• 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!

House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Faced

Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

And I'm all answers since you still don't understand dates. The Islamic State in Iraq formed in 2006, the same year that the intelligence agencies declared that Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq caused an increase in global terrorism, And made America less safe. Both of which occurred with 100,000 pairs of boots on the ground!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I see so its your premise that things were worse after the surge that the left opposed (preferring to surrender to terrorists than fight), than it is now?

Funny how Obama made the claim that Iraq was more stable, when it clearly is not.

Face it, he ceded iraq to terrorists, and you want to pin a medal on failure.

Its ok to admit that.
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

I see so its your premise that things were worse after the surge that the left opposed (preferring to surrender to terrorists than fight), than it is now?

Funny how Obama made the claim that Iraq was more stable, when it clearly is not.

Face it, he ceded iraq to terrorists, and you want to pin a medal on failure.

Its ok to admit that.

I don't want to pin any medals on Obama. I've been highly critical of him with regards to his Middle East policies which I consider to be doing even greater harm than Bush's. So why do you continue to attempt to put me in the pro-Obama camp on this, hmm? I realize you're 80 years old, so I've tried to be patient with you. It was our intelligence agencies that pointed out to Bush the failure of his invasion and occupation of Iraq. ;)
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

I see so its your premise that things were worse after the surge that the left opposed (preferring to surrender to terrorists than fight), than it is now?

Funny how Obama made the claim that Iraq was more stable, when it clearly is not.

Face it, he ceded iraq to terrorists, and you want to pin a medal on failure.

Its ok to admit that.

Everything is still about Obama with this guy..
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

I don't want to pin any medals on Obama. I've been highly critical of him with regards to his Middle East policies which I consider to be doing even greater harm than Bush's. So why do you continue to attempt to put me in the pro-Obama camp on this, hmm? I realize you're 80 years old, so I've tried to be patient with you. It was our intelligence agencies that pointed out to Bush the failure of his invasion and occupation of Iraq. ;)

No they did not. Intelligence agencies do not assess the success or failure of policies.
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

No they did not. Intelligence agencies do not assess the success or failure of policies.

Jack, we've beat this horse to. Death you and I.

I think you understand the point precisely. ;)

Here is the verdict of the 2006 National Intelligence Estimate, ie the consensus view of 16 US intelligence agencies:

We assess that the Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives . . . The Iraq conflict has become the "cause celebre" for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement.

Here's the verdict of the then director of the CIA, Porter Goss:

The Iraq conflict, while not a cause of extremism, has become a cause for extremists. Those jihadists who survive will leave Iraq experienced in and focused on acts of urban terrorism. They represent a potential pool of contacts to build transnational terrorist cells, groups and networks in Saudi Arabia, Jordan and other countries.

Here's the verdict of National Intelligence Council, the CIA director's in-house think tank:

Iraq provides terrorists with "a training ground, a recruitment ground, the opportunity for enhancing technical skills," said David B Low, the national intelligence officer for transnational threats. "There is even, under the best scenario, over time, the likelihood that some of the jihadists who are not killed there will, in a sense, go home, wherever home is, and will therefore disperse to various other countries."

"At the moment," NIC Chairman Robert L Hutchings said, Iraq "is a magnet for international terrorist activity."

According to the NIC report, Iraq has joined the list of conflicts . . . that have deepened solidarity among Muslims and helped spread radical Islamic ideology.

Here's the verdict of the former chief of the CIA's Bin Laden unit, Michael Scheuer, in an interview with me for our 9/11 special issue of the New Statesman earlier this month:

Iraq moved Osama and al-Qaeda from man and group to philosophy and movement. I don't think we've begun to see the disaster Iraq is going to cause in the years to come.

AND NOW INDEED WE ARE SEEING THE DISASTER UNFOLD.
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

Jack, we've beat this horse to. Death you and I.

I think you understand the point precisely. ;)

Here is the verdict of the 2006 National Intelligence Estimate, ie the consensus view of 16 US intelligence agencies:

We assess that the Iraq jihad is shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives . . . The Iraq conflict has become the "cause celebre" for jihadists, breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world and cultivating supporters for the global jihadist movement.

Here's the verdict of the then director of the CIA, Porter Goss:

The Iraq conflict, while not a cause of extremism, has become a cause for extremists. Those jihadists who survive will leave Iraq experienced in and focused on acts of urban terrorism. They represent a potential pool of contacts to build transnational terrorist cells, groups and networks in Saudi Arabia, Jordan and other countries.

Here's the verdict of National Intelligence Council, the CIA director's in-house think tank:

Iraq provides terrorists with "a training ground, a recruitment ground, the opportunity for enhancing technical skills," said David B Low, the national intelligence officer for transnational threats. "There is even, under the best scenario, over time, the likelihood that some of the jihadists who are not killed there will, in a sense, go home, wherever home is, and will therefore disperse to various other countries."

"At the moment," NIC Chairman Robert L Hutchings said, Iraq "is a magnet for international terrorist activity."

According to the NIC report, Iraq has joined the list of conflicts . . . that have deepened solidarity among Muslims and helped spread radical Islamic ideology.

Here's the verdict of the former chief of the CIA's Bin Laden unit, Michael Scheuer, in an interview with me for our 9/11 special issue of the New Statesman earlier this month:

Iraq moved Osama and al-Qaeda from man and group to philosophy and movement. I don't think we've begun to see the disaster Iraq is going to cause in the years to come.

AND NOW INDEED WE ARE SEEING THE DISASTER UNFOLD.

Scheuer was speaking personally and after leaving the CIA. The point stands that intelligence agencies do not assess policy decisions. Did Iraq radicalize jihadists? Of course -- a fully unsurprising conclusion. That's what war does.
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

No they did not. Intelligence agencies do not assess the success or failure of policies.

Quite right. They provide intelligence, and that is at the direction of others. Policy may flow from intelligence assessments, but that is an executive function completely outside the intelligence community's interest. This is by design, and rightly so.
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

Scheuer was speaking personally and after leaving the CIA. The point stands that intelligence agencies do not assess policy decisions. Did Iraq radicalize jihadists? Of course -- a fully unsurprising conclusion. That's what war does.

Lol. Nobody was listening to guys like me when we were yelling that in real time as the decider was preparing to launch his folly! You guys are simply amazing. A consensus amongst our intelligence agencies which concluded that Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq was having the opposite intended effect of causing an increase in global terrorism, making America less safe, and you want me to believe that Bush was not made aware of it at the time! Fantastic. I believe that that 2006 NIE was in fact pointed out to Bush, and if you don't, your sillier than I ever believed. And funny too that Scheuer's was the only declaration you responded to. Never a surprise from Jack.
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

Lol. Nobody was listening to guys like me when we were yelling that in real time as the decider was preparing to launch his folly! You guys are simply amazing. A consensus amongst our intelligence agencies which concluded that Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq was having the opposite intended effect of causing an increase in global terrorism, making America less safe, and you want me to believe that Bush was not made aware of it at the time! Fantastic. I believe that that 2006 NIE was in fact pointed out to Bush, and if you don't, your sillier than I ever believed. And funny too that Scheuer's was the only declaration you responded to. Never a surprise from Jack.

Of course it was pointed out to GWB. It was written for GWB. The finding was a statement of the obvious that surprised no one. As for Scheuer, he was and remains a friend.
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

Of course it was pointed out to GWB. It was written for GWB. The finding was a statement of the obvious that surprised no one. As for Scheuer, he was and remains a friend.

Well there you have it then. That was always my point! Except that while it was obvious that Bush was stirring up a jihadi hornets nest that would cause an increase in global terrorism and make America less safe. Nobody was acknowledging that, and the low information Americans that supported the adventure surely didn't think that would be the case. But I did!
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

Intelligence agencies do not assess the success or failure of policies.


Far from kowtowing to policymakers, there is sometimes a strong impulse on the part of intelligence officers to show that a policy or decision is misguided or wrong, to poke an analytical finger in the policy eye. Policymakers know this and understandably
resent it. To protect the independence of the analyst while keeping such impulses in check is one of the toughest jobs of intelligence agency managers. In this connection the policymaker sometimes has the sense that the CIA
is attempting, at least by inference, to "grade" his performance. Further, the policymaker is often suspicious that when the CIA's analysis suggests his policy is failing or in difficulty, these conclusions are widely circulated by the Agency,
with malice, for use as ammunition by critics of the policy in the Executive Branch, in Congress, or among the public. These suspicions are magnified by leaks that pit the policymaker against CIA in a contest for political advantage.

http://media.nara.gov/dc-metro/rg-263/6922330/Box-10-115-1/263-a1-27-box-10-115-1.pdf
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

Well there you have it then. That was always my point!

Then you have no point. The dynamics of warfare are universal and eternal.
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

Far from kowtowing to policymakers, there is sometimes a strong impulse on the part of intelligence officers to show that a policy or decision is misguided or wrong, to poke an analytical finger in the policy eye. Policymakers know this and understandably
resent it. To protect the independence of the analyst while keeping such impulses in check is one of the toughest jobs of intelligence agency managers. In this connection the policymaker sometimes has the sense that the CIA
is attempting, at least by inference, to "grade" his performance. Further, the policymaker is often suspicious that when the CIA's analysis suggests his policy is failing or in difficulty, these conclusions are widely circulated by the Agency,
with malice, for use as ammunition by critics of the policy in the Executive Branch, in Congress, or among the public. These suspicions are magnified by leaks that pit the policymaker against CIA in a contest for political advantage.

http://media.nara.gov/dc-metro/rg-263/6922330/Box-10-115-1/263-a1-27-box-10-115-1.pdf

Thus is real life lived. Readers are free to draw whatever inferences they wish.
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

Thus is real life lived. Readers are free to draw whatever inferences they wish.
The implication is that intelligence agencies do indeed assess the success or failure of policies, according to Robert Gates, who I would venture has much greater standing and understanding.
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

The implication is that intelligence agencies do indeed assess the success or failure of policies, according to Robert Gates, who I would venture has much greater standing and understanding.

You'll notice Gates is at pains to state there is never an explicit assessment, regardless of the implications of the intelligence analysis. His position is exactly mine.
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

You'll notice Gates is at pains to state there is never an explicit assessment, regardless of the implications of the intelligence analysis. His position is exactly mine.
Oh, so your argument now is that analysts poke holes in policy without assessment of the policy. Sure, Dr Ryan.
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

Oh, so your argument now is that analysts poke holes in policy without assessment of the policy. Sure, Dr Ryan.


Analysts provide intelligence analysis. Policy makers are free to draw whatever conclusions they wish.
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

Analysts provide intelligence analysis. Policy makers are free to draw whatever conclusions they wish.
Non-sequitur, this has no impact upon the proof provided by Robert Gates that your argument is complete bullchit.
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

Non-sequitur, this has no impact upon the proof provided by Robert Gates that your argument is complete bullchit.

On the contrary. Gates' argument is my argument.
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

Then you have no point. The dynamics of warfare are universal and eternal.

Oh for crying out loud, besides the fact that you ignored some very important points of my post, you had no ****ing point when you stuck your nose into my conversation to begin with. Which has been my experience with you from my earliest engagement with you. :roll:
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

Just more politics. You'll notice the authors timed their study to exclude 9/11.

Okay, let's go back to 9/11. But let's not stop there. Let's also include Oklahoma City. How far back would be appropriate?

The right wing in action:
oklahoma-city-1995.jpg
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

On the contrary. Gates' argument is my argument.
That is in fact, not true, at all. Gates is clearly stating that analysts assess policy and criticize it as a matter of fact, your inferences and semantic nonsense do not change this in the least, Jack Ryan.
 
Re: House Intel Committee Chair: US Is At ‘The Highest Threat Level We Have Ever Face

Oh for crying out loud, besides the fact that you ignored some very important points of my post, you had no ****ing point when you stuck your nose into my conversation to begin with. Which has been my experience with you from my earliest engagement with you. :roll:

None of your "very important points" were a surprise to anyone.
 
Back
Top Bottom