War in Iraq making it worse??

Lets talk about this...

OK, I have a real problem here. I have been hearing since yesterday that a report from the Intelligence agencies say the War in Iraq has made terrorism worse instead of better. This was picked up of course by the anti-war groups and Left and hailed as proof positive that the Bush Administration has made yet another mistake.

I have one question to ask though. If this is a classified report, that means secret. Who is crying about the leaking of the classified document? Who leaked it and why? Should there not be an investigation since the left and anti-war types want an investigation into everything they see as illegal or improper? Where’s the cry for the person who "outed" the information, like the cry for the culprit who outed the supposed CIA agent?

I read report after report on this and many do not mention that the information comes from a classified document or they mention it in the end or some obscure place. What’s the deal here?

I want a full Congressional investigation into who and how this classified information got leaked (sound like the left!?!?!). And before people start quoting it, or using it to point fingers, the whole document will have to be considered. Context is everything.

 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/25/world/middleeast/25terror.html?hp&ex=1159156800&en=0a9bfa250ffa107d&ei=5094&partner=homepage

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a6u3Mr9lL9vc&refer=us

http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_27268590.shtml

12,758 views 37 replies
Reply #1 Top
Whats even more interesting is how the left has been telling us for years how inept and clueless our intelligence agencies are. Why now are they so confident? Because they hate Bush, and their "facts" are based on that.
Reply #2 Top
The question that should be asked is WHY is Bush still telling us that the Iraq War has made us safer when he has had the information form this previously secret report that shows what he is telling Americans is NOT CORRECT?

Why has Bush not used this information that he and his principal subordinates have had for some time. It is another example where the President ignores ANY information that does not support WHAT HE WANTS TO DO! He never admits he is wrong or changes his policies even though there is PROOF his policies ARE NOT WORKING!!!!!!!!!
Reply #3 Top
"previously secret report " "have had for some time" I find it amazing you know so much about a STILL classified document. Thats the point. Oh and BTW, since this supports the left side of view its OK to use only what we know, even if the context of what is known is wrong, right? Wow are people quick to say OK! When it fits their side, even if its only part of the story. Amazing..
Reply #4 Top
The Article from the AP (by Nedra Pickler) stated the report in question was completed in April 2006. Thus Bush has had this most significant intelligence information for 5 months. The National Intelligence Estimate is the Last Word in intelligence and is the net result of all 16 Intelligence agencies!
Reply #5 Top
Here is another article from the NYT:

September 24, 2006
Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terrorism Threat
By MARK MAZZETTI
WASHINGTON, Sept. 23 — A stark assessment of terrorism trends by American intelligence agencies has found that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.

The classified National Intelligence Estimate attributes a more direct role to the Iraq war in fueling radicalism than that presented either in recent White House documents or in a report released Wednesday by the House Intelligence Committee, according to several officials in Washington involved in preparing the assessment or who have read the final document.

The intelligence estimate, completed in April, is the first formal appraisal of global terrorism by United States intelligence agencies since the Iraq war began, and represents a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government. Titled “Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States,’’ it asserts that Islamic radicalism, rather than being in retreat, has metastasized and spread across the globe.

An opening section of the report, “Indicators of the Spread of the Global Jihadist Movement,” cites the Iraq war as a reason for the diffusion of jihad ideology.

The report “says that the Iraq war has made the overall terrorism problem worse,” said one American intelligence official.

More than a dozen United States government officials and outside experts were interviewed for this article, and all spoke only on condition of anonymity because they were discussing a classified intelligence document. The officials included employees of several government agencies, and both supporters and critics of the Bush administration. All of those interviewed had either seen the final version of the document or participated in the creation of earlier drafts. These officials discussed some of the document’s general conclusions but not details, which remain highly classified.

Officials with knowledge of the intelligence estimate said it avoided specific judgments about the likelihood that terrorists would once again strike on United States soil. The relationship between the Iraq war and terrorism, and the question of whether the United States is safer, have been subjects of persistent debate since the war began in 2003.

National Intelligence Estimates are the most authoritative documents that the intelligence community produces on a specific national security issue, and are approved by John D. Negroponte, director of national intelligence. Their conclusions are based on analysis of raw intelligence collected by all of the spy agencies.

Analysts began working on the estimate in 2004, but it was not finalized until this year. Part of the reason was that some government officials were unhappy with the structure and focus of earlier versions of the document, according to officials involved in the discussion.

Previous drafts described actions by the United States government that were determined to have stoked the jihad movement, like the indefinite detention of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay and the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal, and some policy makers argued that the intelligence estimate should be more focused on specific steps to mitigate the terror threat. It is unclear whether the final draft of the intelligence estimate criticizes individual policies of the United States, but intelligence officials involved in preparing the document said its conclusions were not softened or massaged for political purposes.

Frederick Jones, a White House spokesman, said the White House “played no role in drafting or reviewing the judgments expressed in the National Intelligence Estimate on terrorism.” The estimate’s judgments confirm some predictions of a National Intelligence Council report completed in January 2003, two months before the Iraq invasion. That report stated that the approaching war had the potential to increase support for political Islam worldwide and could increase support for some terrorist objectives.

Documents released by the White House timed to coincide with the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks emphasized the successes that the United States had made in dismantling the top tier of Al Qaeda.

“Since the Sept. 11 attacks, America and its allies are safer, but we are not yet safe,” concludes one, a report titled “9/11 Five Years Later: Success and Challenges.” “We have done much to degrade Al Qaeda and its affiliates and to undercut the perceived legitimacy of terrorism.”

That document makes only passing mention of the impact the Iraq war has had on the global jihad movement. “The ongoing fight for freedom in Iraq has been twisted by terrorist propaganda as a rallying cry,” it states.

The report mentions the possibility that Islamic militants who fought in Iraq could return to their home countries, “exacerbating domestic conflicts or fomenting radical ideologies.”

On Wednesday, the Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee released a more ominous report about the terrorist threat. That assessment, based entirely on unclassified documents, details a growing jihad movement and says, “Al Qaeda leaders wait patiently for the right opportunity to attack.”

The new National Intelligence Estimate was overseen by David B. Low, the national intelligence officer for transnational threats, who commissioned it in 2004 after he took up his post at the National Intelligence Council. Mr. Low declined to be interviewed for this article.

The estimate concludes that the radical Islamic movement has expanded from a core of Qaeda operatives and affiliated groups to include a new class of “self-generating” cells inspired by Al Qaeda’s leadership but without any direct connection to Osama bin Laden or his top lieutenants.

It also examines how the Internet has helped spread jihadist ideology, and how cyberspace has become a haven for terrorist operatives who no longer have geographical refuges in countries like Afghanistan.

In early 2005, the National Intelligence Council released a study concluding that Iraq had become the primary training ground for the next generation of terrorists, and that veterans of the Iraq war might ultimately overtake Al Qaeda’s current leadership in the constellation of the global jihad leadership.

But the new intelligence estimate is the first report since the war began to present a comprehensive picture about the trends in global terrorism.

In recent months, some senior American intelligence officials have offered glimpses into the estimate’s conclusions in public speeches.

“New jihadist networks and cells, sometimes united by little more than their anti-Western agendas, are increasingly likely to emerge,” said Gen. Michael V. Hayden, during a speech in San Antonio in April, the month that the new estimate was completed. “If this trend continues, threats to the U.S. at home and abroad will become more diverse and that could lead to increasing attacks worldwide,” said the general, who was then Mr. Negroponte’s top deputy and is now director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

For more than two years, there has been tension between the Bush administration and American spy agencies over the violence in Iraq and the prospects for a stable democracy in the country. Some intelligence officials have said the White House has consistently presented a more optimistic picture of the situation in Iraq than justified by intelligence reports from the field.

Spy agencies usually produce several national intelligence estimates each year on a variety of subjects. The most controversial of these in recent years was an October 2002 document assessing Iraq’s illicit weapons programs. Several government investigations have discredited that report, and the intelligence community is overhauling how it analyzes data, largely as a result of those investigations.

The broad judgments of the new intelligence estimate are consistent with assessments of global terrorist threats by American allies and independent terrorism experts.

The panel investigating the London terrorist bombings of July 2005 reported in May that the leaders of Britain’s domestic and international intelligence services, MI5 and MI6, “emphasized to the committee the growing scale of the Islamist terrorist threat.”

More recently, the Council on Global Terrorism, an independent research group of respected terrorism experts, assigned a grade of “D+” to United States efforts over the past five years to combat Islamic extremism. The council concluded that “there is every sign that radicalization in the Muslim world is spreading rather than shrinking.”
Reply #6 Top

I'm sorry but if it's making "terrorism worse" then where are all the terrorist attacks.

Pre-9/11: Embassy bombings, USS Cole, First WTC attack, the final WTC attack.

Post-9/11: Crickets chirping.

Oh yea, those terrorists, they're really kicking some ass...

Heck, *I* by myself could do more effective terrorism than the terrorists are doing these days. So could any individual American. Al Qaeda and their ilk have become truly pathetic.

Reply #7 Top
This does smell of a red herring. I think someone is being set up. And it is not Bush.
Reply #8 Top

Col, reports don't equal truth.  Like I said, people like you have told us how enept our intelligence services are, but now they are completely credible because it goes againt Bush. 

 

Reply #9 Top
September 24, 2006
Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terrorism Threat
By MARK MAZZETTI
WASHINGTON, Sept. 23 — A stark assessment of terrorism trends by American intelligence agencies has found that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.

The classified National Intelligence Estimate attributes a more direct role to the Iraq war in fueling radicalism than that presented either in recent White House documents or in a report released Wednesday by the House Intelligence Committee, according to several officials in Washington involved in preparing the assessment or who have read the final document.

The intelligence estimate, completed in April, is the first formal appraisal of global terrorism by United States intelligence agencies since the Iraq war began, and represents a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government. Titled “Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States,’’ it asserts that Islamic radicalism, rather than being in retreat, has metastasized and spread across the globe.

An opening section of the report, “Indicators of the Spread of the Global Jihadist Movement,” cites the Iraq war as a reason for the diffusion of jihad ideology.

The report “says that the Iraq war has made the overall terrorism problem worse,” said one American intelligence official.

More than a dozen United States government officials and outside experts were interviewed for this article, and all spoke only on condition of anonymity because they were discussing a classified intelligence document. The officials included employees of several government agencies, and both supporters and critics of the Bush administration. All of those interviewed had either seen the final version of the document or participated in the creation of earlier drafts. These officials discussed some of the document’s general conclusions but not details, which remain highly classified.

Officials with knowledge of the intelligence estimate said it avoided specific judgments about the likelihood that terrorists would once again strike on United States soil. The relationship between the Iraq war and terrorism, and the question of whether the United States is safer, have been subjects of persistent debate since the war began in 2003.

National Intelligence Estimates are the most authoritative documents that the intelligence community produces on a specific national security issue, and are approved by John D. Negroponte, director of national intelligence. Their conclusions are based on analysis of raw intelligence collected by all of the spy agencies.

Analysts began working on the estimate in 2004, but it was not finalized until this year. Part of the reason was that some government officials were unhappy with the structure and focus of earlier versions of the document, according to officials involved in the discussion.

Previous drafts described actions by the United States government that were determined to have stoked the jihad movement, like the indefinite detention of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay and the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal, and some policy makers argued that the intelligence estimate should be more focused on specific steps to mitigate the terror threat. It is unclear whether the final draft of the intelligence estimate criticizes individual policies of the United States, but intelligence officials involved in preparing the document said its conclusions were not softened or massaged for political purposes.

Frederick Jones, a White House spokesman, said the White House “played no role in drafting or reviewing the judgments expressed in the National Intelligence Estimate on terrorism.” The estimate’s judgments confirm some predictions of a National Intelligence Council report completed in January 2003, two months before the Iraq invasion. That report stated that the approaching war had the potential to increase support for political Islam worldwide and could increase support for some terrorist objectives.

Documents released by the White House timed to coincide with the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks emphasized the successes that the United States had made in dismantling the top tier of Al Qaeda.

“Since the Sept. 11 attacks, America and its allies are safer, but we are not yet safe,” concludes one, a report titled “9/11 Five Years Later: Success and Challenges.” “We have done much to degrade Al Qaeda and its affiliates and to undercut the perceived legitimacy of terrorism.”

That document makes only passing mention of the impact the Iraq war has had on the global jihad movement. “The ongoing fight for freedom in Iraq has been twisted by terrorist propaganda as a rallying cry,” it states.

The report mentions the possibility that Islamic militants who fought in Iraq could return to their home countries, “exacerbating domestic conflicts or fomenting radical ideologies.”

On Wednesday, the Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee released a more ominous report about the terrorist threat. That assessment, based entirely on unclassified documents, details a growing jihad movement and says, “Al Qaeda leaders wait patiently for the right opportunity to attack.”

The new National Intelligence Estimate was overseen by David B. Low, the national intelligence officer for transnational threats, who commissioned it in 2004 after he took up his post at the National Intelligence Council. Mr. Low declined to be interviewed for this article.

The estimate concludes that the radical Islamic movement has expanded from a core of Qaeda operatives and affiliated groups to include a new class of “self-generating” cells inspired by Al Qaeda’s leadership but without any direct connection to Osama bin Laden or his top lieutenants.

It also examines how the Internet has helped spread jihadist ideology, and how cyberspace has become a haven for terrorist operatives who no longer have geographical refuges in countries like Afghanistan.

In early 2005, the National Intelligence Council released a study concluding that Iraq had become the primary training ground for the next generation of terrorists, and that veterans of the Iraq war might ultimately overtake Al Qaeda’s current leadership in the constellation of the global jihad leadership.

But the new intelligence estimate is the first report since the war began to present a comprehensive picture about the trends in global terrorism.

In recent months, some senior American intelligence officials have offered glimpses into the estimate’s conclusions in public speeches.

“New jihadist networks and cells, sometimes united by little more than their anti-Western agendas, are increasingly likely to emerge,” said Gen. Michael V. Hayden, during a speech in San Antonio in April, the month that the new estimate was completed. “If this trend continues, threats to the U.S. at home and abroad will become more diverse and that could lead to increasing attacks worldwide,” said the general, who was then Mr. Negroponte’s top deputy and is now director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

For more than two years, there has been tension between the Bush administration and American spy agencies over the violence in Iraq and the prospects for a stable democracy in the country. Some intelligence officials have said the White House has consistently presented a more optimistic picture of the situation in Iraq than justified by intelligence reports from the field.

Spy agencies usually produce several national intelligence estimates each year on a variety of subjects. The most controversial of these in recent years was an October 2002 document assessing Iraq’s illicit weapons programs. Several government investigations have discredited that report, and the intelligence community is overhauling how it analyzes data, largely as a result of those investigations.

The broad judgments of the new intelligence estimate are consistent with assessments of global terrorist threats by American allies and independent terrorism experts.

The panel investigating the London terrorist bombings of July 2005 reported in May that the leaders of Britain’s domestic and international intelligence services, MI5 and MI6, “emphasized to the committee the growing scale of the Islamist terrorist threat.”

More recently, the Council on Global Terrorism, an independent research group of respected terrorism experts, assigned a grade of “D+” to United States efforts over the past five years to combat Islamic extremism. The council concluded that “there is every sign that radicalization in the Muslim world is spreading rather than shrinking.”
Reply #10 Top
Why do you keep posting articles from the NYT's. I have asked for the official report which even Congress hasn't seen.
Reply #11 Top
Democrats are great at theories. That's why they like academia.

A Democrat could sit there with a big impressive mathematic equation on the board claiming that gravity repels rather than attracts and get mad when the person asks why the apple falls to the ground then.
Reply #12 Top
Democrats are great at theories. That's why they like academia. - Emily

Only democrats could like academia!

Sorry, couldn't resist.

  
Reply #13 Top
IslandDog

I do not have the classified National Intelligence Estimate as you well know. However, Bush administration officials have acknowledged that the statements quoted by AP and NYT are included within the report. They claim the statements have been taken out of context. So much for,” is the story true"? Yes the conclusion by the NIE is that the Iraq War has not made us safer as Bush and Cheney claim!!!
Reply #14 Top
I do not have the classified National Intelligence Estimate as you well know. However, Bush administration officials have acknowledged that the statements quoted by AP and NYT are included within the report.


What they have acknowledged is democrats and the treasonous NYT are picking out a few sentences of a multi-page report. So if you don't have the entire report to put into perspective, they you are just promoting democratic propaganda, which is normal for you anyway.

Fighting terrorism makes islam angry....how surprising.
Reply #15 Top
Looks like Bush needs to release the report so we can all read it. They can redact those sections that would reveal methods and sources. This has been done in the past!

What is true is that Bush and Cheney who have had this report since April have IGNORED it and keep telling us the Iraq war has made us safer when they have been provided the PROOF from the 16 Intelligence agencies that is NOT TRUE!
Reply #16 Top
Looks like Bush needs to release the report so we can all read it. They can redact those sections that would reveal methods and sources. This has been done in the past!


Why col? You obviously have gotten everything you needed to know from the NYT. What needs to happen is for the government to file charges against the papers that published these classified leaks.

What is true is that Bush and Cheney who have had this report since April have IGNORED it and keep telling us the Iraq war has made us safer when they have been provided the PROOF from the 16 Intelligence agencies that is NOT TRUE!


Do you just copy and paste the same statements over and over in different threads? You don't know what the President has ignored and not ignored. You are not there, and you have absolutely no knowledge of what goes on. You posts just prove your ignorance beyond all doubt.
Reply #17 Top
IslandDog

The release is for you and the others that refuse to accept the truth about the Bush policies in Iraq!
Reply #18 Top
If the President has read the NIE then WHY is he telling us the exact opposite of what the report says?
Reply #19 Top
Cat got your tongue?
Reply #20 Top
The release is for you and the others that refuse to accept the truth about the Bush policies in Iraq!


Col, I don't need a report written by bureaucrats to know what the policy is. We are in Iraq col, nothing you will ever do will change that. Democrats still can't win elections on being anti-war, and you still don't understand that. You read 3 sentences from a multi-page report and now somehow you understand policy.

Like I said before. If it was up to you, we would all be speaking another language and surrendering to anybody who threatens us.

I notice you ignore everything that is posted to you. Hey col, fighting crime creates more criminals, let's stop fighting crime. I'm sure you will agree with that.

If the President has read the NIE then WHY is he telling us the exact opposite of what the report says?


First of all col, you DO NOT KNOW ANYTHING of what that report says except for a few sentences which is being used for democrat propaganda. For all you know the report could go on to say good things. Which of course you will dismiss and ignore if it did anyways. So STOP CLAIMING things that you do not know.

Second, reports are not word of law, nor are they completely factual. If you want to change policy every time a "report" comes out, then no wonder people like you cannot get elected. I bet if this report said going to Iraq was the right thing to do, you wouldn't be so obsessive about it.

So most people see this report for what is has become.....democrat propaganda. So once again col keep crying and whining about Bush...you are wasting your life obsessing over this man. Why don't you head over to the DU where people like you are welcomed and maybe you can sell a book or two?
Reply #21 Top
Cat got your tongue?


Should I go back and find all the threads you have abandoned because you were proved wrong and were AFRAID to admit it?

Why don't you go to Iraq and fight with the people you support......the terrorists?
Reply #22 Top
Most sentient Americans are not going to sweat what the NYT says because of the simple fact that we have not been attacked since 9/11.
Reply #23 Top
Bush is going to de-classify parts of the report. I bet you guys get made fools of again.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12913317/
Reply #24 Top
The facts on the ground in Iraq have proven me correct. Look at this excerpt from my book.
George W. Bush Robin Hood For The Rich by Colonel Gene P. Abel:
The Bush policy has isolated the U.S. from billions of people throughout the world. His credibility has been seriously impacted by the inability to locate any WMD in Iraq. After eight months of searching for these weapons, Mr. Kay believes that production was not resumed by Saddam Hussein after 1991. Colin Powell has now conceded that Iraq may not have had the weapons claimed by George Bush as the principal reason for the war. We must find a way to protect our nation in cooperation with the rest of the world. When we ignore world opinion we embark on a very dangerous path. Even General Powell has now stated that his speech before the U N on February 5, 2003 was the biggest mistake of his career.

The most dangerous reality is that millions of Muslims believe the policies of the United States and other Western countries threaten their belief, their territory and their God. Michael Scheuer, in his book Imperial Hubris states that America is faced with what he calls a defensive jihad, which is triggered by our policy in the Middle East. He points out that for Muslims do not separate politics and religion from their lives. They are all intertwined. For a Muslim to not join to protect Islam means that they are disobeying God's law. According to Mr. Scheuer the relationship of the Muslims to their religious beliefs is something that the Western world does not fully comprehend. Millions of Muslims look at Osama bin Laden as the protector of the Muslim faith, their way of life, their God and is not a terrorist. In fact the way Mr. Scheuer describes the conflict is more than just terrorism, it is an international insurrection by Muslims against what they believe is an attack on them, their religion and their way of life. The former CIA agent claims that we are faced with international insurrection by millions and millions of Muslims and that they will not end their resistance until the United States and other Western countries stop interfering with what they believe and remove themselves and their influence from all Muslim countries.

If this former CIA agent is correct, we have grossly understated the danger and the difficulty in dealing with what President Bush terms, “terrorism”. It would do us well to look at the experience that Michael Scheuer brings to the defense of our country and the western world. He believes that our invasion of Iraq has done more to energize the Islamic militants and thus weaken our security.
Reply #25 Top
That excerpt proves nothing as usual col. You are making a cheap attempt at promoting a book which doesn't sell and that you have wasted part of your life writing.

I can and have posted articles from CIA/experts who say pretty much the opposite. But then again nobody can understand the logic of an obsessive Bush hater.

Bush made the islamists hate America even more than when they flew airplanes into buildings. I can't stop laughing at your logic.