|
Senate Report Finds U.S. Overplayed Iraq Threat
|
View this Thread in Original format
| LiquidX |
| quote: | Updated: 01:19 PM EDT
Senate Report Finds U.S. Overplayed Iraq Threat
By KATHERINE PFLEGER SHRADER, AP
WASHINGTON (July 9) -- The key U.S. assertions leading to the 2003 invasion of Iraq - that Saddam Hussein had chemical and biological weapons and was working to make nuclear weapons - were wrong and based on false or overstated CIA analyses, a scathing Senate Intelligence Committee report asserted Friday.
Intelligence analysts fell victim to ''group think'' assumptions that Iraq had weapons that it did not, the bipartisan report concluded. Many factors contributing to those failures are ongoing problems within the U.S. intelligence community - which cannot be fixed with more money alone, it said.
The report did not address a key allegation by Democrats: That Bush and other officials further twisted the evidence to back their calls for war against Iraq. The committee's top Democrat, Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, said he was disappointed the panel did not look into what he called ''exaggerated'' claims of the Iraqi threat by top administration officials.
Sen. Pat Roberts, a Kansas Republican who heads the committee, told reporters that assessments that Iraq had chemical and biological weapons and could make a nuclear weapon by the end of the decade were wrong.
''As the report will show, they were also unreasonable and largely unsupported by the available intelligence,'' he said.
''This was a global intelligence failure.''
Rockefeller said: ''Tragically, the intelligence failures set forth in this report will affect our national security for generations to come. Our credibility is diminished. Our standing in the world has never been lower. We have fostered a deep hatred of Americans in the Muslim world, and that will grow. As a direct consequence, our nation is more vulnerable today than ever before.''
The report repeatedly blasts departing CIA Director George Tenet, accusing him of skewing advice to top policy-makers with the CIA's view and elbowing out dissenting views from other intelligence agencies overseen by the State or Defense departments. It faulted Tenet for not personally reviewing Bush's 2003 State of the Union address, which contained since-discredited references to Iraq's attempts to purchase uranium in Africa.
White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, traveling with President Bush on a campaign trip Friday, said the committee's report essentially ''agrees with what we have said, which is we need to take steps to continue strengthening and reforming our intelligence capabilities so we are prepared to meet the new threats that we face in this day and age.''
Tenet has resigned and leaves office Sunday.
Bush has been agonizing over whether he will nominate a successor for Tenet before the November election. Poised to take over next week as acting director is Tenet's his deputy, John McLaughlin.
Asked earlier this week whether he planned to wait until after the election to name Tenet's replacement, the president said: ''I haven't made up my mind on the nomination process.''
Intelligence analysts worked from the assumption that Iraq had chemical and biological weapons and was seeking to make more, as well as trying to revive a nuclear weapons program. Instead, investigations after the Iraq invasion have shown that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had no nuclear weapons program and no biological weapons, and only small amounts of chemical weapons have been found.
Analysts ignored or discounted conflicting information because of their assumptions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, the report said.
''This 'group think' dynamic led Intelligence Community analysts, collectors and managers to both interpret ambiguous evidence as conclusively indicative of a WMD program as well as ignore or minimize evidence that Iraq did not have active and expanding weapons of mass destruction programs,'' the report concluded.
Such assumptions also led analysts to inflate snippets of questionable information into broad declarations that Iraq had chemical and biological weapons, the report said.
For example, speculation that the presence of one specialized truck could mean an effort to transfer chemical weapons was puffed up into a conclusion that Iraq was actively making chemical weapons, the report said.
Analysts also concluded that Iraq had a mobile biological weapons program based mainly on the since-discredited claims of one Iraqi defector code-named ''Curve Ball,'' it said. American agents did not have direct access to Curve Ball or his debriefers, but the source's information was expanded into the conclusion that Iraq had an advanced and active biological weapons program, the report said.
07/09/04 12:19 EDT
Copyright 2004 The Associated Press. The information contained in the AP news report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. All active hyperlinks have been inserted by AOL. |
WHAT A SURPRISEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
| NYCTrancefan |
| As well as a shame, it is my misguided beliefs placed in this adminstration that they were telling the truth about Iraq and its capabilities that have now made me so vehemently opposed to them. They have disgraced America's reputation, its ability to lay claims against other nations and any decent sense of crediblity in America's actions. How are we to now look at the rest of the world and say what America stands for with any sense of decent conscience, in November I know where my vote is going. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me indeed. :mad: |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| ''This was a global intelligence failure.'' |
|
|
| emander |
| 20/20 hindsight. We're there now, so we need to make a go of it and stabilize Iraq for long term security in the region. |
|
|
| LiquidX |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
''This was a global intelligence failure.'' |
But who made the move? |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by LiquidX
But who made the move? |
the coalition did, and we haven't looked back.
niether should you |
|
|
| LiquidX |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
the coalition did, and we haven't looked back.
niether should you |
No, I dont look back, I just look at the real facts, instead of just going all blind. |
|
|
| Q5echo |
the worlds most advanced intelligence agencies don't deal with the real facts or just your interpretation of the facts?
the fact is you are the one with blinders on. you absorb what the haters feed you because you have made the decision to be anti-war and the easiest target for you is the man who made the decision to take war to the enemy.
i absorb it all. i absorb the haters, the dogs of war, and the men who wish to destroy it all. i see everything.
why do you think post at liberal, multi-national, american hate fest?
...and yes, you did look back. |
|
|
| BigManwithaPlan |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
''This was a global intelligence failure.'' |
With all due respect to Q5echo, I've heard this line several times and everytime I have the same reaction. Bull SH*T!
If "Global Intelligence" was absolutely certain Saddam was storing + developing the hundreds of tons of Anthrax, Nerve Gas, UAV's for chemical warfare, an active Nuke program and all the other CRAP, why didn't they all send troops their? Of the countries that did go in with us, why did they send so few people?
The countries that didn't join our coalition to get Saddam were much closer geographically to the "Great and Gathering Danger". If "Global Intelligence" reached the same conclusion we did about Saddam's "Immenint Threat" why did so few of them "share in the sacrifice?" Why didn't the moderately friendly Arab states (Egypt, Jordan, UAE, Bahrain) not jump at the chance to get rid of the "Threat to global peace" just a few hundred miles from their borders?
You can find the names, faces, and nationalities of those "Global" coaltion sacrifices here.
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/ir...ces/casualties/
If 13 coutries + us in the US fits your defination of "Global" you live in a small world indeed.
God Bless Our Troops. |
|
|
| ResonantDrag |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
i absorb it all. i absorb the haters, the dogs of war, and the men who wish to destroy it all. i see everything.
|
well, aren't you just a thousand points of light:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | If 13 coutries + us in the US fits your defination of "Global" you live in a small world indeed.
God Bless Our Troops. |
your confusing the "coalition of the willing to do something about something" with the "worlds most advanced inteligence agencies". big difference.
"This was a global inteligence failure" was a quote from one of the most effective bipartisan thinktanks the senate intel committee has produced in recent years. it was something to be proud of for once on capitol hill. |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by ResonantDrag
well, aren't you just a thousand points of light:rolleyes: |
what are you willing to absorb? |
|
|
|
|
