From the Washington Post
U.S. Spy Agencies Criticized On IranHonestly. With the nation going deeper and deeper into debt to finance the ruins of neoconservativism, you'd think they'd welcome the chance to avoid a war. Ah well.
GOP-Led Panel Faults Intelligence
By Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, August 24, 2006; Page A01
A key House committee issued a stinging critique of U.S. intelligence on Iran yesterday, charging that the CIA and other agencies lack "the ability to acquire essential information necessary to make judgments" on Tehran's nuclear program, its intentions or even its ties to terrorism.
The 29-page report, principally written by a Republican staff member on the House intelligence committee who holds a hard-line view on Iran, fully backs the White House position that the Islamic republic is moving forward with a nuclear weapons program and that it poses a significant danger to the United States. But it chides the intelligence community for not providing enough direct evidence to support that assertion.
...
The report relies exclusively on publicly available documents. Its authors did not interview intelligence officials. Still, it warns the intelligence community to avoid the mistakes made regarding weapons of mass destruction before the Iraq war, noting that Iran could easily be engaged in "a denial and deception campaign to exaggerate progress on its nuclear program as Saddam Hussein apparently did concerning his WMD programs."
3 comments:
Wow. It's truly amazing how thick some people's partisan blinders can be.
From the WaPo article (conveniently omitted in this post):
"American intelligence agencies do not know nearly enough about Iran's nuclear weapons program" to help policymakers at a critical time, the report's authors say. Information "regarding potential Iranian chemical weapons and biological weapons programs is neither voluminous nor conclusive," and little evidence has been gathered to tie Iran to al-Qaeda and to the recent fighting between Israel and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, they say.
"We want to avoid another 'slam dunk,' " Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.) said in an interview yesterday, explaining why the staff report was made public before it had been approved by the full committee. "We think it's important for the American people to understand the kinds of pressures that we are facing and to increase the American public's understanding of Iran as a threat."
Um...yeah. So it seems that what this report calls for is improved intelligence on Iran that will help the U.S. avoid the various mistakes associated with the Iraq war. After all, if we have a better understanding of Iran's present and future capabilities in the nuclear arena, then we have a better understanding of what course of action to proceed with. That kind of goes without saying.
But not for Loyal. Apparently, he thinks that our intelligence services shouldn't even be gathering as much information as possible on Iran's activities, because we might find something really nasty under those big Persian rocks.
That mentality is worse than Chamberlain - at least he sacrificed Czechoslovakia in the hopes it would benefit his country. Loyal and his ilk are willing to sacrifice Israel, America, and the rest of the free West to benefit only the far left wing of the Democratic Party.
Heavens! I had no idea I was as bad as all that.
This is not simply a case of the Republicans wanting 'better intelligence', but demanding that the US intelligence agencies find proof of Iranian wrongdoing whether it is there or not.
If you like, you can interpet it in a more positive way, as simply a desire for more extensive intel. Given the history of this administration and this congress, though, that seems doubtful.
The report itself (which, don't forget, is based entirely on publicly available documents) is full of errors, claiming that Iran has further-range missiles than anyone has ever suggested it has, and that Iran has weapons-grade enriched-uranium right now. You need at least 80% enriched for a bomb and Iran only claims 2.5%. How exactly they would know something like that, based only on what they read in the papers, creates (at least for me) serious doubts about their credibility.
Of course, Rep. Hoekstra seems certain the proof is there; as do you. Please let me know what sources the two of you are sharing that you won't pass on to the CIA.
That Iran ought to be dealt with is clear as day. But, if it really is a danger (which I think it is) it has to be dealt with carefully.
The Republicans say they want to avoid a 'slam dunk' like Iraq. Isn't that fantastic? Isn't that too wonderfully ironic? As I recall, the 'slam dunk' was the result of beauracratic pressures by a hawkish administration causing intelligence agencies to cherrypick their data to exaggerate a threat, which seems like... EXACTLY WHAT IS HAPPENING AGAIN. Unless you think the CIA is always wrong.
As for my being on the 'far left' of the Democratic Party, remember that this report was written without Democratic input or oversight and given their reluctant approval because they lacked the power to dismiss or change it in any way.
I am not prepared to 'sacrifice' anybody. If I have a fault here, it is being overly cautious about stumbling into another war under false pretenses.
What is amazing is how quickly your neocon commenters adopt the Mc Carthyist position, ie, if you disagree, you must be disloyal.In their fearful position, the only way to enter the twentyfirst century is to become Fortress America, a totally militarized, global domineering "keeper of the sacred order". In other words, the terrorists have completely succeeded and these neocons are the perfect dupes.
Soon the Muslim Flag will be flying over Iowa and we will all be herded into Mosques to get our burkahs, dominoe theory and all that crap.Cold War mentality at it's finest.Try to get this through your thick skulls. It's the OIL.The war on terror is the war for OIL.
Post a Comment