Do people accept the WH's reaction to the new terrorism intelligence report as sincere?

Question

We see how the White House is reacting to the National Intelligence Assessment--by defending the war in Iraq as 'an effort to take the offensive in the war on terror...to bring the fight to the enemy'.
I would especially like to hear from those who support the president's claim here and the war generally. How is the recent comprehensive intelligence report claiming that this 'strategy' is actually COUNTERproductive "wrong"?
Where has their reasoning and analysis missed something about how Iraq has actually served to recruit for and strengthen the radical islam and anti-western sentiment?
And even if you disagree with the Bush administration's position on this comprehensive and non-partisan assessment of the effect of the Iraq war, do you think that the Bush folks themselves really believe that the war has been helpful in the fight against terrorism?

Answer 1

This White House has changed their "reasons" for fighting Iraq everytime some new news comes out showing their original reason was not valid. First it was Iraq was working with Al Qaeda, had WMDs and posed a threat to the US. Then it was changed to Iraq was destabilizing the region. Now this news.

I dont believe anything that comes out of this administration is sincere.

Answer 2

It is worth mentioning at the outset that this entire report is classified! We can "guess" all we like.

I submit three quotes from three different ppl in govt who read - I trust - the entire report.

"Either we are going to be fighting this battle, this war, overseas or it's going to be right here in this country," Frist said on ABC's "This Week," echoing an argument that President Bush frequently makes.

Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., said in a statement that the assessment "should put the final nail in the coffin for President Bush's phony argument about the Iraq war." "How many more independent reports, how many more deaths, how much deeper into civil war will Iraq need to fall for the White House to wake up and change its strategy in Iraq?"

A White House spokesman, Blair Jones, said "We don't comment on classified documents" and that the published accounts' "characterization of the NIE is not representative of the complete document."

So who are we to believe? Is the war good for us or not good for us? One thing is certain; the war will go on until it is ended. And if the war (call it anything you like!) comes to a mall near us, we shall all have a real appreciation for it's might! Right OR wrong!

Personally, I believe it is always better to fight a war, of any kind, in some one else's backyard! Besides, my neighbor might not be all that good at shooting!! And where will the cuties in their minis hang out if the mall becomes a fire-zone?!?

And my opinion of Ted Kennedy is that he seems a little too concerned for the Iraqis and not concerned enough for the safety and well being of US citizens. Unless he means we ought to bomb them! lol!

Answer 3

I believe that the NIE is pretty balanced both directions if you read the whole thing, according to the White House and the typical "anonymous source". Here's some selected quotes:

"A large body of reporting indicates that people identifying themselves as jihadists is increasing...however, they are largely decentralized, lack a coherent strategy and are becoming more diffuse." This is where they're talking about more terrorists. They do not mention it being "counter productive" as a matter of fact it goes on to say:

"Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves to have failed, we judge that fewer will carry on the fight" & "Threats to the U.S. are intrinsically linked to U.S. success or failure in Iraq."

So there's one way to fix this problem according to the NIE report. Win in Iraq

That is what Bush has been saying all along.

As for successes of the war the report says: The U.S.-led efforts have "seriously damaged Al Qaida leadership and disrupted its operations."

I would suggest to anyone who gets their news solely from the media, read the documents. (The White House retorts and the leaked portions that can be found all over the internet). None of it is being covered in an accurate sense.

Answer 4

I don't think anyone is surprised at what the report concluded. Kerry said repeatedly in the '04 campaign that the invasion of Iraq was the best recruiting tool Al Queda could ever wish for. Now two years later the intelligence community is stating the obvious.

The white house response in my mind is borderline criminal. Their denial of the central conclusion is a bullheaded attempt to minimize it's potential impact on the upcoming elections. What about national security? What about soldiers dying for a result which is the opposite of what we all hope for? Why did the white house sit on this report since April if it is counter to our security and safety?

Answer 5

They shouldn't, unless they lack in any intelligence.

Answer 6

no its just spin.