CIA chief sees 'near strategic defeat of al-Qaeda in Iraq'
US News
May 30, 2008, 6:10 GMT
Older Talkback
Oogunga! You place entirely too much faith in this technological terror you have constructed, General. It is insignificant compared to the fires of Islam. They or some other group with a different name will be back. In fact, other such groups still exist and still actively seek our destruction. Your intelligence magic has not brought us the heads of Osama Bin Laden and Al Zawahiri, now has it? What about those two Shia Fatboys, hmm?
Oh, and while you are about it, here is what many of our 'allies' think of us:
//www.europeanvoice.com/article/2008/05/1925/a-post-american-israel/608 95.aspx
What about Afghanistan and Pakistan? 'US and other intelligence experts believe that bin Laden is most likely hiding in remote, mountainous areas along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan.' Why did we even bother to go into Afghanistan in 2001 if we were not actually on the trail of osama bin laden and al qaeda? It is a shame for American that the neocons perverted our mission after 9/11 of killing/capturing osama bin laden and al qaeda in the countries that harbor them. The neocons in their grand delusion would like to trick Americans into believing that 9/11 is all about Iraq. For some bizzare rational, after rightfully invading Afghanistan in 2001 because the extremist taliban government was harboring osama bin laden and al qaeda, we stopped at the border with Pakistan, and let the terrorists return to safe havens in Pakistan.
The promoting democracy, and nation-building crusade that replaced our true mission is a mirage. To believe that now this is our purpose, instead of dealing with the 9/11 terrorists, we have to forget that Pakistan is run by a military dictator, created the Taliban, harbors al qaeda, and osama bin laden, has lots of nuclear bombs, and shared nuclear bomb techology with their North Korean buddies. That is a lot of truth to forget about. The neocons can cheerlead all they want, but it does not
provide the victory over the 9/11 terrorists America deserves.
...but, no matter what you think, the USA has been, undeniably, free of terror, and Bush has to be credited for this. He has bucked every attempt to weaken our system, by the liberal luddites. He has taken every possible advantage of his constitutional authority to thwart the enemies, both abroad and in our own Congress.
It has been, undeniably, successful.
Has this war been properly executed? Perhaps not, but nonetheless, these successes have been produced. To simply widen the scope and declare failure because he cannot claim total, unconditional victory, flies in the face of reason. If this is the case, we cannot wait to measure the dem administration by the same metrics.
What IS interesting is that the public HAS adopted total unconditional victory as THE paradigm. This will be the real Bush legacy, as no President, from now on, will have the luxury of capitualting.
An administration who has deceived the american people and the world has lost all credibility and cannot be believed in any way, shape, or form. Even if they provide hard evidence, how do we know the evidence was not fabricated as is commonplace with cloak and dagger organizations? How do we know this? Sadly they cannot be trusted.bccmeteorites.com/misconduct-planetary.html
SRD
'What IS interesting is that the public HAS adopted total unconditional victory as THE paradigm. This will be the real Bush legacy, as no President, from now on, will have the luxury of capitualting.'
talk is cheap, buddy. please define 'total unconditional victory'.
Is it releasing the gitmo prisoners, [worse of the worse] without making any charges or convictions? Is is going after the al qaeda in Pakistan? Is it killing every muslim in the world? tell us what you mean.
'Why did we even bother to go into Afghanistan in 2001 if we were not actually on the trail of osama bin laden and al qaeda?'
3 main reasons we went in:
1. disrupt/destroy AQ;
2. punish Talib;
3. set example that regimes supporting terror groups will pay high price.
Why is that so tough to grasp?
'The neocons in their grand delusion would like to trick Americans into believing that 9/11 is all about Iraq.'
Who ever said 9/11 was all about Iraq? That is utter nonsense. They are linked strategically on several levels, but that would require the capacity for independent thought to grasp.
1. Rogue dictator disregarding UN ceasefire requirements regarding wmd (among other things), with proven history of use against civilians and support for terror groups is a bad example to let stand at any time, but especially after 9/11.
Is that too complex for you?
2. His overthrow would send strong message to other rogue dictators that there behavior will not be tolerated and they will lose power and their lives.
Gosh there are even examples - khadaffi soon fessed up and turned over wmd info/programs which exposed clandestine proliferation sources.
3. Establishment and worldwide support of democracy in heart of ME is a long term process, but it would go a long way to providing alternative to radical islam (and therefore reduce/isolate terrorists).
WMD proliferation to nation states and then to economically or ideologically driven rogue groups is inevitable. Slowing that process is in everyones interest.
The administrations greatest miscalculation was that the free world - as well as the Dem oopposition in US, was more interested is hobbling the US adminsitration than in supporting a democratic Iraq.
'we stopped at the border with Pakistan...'
As opposed to invading Pakistan? This argument is made from many angles - all of them ignorant. The notion that 'the military dictator in Pakistan' somehow supports AQ is just stupid. The regions of Pakistan where AQ/Talib are harbored is outside the control of the central government. Musharaff has lost more troops fighting in that region than US/coalition has lost in Iraq/Afghanistan combined.
What IS interesting is that the public HAS adopted total unconditional victory as THE paradigm. This will be the real Bush legacy, as no President, from now on, will have the luxury of capitualting.'
talk is cheap, buddy. please define 'total unconditional victory'.
sp4 - total...every nasty towelhead, without a single casualty...that IS total victory as defined by libnazi capitulators, right?
Is it releasing the gitmo prisoners, [worse of the worse] without making any charges or convictions?
sp4 - no, they are POW's, so they do not have the same rights as citizens
Is is going after the al qaeda in Pakistan? Is it killing every muslim in the world? tell us what you mean.
sp4 - that was the point, professor: in your gossamer world, where everything exists in simplistic totallity, it looks like the next President is going to get the pleasure of living up to what has been defined for Mr. Bush!
By the way, how do you know he's in Pakistan....?
Good luck....
we did temporarily disrupt al qaeda in Afghanistan. then we stalled, didn't go after them in Pakistan. that is simple to understand. what is difficult to grasp is why we did not chase obl and al quaeda right into Pakistan. If there was no logic to going after al qaeda in Pakistan in 2001, than there was no logic to going after al qaeda in Iraq in 2003, especially considering that they were not there then. More logical to bring democracy and women's rights to the fundamentalist islamic theocracy in saudi arabia.
you and sp4 would make good choices for a new neoconartist apologist/ cheerleader/press secretary for the next few months. try spinning your tricycle training wheels some more, because your neocon political spin doesn't work for most people any more.
'then we stalled, didn't go after them in Pakistan. '
You have really latched on to that as if it were an intelligent idea. No matter how many times it is explained to you you still don't seem to understand that:
1) The USA has special forces operating in Pakistan.
2) A full scale invasion of Pakistan would be NOT be in our internists.
' It is insignificant compared to the fires of Islam. '
Found another problem you want to capitulate to? Well Obama will get right on that for you.
'Your intelligence magic has not brought us the heads of Osama Bin Laden and Al Zawahiri, now has it? What about those two Shia Fatboys, hmm?'
They are Sunni... And turning Iraq over to them isn't going to bring their heads to us.
give it to me again, buddy. after 9/11, why was it in our interest for a full scale invasion of Iraq, but not Pakistan, or even saudi arabia? And now, are we really going after the 9/11 terrorists in the countries that harbor them, or are we too pre-occupied with 'nation-building'? What is this neocon pre-occupation with Iraq? This reminds me of the scout leader who took his troop to climb to the highest peak. They didn't need no maps or compass because he believed that he knew the way. They climbed and climbed, and after reaching the top of a ridge, looked across and realized that the peak they were seeking was several miles away.
...the argument above was that, never mind the success in front of them, that liberals cried as a failure (and are now wrong) oh no...they want to seek ANOTHER goal, that we are told, SHOULD, have been the goal begin with, but that liberals NEVER articulated to begin with.
No, they voted for war in Iraq, a fact they are trying like hell to make us forget. They want us to believe dumb ol GW jes fooled thim reel bad, rather than facing the fact that:
They did it to get Bush to rid of Saddam for them, and them pillory him for it later.
wow...what a surprise...the liberal moving target...can't wait to apply it to President Barak...
Nonetheless, we've defeated this enemy, and on someone else's soil, regardless of the state of the country they are in. Now, MacCain challenges barak to, finally go there and see what he can see with his own eyes. Then again, why would we think John McCain is afraid of anything...?
Besides, why does anyone think Osama is in Pakistan...or Afghanistan...? Why is it so imperitive to get to him?
if the CIA chief is smoking from the same bong as SP.
'didn't go after them in Pakistan.'
We have people in Pakistan now. We have conducted dozens of operations and killed hundreds of AQ/Talib operatives. Musharraf has deployed tens of thousands of troops and suffered thousands of casualties fighting against AQ/Talib and their supporters.
Are you suggesting that the US should have conducted a full scale invasion?
'If there was no logic to going after al qaeda in Pakistan in 2001, than there was no logic to going after al qaeda in Iraq in 2003'
Logic isn't your strength? Just kidding. Seriously, Saddam was our enemy and his overthrow was supported by Congress under Clinton. Do I really need to restate the litany of his real and perceived offenses? You cannot compile a comperable list of offenses against Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. Feel free to try.
Please tell me what the logic is for supporting your country's enemies? Could it be that increased casualties and potential defeat could secure advantages for your political party?
And I bet the CIA Chief won't say anything about Osamina bin Laden when he was working for them (P.A.K.) I bet you don't remember the cover and the super write up and numerous photos in the US 'TIME' magazine with the words 'freedom fighter' when he was being supplied by CIA and USA arnaments to fight the Russians in Afghanistan..Personally, I would cringe in shame!.Try and get The old TIME edition it's a hoot! (I sold mine to a collector....goood money too!)
'Saddam was our enemy'
But first he was your friend. You supplied him with a lot of weapons and technology as your surrogate fighter against Iran. Remember? Or is your memory as selective and as bad as the drug addicted SP4? What turned him into an enemy? He refused to kiss the US ass any more. You turkeys deserve and have earned every last plane crash into a building that's coming at you. Plus whatever else they can think of. Finally you international criminals are getting some back. Wear it well. It looks good on you.
when bush leaves office maybe sp4 will go with him to crawford where they can be butthole buddys to the end.
Hayden !! TWO years in the job - he really has still got his diapers on.
These CIA imbeciles have polluted the name of America ever since that gigantic jerk and national embarrassment Hoover made a fool of himself and everybody else.
The CIA could not even tell you the weather when looking out of the window without getting it wrong. They have an endless stream of the most incredible cock-ups and misinformation that the human brain can possibly come up with. Not to mention being responsible for thousands of American deaths.
If you want the biggest balls-up on earth, then give the job to the CIA, their devotion to absolutely screwing things up is inexhaustible.
OH BOY !! no, please no, don`t mention that Iranian Hostage episode.
But I will - the CIA and all those clever tough special operations (don`t laugh) clowns, planned this masterpiece of utter devastation in great detail. All very secret and with Delta-Force and the other boy scouts all involved.
Apart from destroying half the American air force`s C-130`s and helicopters and killing about 8-10 American gladiators, all in a superbly executed ram-em-all manner, the whole mission was the biggest military cock-up the world has ever laughed at. Go-it guys, Gung-ho and all that jazz.
BUT that wonderful epic of recent times, where the CIA and their FBI crazy-gang buddies actually knew all about 19 Muslim crackpots, then let them calmly train to fly aeroplanes in an AMERICAN flying school.
Here is the best bit - THEN the mad mullahs were allowed to hijack 4 huge American passenger planes full of nice people, armed only with penknives.
AND THEN to give new York a massive makeover by destroying the WTC towers, killing nearly 3,000 people and injuring thousands more. AND even made a great dent in the Pentagon to finish their act. Well done CIA and FBI.
If there is a very large crap hole somewhere in those nasty desert badlands, then collect up all CIA jerk-offs with their little toys and comics and DUMP them in it !
AL-QAEDA finished !! America and the alliance have`nt got the balls to do it and certainly not the firepower. I should think Osama is peeing himself in his nightshirt at this jerk Hayden`s fit of insane fantasy.
'And I bet the CIA Chief won't say anything about Osamina bin Laden when he was working for them (P.A.K.) '
I think it is fair to say at this point that you are a seething Indian who is angry that the USA didn't take care of the problem for you. If you want Pakistan invaded be my guest. Don't expect Americans to die for your interests though. If India is to be taken seriously as a superpower it is going to have to start pitching in instead of whining from the sidelines.
'I bet you don't remember the cover and the super write up and numerous photos in the US 'TIME' magazine with the words 'freedom fighter''
Nope, Don't remember that.
'Try and get The old TIME edition it's a hoot!'
Betcha, since it doesn't exist.
'Nope, Don't remember that.'
If you put down the bong, your memory would return.
Similar articles
- Moment of silence begins 7th annual commemoration of 9/11
- Seven years later, Afghanistan still a daunting challenge
- After seven years, commemorations in US, scepticism abroad
- Acquittal does not ensure release of Guantanamo detainees
- Report: US could have vast archive of Guantanamo tapes
Latest Headlines in US
- 1. Catholic bishop says no communion for Kennedy over health reform
- 2. New York man kills fellow commuter over seat on train
- 3. Computer glitch causes delays at major US airports
- 4. Pentagon launches review in wake of Fort Hood rampage
- 5. Oprah to declare 2011 end to landmark talk show
News from Other Sites
Your Talkback on this Story