• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Former CIA officer says US policies helped create IS

Montecresto said:
So I appreciate your position there. But respectfully disagree. While there have been policies that avoided war, I agree with the official in the op, the one criticised for having been retired from the CIA for 25 years now.
Click to expand...

He left under a cloud.
 
Hard Truth said:
Bombing a nation that was not a threat (Iraq) is considered destructive by most impartial observers.
Click to expand...

Yes, and the term for it in international law is "military aggression".
 
Montecresto said:
Yes well, it was never proven that he was responsible for the gas. And it makes no sense that he would. For one thing, at the time he enjoyed 70% support from Syrian's. Gassing them would not advance his purpose. Gassing his own people would make Putins support more difficult, and gassing his people would be handing the US a green light for military action, that he most certainly didn't want. The UK ended up pulling there support. Hillary Clinton failed in all three of her attempts to secure a resolution for the use of force in Syria, Obama could not get authorisation from congress, and, 70% of Americans were against it.

You're right that Saudis and Qatar too, are supporting the terrorists working to overthrow president Assad. And then IS as pointed out by the CIA official in the op, has been emboldened by our policies there. So why anyone would want to see more US policy in the region is a mystery.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree with you more. What we saw was the brutality of Assad. It seems to me that US foreign policy, as well as turning the other cheek woth respect to Saudi funding of terrorism etc has all by ruined our abilities in the ME for any kind of negotiated stability, leaving only force as a logical option; then again, it could very well be that teh heavy weights of influence want that so that the ME can be carved up among certain interests, all of them being commerical. I fear that two things aree going to come from this: the US will be in consistent state of terror ala Israel, and that it will reach a point wherein Israel proper will be held hostage. US ME policy has done nothng but ruin the entire region.
 
Jack Hays said:
He left under a cloud.
Click to expand...

Of course he did: the agency sees him as a subversive. All the man ahs done is simply verify what everyone has already known for a generation now.
 
jet57 said:
Of course he did: the agency sees him as a subversive. All the man ahs done is simply verify what everyone has already known for a generation now.
Click to expand...

Yep. How old is that excuse. Anytime somebody exits a federal agency and reveals government wrong doing, it can be dismissed by clouds and disgruntled, axe sharpening individuals. Because the government never abuses its power.
 
Montecresto said:
Yep. How old is that excuse. Anytime somebody exits a federal agency and reveals government wrong doing, it can be dismissed by clouds and disgruntled, axe sharpening individuals. Because the government never abuses its power.
Click to expand...

And thus - we have ISIS.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
[/FONT][/COLOR]

Read more @: Former CIA officer says US policies helped create IS

Great interview, with a man that knows a lot about the region. He states that the US does have some responsibility in the creation of ISIS. It also states that Turkey and the US at some point (if not have already) are going to have to accept that Assad is going to stay in power. It also goes over how the Kurds will win some cultural, social, and political autonomy if not full autonomy in the region.
Click to expand...

This guy sounds like a political hack that's never picked a history book.

Anyone that's even half-ass familiar the history of the ME knows an islamic caliphate was an objective long before the US invaded Iraq.

The US didn't create ISIS. The twisted ********ers that fill their ranks created ISIS. It's disgusting to see people ignore that reality.
 
jet57 said:
Of course he did: the agency sees him as a subversive. All the man ahs done is simply verify what everyone has already known for a generation now.
Click to expand...

He advocated for what became an illegal operation. It was carried out outside professional channels (and therefore done badly) because the institution would not go along. Contrary to movie portrayals, that's not viewed favorably.
 
Jack Hays said:
He advocated for what became an illegal operation. It was carried out outside professional channels (and therefore done badly) because the institution would not go along. Contrary to movie portrayals, that's not viewed favorably.
Click to expand...

And he had a turn around of motives; people do it all the time.
 
apdst said:
This guy sounds like a political hack that's never picked a history book.

Anyone that's even half-ass familiar the history of the ME knows an islamic caliphate was an objective long before the US invaded Iraq.

The US didn't create ISIS. The twisted ********ers that fill their ranks created ISIS. It's disgusting to see people ignore that reality.
Click to expand...

Mercenary bastards THEY are, eh? ;)
 
Roger that! It's kinda infectious amongst humans, certain types.
 
Source in the OP is garbage.

Some commentators have alleged Al-Monitor follows the agenda of the Iranian and Syrian governments and Hezbollah[6][7]...

Daniel himself is said to have been a close friend of Syria's Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem when the latter was Syria's envoy to the U.S.[8]
Click to expand...
Al-Monitor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And "former official" is also a BS source. There are plenty of former officials with Alzheimer's.
 
jet57 said:
And he had a turn around of motives; people do it all the time.
Click to expand...

A career CIA officer claims in a new book that America is losing the war on terror, in part because of the invasion of Iraq, which, he says, distracted the United States from the war against terrorism and further fueled al-Qaida’s struggle against the United States. The author, who writes as “Anonymous,” is a 22-year veteran of the CIA and still works for the intelligence agency, which allowed him to publish the book after reviewing it for classified information.
In an interview with NBC’s Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent Andrea Mitchell, he calls the U.S. war in Iraq a dream come true for Osama bin Laden, saying, “Bin Laden saw the invasion of Iraq as a Christmas gift he never thought he’d get.” By invading a country that’s regarded as the second holiest place in Islam, he asserts, the Bush administration inadvertently validated bin Laden’s assertions that the United States intends a holy war against Muslims.


http://www.nbcnews.com/id/5279743/n...ams/t/cia-insider-says-us-fighting-wrong-war/
 
Montecresto said:
A career CIA officer claims in a new book that America is losing the war on terror, in part because of the invasion of Iraq, which, he says, distracted the United States from the war against terrorism and further fueled al-Qaida’s struggle against the United States. The author, who writes as “Anonymous,” is a 22-year veteran of the CIA and still works for the intelligence agency, which allowed him to publish the book after reviewing it for classified information.
In an interview with NBC’s Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent Andrea Mitchell, he calls the U.S. war in Iraq a dream come true for Osama bin Laden, saying, “Bin Laden saw the invasion of Iraq as a Christmas gift he never thought he’d get.” By invading a country that’s regarded as the second holiest place in Islam, he asserts, the Bush administration inadvertently validated bin Laden’s assertions that the United States intends a holy war against Muslims.


CIA officer claims U.S. fighting wrong war - NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams | NBC News
Click to expand...

Ten years ago. I know the author.
 
ecofarm said:
Source in the OP is garbage.


Al-Monitor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And "former official" is also a BS source. There are plenty of former officials with Alzheimer's.
Click to expand...

"The Washington Post's Max Fisher has called Al-Monitor "an invaluable Web-only publication following the Middle East."[3] Ian Burrell of The Independent, in January 2013, called Al-Monitor "an ambitious website that pulls together the commentary of distinguished writers from across the region."[4] In 2014, the International Press Institute awarded Al-Monitor its Free Media Pioneer Award, stating that Al-Monitor's "unrivalled reporting and analysis exemplify the invaluable role that innovative and vigorously independent media can play in times of change and upheaval".[5]"
 
TheDemSocialist said:
"The Washington Post's Max Fisher has called Al-Monitor "an invaluable Web-only publication following the Middle East."[3] Ian Burrell of The Independent, in January 2013, called Al-Monitor "an ambitious website that pulls together the commentary of distinguished writers from across the region."[4] In 2014, the International Press Institute awarded Al-Monitor its Free Media Pioneer Award, stating that Al-Monitor's "unrivalled reporting and analysis exemplify the invaluable role that innovative and vigorously independent media can play in times of change and upheaval".[5]"
Click to expand...

Al-Monitor can eat a crap. Get a real source.
 
Montecresto said:
A career CIA officer claims in a new book that America is losing the war on terror, in part because of the invasion of Iraq, which, he says, distracted the United States from the war against terrorism and further fueled al-Qaida’s struggle against the United States. The author, who writes as “Anonymous,” is a 22-year veteran of the CIA and still works for the intelligence agency, which allowed him to publish the book after reviewing it for classified information.
In an interview with NBC’s Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent Andrea Mitchell, he calls the U.S. war in Iraq a dream come true for Osama bin Laden, saying, “Bin Laden saw the invasion of Iraq as a Christmas gift he never thought he’d get.” By invading a country that’s regarded as the second holiest place in Islam, he asserts, the Bush administration inadvertently validated bin Laden’s assertions that the United States intends a holy war against Muslims.


CIA officer claims U.S. fighting wrong war - NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams | NBC News
Click to expand...

Reminds me of the story of the Muslim scholars who went to see Dubya. The story goes that they were telling him about the differences between the Sunni and the Shi'a, and his reply was along the lines of, "What does that matter? They're all Muslim."

And Sun Tzu turned over in his grave. So much for knowing one's enemies....
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Reminds me of the story of the Muslim scholars who went to see Dubya. The story goes that they were telling him about the differences between the Sunni and the Shi'a, and his reply was along the lines of, "What does that matter? They're all Muslim."

And Sun Tzu turned over in his grave. So much for knowing one's enemies....
Click to expand...

The story is false.
 
Jack Hays said:
The story is false.
Click to expand...

Is it? There's an update at the bottom of this story that seems to support that Bush did know that the different sects within Islam existed: “If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will cease persecution of its civilian population, including Shi’a, Sunnis, Kurds, Turkomans, and others, again as required by Security Council resolutions.” But is there any indication that prior to the invasion Bush knew of the importance of the Shi'a/Sunni schism?

I would like to hear your side of the story, though.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Is it? There's an update at the bottom of this story that seems to support that Bush did know that the different sects within Islam existed: “If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will cease persecution of its civilian population, including Shi’a, Sunnis, Kurds, Turkomans, and others, again as required by Security Council resolutions.” But is there any indication that prior to the invasion Bush knew of the importance of the Shi'a/Sunni schism?

I would like to hear your side of the story, though.
Click to expand...

Ambassador Galbraith recounts the White house incident in his book.

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Ambassador_claims_shortly_before_invasion_Bush_0804.html
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Is it? There's an update at the bottom of this story that seems to support that Bush did know that the different sects within Islam existed: “If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will cease persecution of its civilian population, including Shi’a, Sunnis, Kurds, Turkomans, and others, again as required by Security Council resolutions.” But is there any indication that prior to the invasion Bush knew of the importance of the Shi'a/Sunni schism?

I would like to hear your side of the story, though.
Click to expand...

Galbraith is a Clintonista hack who, when he was Ambassador, was caught facilitating Iranian arms shipments into Bosnia. The quote doesn't show anything one way or the other. GWB was in fact quite knowledgeable.
 
Jack Hays said:
Galbraith is a Clintonista hack who, when he was Ambassador, was caught facilitating Iranian arms shipments into Bosnia. The quote doesn't show anything one way or the other. GWB was in fact quite knowledgeable.
Click to expand...

1. Why was he facilitating those arms shipments - was it under his direction, or did someone tell him to make that happen? And this takes away from his credibility how? I ask because I hold a very high opinion of Bush 41, and he was - had to be - involved hip-deep in Iran-Contra.

2. It seems that you're referring to the quote I posted in my comment, but not the pertinent quote concerning GWB's ignorance from the same reference:

During their conversation with the President, Galbraith claims, it became apparent to them that Bush was unfamiliar with the distinction between Sunnis and Shiites. Galbraith reports that the three of them spent some time explaining to Bush that there are two different sects in Islam–to which the President allegedly responded, “I thought the Iraqis were Muslims!”

3. Please show me on what you base your contention that GWB was "in fact quite knowledgeable", especially given that (1) this is concerning nations that are far away and (at the time) peoples of whom we knew little, and (2) GWB, even as incredibly wealthy as he was, traveled very little outside America's borders until after he started running for president (and certainly never traveled anywhere close to the Middle East). You know better than I do how the less people travel the world, the more ignorant they tend to be of the world...and this would be even more true of those who can afford to travel the world so easily. Bush was ignorant of the world because he saw no reason why he should be curious about the world.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
1. Why was he facilitating those arms shipments - was it under his direction, or did someone tell him to make that happen? And this takes away from his credibility how? I ask because I hold a very high opinion of Bush 41, and he was - had to be - involved hip-deep in Iran-Contra.

2. It seems that you're referring to the quote I posted in my comment, but not the pertinent quote concerning GWB's ignorance from the same reference:

During their conversation with the President, Galbraith claims, it became apparent to them that Bush was unfamiliar with the distinction between Sunnis and Shiites. Galbraith reports that the three of them spent some time explaining to Bush that there are two different sects in Islam–to which the President allegedly responded, “I thought the Iraqis were Muslims!”

3. Please show me on what you base your contention that GWB was "in fact quite knowledgeable", especially given that (1) this is concerning nations that are far away and (at the time) peoples of whom we knew little, and (2) GWB, even as incredibly wealthy as he was, traveled very little outside America's borders until after he started running for president (and certainly never traveled anywhere close to the Middle East). You know better than I do how the less people travel the world, the more ignorant they tend to be of the world...and this would be even more true of those who can afford to travel the world so easily. Bush was ignorant of the world because he saw no reason why he should be curious about the world.
Click to expand...

1. Galbraith is, quite simply, a liar.
2. Analysts who briefed GWB were routinely impressed by his interest in subjects covered and his enthusiasm to understand more. It was, in fact, GWB himself who requested the lengthy in-depth briefings that came to be known as "deep dives."
[h=3]Permitting Iran to Arm Bosnia Was Vital, U.S. Envoys Testify ...[/h]www.nytimes.com/.../permitting-iran-to-arm-bosni...The New York Times


May 31, 1996 - Peter W. Galbraith, the United States Ambassador to Croatia, and ... that the Iranian arms, shipped through Croatia to the Bosnian Muslims, ...


[h=3]INVESTIGATION INTO IRANIAN ARMS SHIPMENTS TO ...[/h]www.gpo.gov/.../CRPT-105hrp...United States Government Printing Office


INVESTIGATION INTO IRANIAN ARMS SHIPMENTS TO BOSNIA ______ October 9, ..... Ambassador Galbraith, according to his own testimony, informed the .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom