraq ... it's too early to tell but I believe it's having a negative impact on retention across the ranks both officer and enlisted.

**Storekeeper** · 03-10-2006, 07:18 AM

Originally Posted by Milkman

^ Rumsfeld isn't very popular by most.

Why isn't he popular inside the military ? It's really quite simple. But do you know why ?

**raycarey** · 03-10-2006, 09:01 AM

the white house admits that woodward's book is right.

rice was warned in july about an impending attack.

JIDDA, Saudi Arabia, Oct. 2 — A review of White House records has determined that George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, did brief Condoleezza Rice and other top officials on July 10, 2001, about the looming threat from Al Qaeda, a State Department spokesman said Monday.

The account by the spokesman, Sean McCormack, came hours after Ms. Rice, the secretary of state, told reporters aboard her airplane that she did not recall the specific meeting on July 10, noting that she had met repeatedly with Mr. Tenet that summer about terrorist threats. Ms. Rice, the national security adviser at the time, said it was “incomprehensible” to suggest she had ignored dire terrorist threats two months before the Sept. 11 attacks.

nice work condi.

C.I.A. Chief Warned Rice on Al Qaeda - New York Times

**barbaro** · 03-10-2006, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

Originally Posted by Milkman

^ Rumsfeld isn't very popular by most.

Why isn't he popular inside the military ? It's really quite simple. But do you know why ?

I only know what I read by Generals, and George H. Bush, and other Pentagon officials.

It's in the newspapers.

**barbaro** · 03-10-2006, 08:07 PM

Today is October 3rd, Tuesday. Since Saturday, September 30th there have been:

15 American casualties in iraq.

Somebody is talking about "weaknesses?"

Link and update to official casualties: Iraq Coalition Casualties

**raycarey** · 03-10-2006, 10:01 PM

Originally Posted by Milkman

Since Saturday, September 30th there have been: 15 American casualties in iraq.

why don't the troops have the proper body armor?

why aren't the humvees protected so that RPGs don't destroy them?

who is responsible for this?
and how can alleged supporters of the policy sit by (on their chicken hawk fat asses) and not demand change?

**Whiteshiva** · 04-10-2006, 07:55 AM

Originally Posted by raycarey

Originally Posted by Milkman

Since Saturday, September 30th there have been: 15 American casualties in iraq.

why don't the troops have the proper body armor?

why aren't the humvees protected so that RPGs don't destroy them?

who is responsible for this?
and how can alleged supporters of the policy sit by (on their chicken hawk fat asses) and not demand change?

Because to raise a concern about anything this administration does automatically implies that you are a terrorist sympathiser - the "for us, or against us" priciple.

You could say they have basically come 360 degrees, and are now in a viscious circle where no matter how much they screw up, admitting a mistake would be the same as admitting that the very people they have spent the last 5 years labelling as non-patriotic and a danger to democracy might actually be right on some issues. Unfortunately to do so, naturally raises the question as to who, at the end of the day, is actually lacking in patriotism, or has caused the greatest damage to democratic values.....

**Storekeeper** · 04-10-2006, 08:59 AM

Whiteshiva,

You're making it more complicated than it really is. Personally, I respect those who do not support the war and I believe it is a necessity to have people who rally against any war. I just personally don't like raycarey's way of framing his arguments. And I know you don't like the way I frame my arguments. Believe it or not though I mainly argue the way I do on these forums strictly because of the misleading bullshit that comes out of brainwashed morons like raycarey's mouth. Unfortunately for me, more intelligent people like stroller get swayed in their view of me because of the way I respond back to pseudo-intellectual carrots inabilty to develop their own views and rely strictly on the brainwashing they received in junior colleges.

SK

**stroller** · 04-10-2006, 08:59 AM

They fight with the equipment they have, not the one they might wish for.

**Storekeeper** · 04-10-2006, 09:08 AM

Originally Posted by stroller

They fight with the equipment they have, not the one they might wish for.

Please don't feign concern for the troops with ray.

Bottom line ... the troops ain't voting with their feet now are they ? They're reenlisting in record numbers.

Goa ahead and get rid of Rumsfield. It won't change a gawd damn thing.

**raycarey** · 04-10-2006, 09:10 AM

why don't they have the necessary body armor to protect them? the war will enter its FIFTH year in a few months, and they are still vulnerable.

why is that?
who is responsible?
and why aren't you concerned about it?

**Storekeeper** · 04-10-2006, 09:26 AM

Originally Posted by raycarey

why don't they have the necessary body armor to protect them? the war will enter its FIFTH year in a few months, and they are still vulnerable.

why is that?
who is responsible?
and why aren't you concerned about it?

The problem really isn't lack of body armor anymore. The problem has become one of getting them to wear it all of the time. At least that's what the Sailor told me a few weeks ago who earned a Purple Heart in Iraq.

There is no one single person responsible for the previous lack of body armore or lack of reinforced steel plating on transport vehicles.

Believe it or not but I deployed for years knowing there were not enough life rafts on ships for the crew, there is not enough CBR equipment on ships to decontaminate the ship ... and most of the crew on ships does not have the proper training to defend against CBR attacks.

I'm not overly concerned about it because as you say the public has been aware of the problem for over 5 years ... and yet they keep enlisting and reenlisting ... I don't believe I'm qualified to judge their motives if they still feel comfortable going ahead with joining and fighting with a shortage of equipment.

**raycarey** · 04-10-2006, 09:28 AM

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

There is no one single person responsible for the previous lack of body armore or lack of reinforced steel plating on transport vehicles

so i guess the buck stops....nowhere?

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

I'm not overly concerned about it

sitting on a boat in japan, i'm sure you're not.

**Storekeeper** · 04-10-2006, 09:38 AM

Originally Posted by raycarey

sitting on a boat in japan, i'm sure you're not.

I wish I were on a boat in the Persian Gulf again. Unfortunately I'm sitting at a Supply Depot where I know exactly what is in the stock system for the military and what is not.

Overall, I'm pretty sure I know more about what's really going on in the world than you, stroller or Milkdud.

It's starting to not be much fun try to educate the uninformed masses of the expat world. Maybe it's hopeless.

Thread: Quagmire....

Thread Tools

Display

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Posting Permissions