Intelligence Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terrorism Threat

spike

New Member
The Trillion dollar war in Iraq has officially run out of every last excuse.


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.

Full article
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/world/middleeast/24terror.html?_r=1&hp&ex=1159156800&en=22b7a0941b08007f&ei=5094&partner=homepage&oref=slogin
 
Title said:
Intelligence Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terrorism Threat

I really miss the 40s (retrosepectively, of course). I mean, after landing on Normandy & tenaciously working our way towards Berlin, the Germans still loved us. Especially those guys in the Black Uniforms. I don't know what happened to warfare. It used to be so full of comeraderie.
 
You know what's funny? That same report goes on to say that an independent and democratic Iraq would actually lessen terrorism, so where does that leave you? :rolleyes: The whole report was nothing but CYA in case of an administration change.
 
Weaker? Man, go read the training adn battle accounts & numbers of deaths. If people were as weak then as they choose to be today, we'd be sunk. It took years of constant carpet bombing & heavy allied casualties before the tide turned.
 
You know what's funny? That same report goes on to say that an independent and democratic Iraq would actually lessen terrorism, so where does that leave you? :rolleyes: The whole report was nothing but CYA in case of an administration change.

so how realistic do YOU think an "independent and democratic" iraq is? how long will it take? how much more money (and lives) will we have to throw at it for that result?
 
so how realistic do YOU think an "independent and democratic" iraq is? how long will it take? how much more money (and lives) will we have to throw at it for that result?

Depends upon two things...sending in enough troops to do the job of pacification, and however long it takes to do the job. If you only go half way, you only get half measures.

How much is your security and stability worth?
 
so how many troops, and for how long, will it take to do the job, the whole job, that you (seem to) think we should do?

my security and stability are important, but i'm not sure the iraq war is best way to secure those things other than as they relate to the short-term oil economy, but we've already gone round and round on that one, so maybe let's just stick to the other question?
 
Depends upon two things...sending in enough troops to do the job of pacification, and however long it takes to do the job. If you only go half way, you only get half measures.

How much is your security and stability worth?

Sorry, Gato, but I fail to see where the pacification (or lack thereof) of Iraq has any bearing whatsoever on my security or my country's. Never have.

As far as I can tell the only thing that would actually bring about the pacification of Iraq is the genocide of either the Shi'ites or the Sunnis.
 
As far as I can tell the only thing that would actually bring about the pacification of Iraq is the genocide of either the Shi'ites or the Sunnis.


So, should you just get out and leave them to it? I think that's been tried.
 
So, should you just get out and leave them to it? I think that's been tried.
I'm not so sure it's been tried but I don't think it's an acceptable answer either. Might find out whether there's an amount of bloodshed that would be enough. What would really happen is a great clamoring of European nations asking why the US wasn't doing anything to stop it.

Actually, the only thing that seems to have worked was Saddam. I think that's where they'll end up, too. Another tyrannical dictator.
 
Moot point - with the billions of American dollars being spent on military bases in Iraq... it looks like there will be a permanent force in Iraq even if the troops 'withdraw'
 
so how many troops, and for how long, will it take to do the job, the whole job, that you (seem to) think we should do?

How many troops? At least double. How long? Depends upon how long the enemy keeps fighting. You're asking for a specific timeline for something that is not specific. I'll answer again, and I'll put it in bold so you can't miss it. As long as it takes.

2monkey said:
my security and stability are important, but i'm not sure the iraq war is best way to secure those things other than as they relate to the short-term oil economy, but we've already gone round and round on that one, so maybe let's just stick to the other question?

So what would you do, considering you don't know much about what the military is supposed to do...
 
Moot point - with the billions of American dollars being spent on military bases in Iraq... it looks like there will be a permanent force in Iraq even if the troops 'withdraw'


Jsut like three quarters of the rest of the world.
 
Sorry, Gato, but I fail to see where the pacification (or lack thereof) of Iraq has any bearing whatsoever on my security or my country's. Never have.

Because pacification is the only way to stabilization of the country. Once the country is stabile, the region becomes more stable. Stable people don't tolerate violent extremists in their midst.

chcr said:
As far as I can tell the only thing that would actually bring about the pacification of Iraq is the genocide of either the Shi'ites or the Sunnis.

Well, since 2minkey blames this whole war on oil, he wouldn't blink if we exterminated both groups because then he would have both his timeline and the number of troops needed...:devious:
 
Because pacification is the only way to stabilization of the country. Once the country is stabile, the region becomes more stable. Stable people don't tolerate violent extremists in their midst.


Sorry Gato, but ... bullshit. I'm on a welding website and a hunting site .... and on both, there's daily talk about drug houses in the neighbourhood, known thieves lurking, poachers shooting at landowners, etc. right in the good ol' stable US.

Take one good look at Ireland and realize the truth. The sheep will tolerate the wolf in their midst so long as they think it's looking elsewhere for a meal.
 
Sorry Gato, but ... bullshit. I'm on a welding website and a hunting site .... and on both, there's daily talk about drug houses in the neighbourhood, known thieves lurking, poachers shooting at landowners, etc. right in the good ol' stable US.

There is a difference between an individual, and a group. Some will tolerate an individual, but nobody really likes a group...

prof said:
Take one good look at Ireland and realize the truth. The sheep will tolerate the wolf in their midst so long as they think it's looking elsewhere for a meal.


How much you want to bet that those sheep will have fits if a pack of like-minded wolves moves in, regardless of where they get their meat?
 
They didn't in Ireland. And they don't turn in flophouses in the Us ... because they don't want to draw attention to themselves. They don't want to be a target. Same reason that gangs in the US prosper. Same reason the Mafia makes money.
 
Back
Top