http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalra...aq-assess.html


Anybody who's been paying attention will tell you that the last half dozen intelligence estimates fly right in the face of the administration's bogus rhetoric.

Now, they'll simply not share the intelligence, because an uninformed public, is, well, Republicans.

Actually the reasoning makes perfect sense. We are fighting a war after all. What do you want, microphones in the military planning meetings like this was an episdoe of The Real World?

From your link:

McConnell said recently during a speech in Baltimore that releasing even an unclassified version of the NIE would show the hand of the US to potential enemies.

"At minimum I'm telling a foreign power what I know about him." he said, which could lead the foreign power to switch up, do things differently, and make things difficult for the intelligence community.

I think you are on a need to know basis. So when its time for you to know, we'll let you know.

Now go eat your phone shoe.

__________________
And he said unto them, Ye will surely say unto me this proverb, Physician, heal thyself: whatsoever we have heard done in Capernaum, do also here in thy country.

And he said, Verily I say unto you, No prophet is accepted in his own country.

Like this one:


April 4, 2008

U.S. Study Finds Progress in Iraq, but Fragile Security and Potential for Terror Attacks

By MARK MAZZETTI and ERIC SCHMITT

WASHINGTON—A new National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq cites significant security improvements and progress toward healing sectarian political rifts, but concludes that security remains fragile and terrorist groups remain capable of initiating large attacks, several American government officials said this week.

The classified document provides a more upbeat analysis of conditions in Iraq than the last major assessment by United States spy agencies, last summer. It was completed this week, just days before the top American commander in Iraq, Gen. David H. Petraeus, is due in Washington to give lawmakers a progress report on the military strategy in Iraq.

While the last assessment painted a grim picture of an Iraqi government paralyzed by sectarian strife, the new intelligence estimate cites slow but steady progress by Iraqi politicians on forging alliances between Shiites and Sunnis in Iraq, said the government officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the document is classified.

At the same time, officials said that the document detailed several factors that could reverse these trends: including a campaign of violence by Shiite splinter groups and the possibility that the government would not carry out a series of reconciliation laws Iraq’s Parliament passed recently. Some Bush administration officials said that the report presented positive news, but they remained cautious about the future.

“The N.I.E. update confirmed that the surge strategy the president announced in January of last year is working,” said one senior administration official. “There’s more work to be done, but progress has obviously been made.”

The document was described by American officials on both sides of the Iraq debate, including officials who favor rapid withdrawals of American troops beyond those already scheduled through June.

It was not clear whether the estimate includes a detailed discussion of what might happen should those withdrawals continue, something that the two Democratic presidential candidates have sought. One intelligence official said that the document concluded that American efforts against the insurgent group Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia helped diminish its ability to carry out attacks in Baghdad, and that a grass-roots movement to turn Iraqis against the group had made progress since last summer. American officials contend the largely Iraqi group has some foreign leaders.

But the American government officials also said that the estimate warned that security gains could be upended and that militant groups were still capable of deadly attacks in Baghdad, the capital.

Among the factors seen as contributing to the ebb in violence in Iraq have been the cease-fire observed by the Mahdi Army, the militia founded by the cleric Moktada al-Sadr. That was broken last week by fighting in Basra and other cities in the Shiite-dominated south between Iraqi security forces and the militia.

National Intelligence Estimates represent a consensus of America’s 16 intelligence agencies. They are submitted to members of Congress and senior administration officials. Ross Feinstein, a spokesman for the director of national intelligence, who oversees the estimates, declined to comment on the Iraq assessment. On Thursday, intelligence officials said that they had no plans to declassify the latest estimate, even though the administration made public the major findings of the one last summer. In a letter on Thursday to Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence, two senior Democratic senators said there was “no compelling reason” to keep the latest document classified.


Oops

So in war, it is only okay to inform the public when things are going well and not when they go bad?

The public are the instrument of war. We pay for it. We fight it. Or at least, in the traditional sense we do. We have a right to know as much as possible postively and negatively.

Much of war is propaganda. Hate to admit it. THis is war we are talking about, not some city council meeting on whether to fix a bridge or not.

I think the American public have been greatly informed about the mistakes that have been made as well as all the bad news the last 5 years. We've seen much, much less of the success stories and there have been many.

But as far as having a war be an open book that's a horrible way to fight. The military needs to win and by disclosing every botched plan or how confused they may or may not be only emboldens the enemy.

I firmly believe that had WWII been covered like the Iraq war the enemy would have been much more knowledgeable and may have been able to hold on and keep the war going an additional 1,2, or even 3 ears.

Yea and when Americans are dying in it, the public has a right to know as much as possible.

No, the public was failed pre-Iraq War and post Iraq-invasion until the last few years.

I do agree the success stories don't get played as much and that is very unfortunate. As for success, that just means another reason to get the heck out.

The public does not need to know as much as possible. For example.

My team was attached to BLT 1/6 in Afghan. We had Heraldo Rivera with us. Higher was told to keep him in the loop as much as possible. So they did, he found out about a hit we were going to be doing, reported it on a live feed. By the time we were ready to do our hit, it was all over the news. He was not supposed to know about that hit, but as he had free access to the FOB he overheard it. The only two causalities during that pump were on that hit.

No, the public does not need to be totally informed. They need to be stupid until that information can no longer be used against us.

__________________
Someone hijacked my sig again.

I'm not talking about military strategy in that regard.

I'm talking about if things are going well or not.

They go hand in hand my friend. Heraldo was only supposed to be reporting on what happened, not what is going to happen. Guess what, he and others like him screwed it for the rest.

Now if you want to blame someone for your being misinformed, then blame the bias media, and yourself.

__________________
Someone hijacked my sig again.