Centerfield

I'm trying to see if my linking abilities are functioning LOL sorry This link discusses the problem with our Iraqi "intelligence" from the start It works!!!!

The article above does point out some serious problems with our Iraq operation despite your post of some further "intelligence" supporting our action and Russian intentions. What does this say about Bush's trusting Putin's soul? What does this mean to our Russian strategy, Iran and even a renewed semi-Cold War possibility? How can we trust Russian enrichment of Iran fuel, "reasonable" weapon exports from Russia? And could Chinese duplicity be any better?

The documents still do not substantiate AL Queda's involvment in Iraqi-originating terrorism or 9/11. The possibility of forgery is still there. Recent transcrips of Saddam's secret meeting do suggest he wanted to become a player in international terrorism and restart his wmd programs quickly to catch up with the Iranians. He remarked everyone else was. LOL.

I think the one thing that is emerging is that with French and Russian pre-war involvment in Iraq and sanctions reaching their end, Saddam would have become a difficult blight to remove years later. I agree with Clinton that giving him more than a year or so more would have become too dangerous a situation for the US to allow. Of course that doesn't mean our plan was the best, but let that be another thread......

Max NYC

None of what I read was too surprising to me. Maybe some of the stuff that will come out in the future will be, but what's out so far according to the article, not so much. I can't say I would have expected this stuff, but none of it surprises me.

The documents still do not substantiate AL Queda's involvment in Iraqi-originating terrorism or 9/11.

Better re-phrase. AQ's involvement in 9/11 is indisputable. I have seen no credible evidence of direct Iraqi involvement in 9/11. The extent of AQ/Iraq joint operations or "friendly relations" are an area of contention. Contact between the two is well-established, but doesn't prove much. And frankly, wasn't offered as a major justification for the invasion by the administration, despite much wing chatter from both sides claiming otherwise. On the other hand, Iraqi involvement in supporting Middle Eastern terrorism is well-established.

Please note the thread is not about policy disputes or the CFR's opinion of anything, but the specific subject of newly available documents from Iraq. ABC's contextualization and caveats look sound. Dual posting removed.

Sorry...I mean't "no direct involvement between Iraq and an Iraqi-originating (organized from Iraq with Saddam's permission) role by Al Queda IN 9/11".

I remember, a while back, Putin reporting that Saddam told them he was actively engaged in preparing terrorist attacks against America and its "assets". I always found that report odd. Was it quid pro quo for something? I think the highjacking-terrorist-camp theory has been largely debunked. And many reports have turned out false. But those Russians.......

I thought it was no simple mistake that the last Russian diplomatic convoy out of Iraq was fired on by the US before it reached Syria. I also wonder what evidence there is for a connection between a our first aircraft loss (F-117) over Iraq, errant GPS-guided cruise missiles (a blog-reported claim in explaining some Iraqi casualties) and the Russians? Not to mention Russian complicity in the cruise missile sale via the Ukraine to Iran and China.

And if Putin was planning to begin a military and economic relationship with Saddam, how do you explain Bush's behavior in not discussing this and other related actions publically? He wasn't counting on the UN's blessings anyway and Putin wasn't prepared to stop the US or scare Europe.

The air defense capabilites of Iran are far more extensive than Iraq's ever were, as is their ability to cause considerable damage to fuel production and transport in the Gulf. The strange thing is that disaster in the Gulf hikes the price of Russian crude and gas. And our Iraq adventure hasn't hurt their business either.

Knew what you meant, just wanted to clear up your phrasing so others didn't jump it.

Communist, capitalist, royalist, imperialist--the nature of Russian ambition hasn't changed much in 300 years. They left Iraq about ten minutes ahead of our troops.

You are so right. I have numerous Russian friends in NYC. Fantasitic people. Their view is quite interesting and they are so glad to be here. They do make some points about Russian sensibilites and a case that the IMF was too draconian on the privitization of their energy sector which failed to understand Russian organized crime. There is still a big chip on their shoulder for both having watched their military strength erode and political leverage fade.

You know we could always let Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria start up their wmd programs again. How would Russia feel about that? Their pipeline plans seem open to terrorism and environmental disaster. Their "inflatable shuttle" is just as ABM treaty-busting as our ABM plans. Perhaps just as unreliable.

If they were serious about being a critical part of hegemony and anti-terrorism, they would certainly not be fueling Iran, encouraging China, empowering totalitarianism in Belarus and Ubekistan, closing down human rights NGO's in Russia and getting caught with their pants down in Iraq. Europe is the key to push them and as Russia goes, so goes China. When I mention tri-polarity on the "undisputed" thread, I meant the West, the obstructionist block that still relies on our uncompensated hegemic(sp?) services like shooting pirates, and of course Radicals (which include radical Islama, organized crime, drug lords, NK etc.) From bi-polat ro tri-polar? Now that's something Orwell missed........

I remember, a while back, Putin reporting that Saddam told them he was actively engaged in preparing terrorist attacks against America and its "assets". I always found that report odd. Was it quid pro quo for something? I think the highjacking-terrorist-camp theory has been largely debunked.

Think again. While the Salman Pak hype offered pre-war by Chalabi and others has proven largely false, findings at other locations indicate that Iraq trained Palestinian terrorists, and it was already known that Saddam subsidized Palestinian suicide bombers by rewarding their families. He didn't even hide it--he hyped it to gain support. And since you like FOREIGN AFFAIRS, this article on the just-being-released Iraqi Perspectives Report from Joint Forces Command might interest you.

The Saddam Fedayeen also took part in the regime's domestic terrorism operations and planned for attacks throughout Europe and the Middle East. In a document dated May 1999, Saddam's older son, Uday, ordered preparations for "special operations, assassinations, and bombings, for the centers and traitor symbols in London, Iran and the self-ruled areas [Kurdistan]." Preparations for "Blessed July," a regime-directed wave of "martyrdom" operations against targets in the West, were well under way at the time of the coalition invasion.

Evidence conclusively linking Saddam to an effective operational relationship with AQ has not been forthcoming yet. But linking Saddam to Middle Eastern terrorism in general isn't tough at all.

The trouble with Russian sources is you never know how much of what they're revealing is true, how much is false, and how much has been cleverly inserted as misdirection and misinformation. Likewise, their own intel can be supplied in good faith and still be mistaken. But there's little doubt that Russia was assisting Saddam in many ways right up until the invasion.

Yeah, the Russians will remain the Russians. That's tough to explain to anyone who thinks that the fall of the USSR defanged that threat. Nope. The form of government may have changed and the scope of their power decreased, but Russian governance patterns haven't changed all that much since Ivan the Terrible ran the show. Thugocracy.

Scary place to live right now--Mongolia! A mere 3 million Buddhists and agnostics spread out over a country 3/4's the size of Mexico, and sandwiched between China and Russia.

Putin seems to be walking a fine line trying to drum up some diplomatic leverage for what, I am not sure. Despite the Left's strong drone that EVERYONE hates us, many Americans are actually waking up and seeing the glaring obstructionism of China (crackdowns, Peace Mission and defense spending, torture and passivity towards solving NK) and Russia (Ukraine, Belarus, Uzbekistan, Iran, Hamas etc.) which our European frends are worried about too.

Perhaps that is why Europe is moving a bit back to center and is still is our greatest hope to muscle the Russians with "hegemony".

The intel posted does mock the suggestion the Russians should "help" Iranians enrich fuel in Russia. Does this "help" include letting our "inspectors" in as we let their's into our war room?(Bush apparently does not think we need US inspectors overseeing a Hong Kong Co.'s nuke inspection of cargo bound for the US.) Will the newly suggested global increase in commercial nuclear production and transportation create more areas the US must unilateral police and pay for? Hegemony is an expensive propisition. Maybe the security for this dangerous flow of projected nuclear materials will also slip into the hands of those quite capable of blowing things up.

The point: those who demand international consensus for enforcing and protecting international agreements (terrorism, human rights abuses, proliferation) AND US security must realize that such consensus is dubious given the obvious disregard of that very purpose by our former adversaries. Perhaps the Europeans realize now that without a united front, China and Russia still hold cards to their continued gambit to benefiting from hegemony without having to submit to its "reasonable behavior clause" or pay for its enforcement.

No wonder that every US competitor in the world wishes to divert attension away from their own dangerous behavior, by harping on American Domination. How ironic that Japan and Germany may serve as powerful guards at the approached of Western Liberty. And you've got to love those Aussies who show how with a 1/100 the buget they can scram jet too.

Saddam's own recorded reflections should make Americans clear about his intention to get into the "terrorist game". What deal would he have made to get the Brotherhood to put a radialogical device under the Mullah's feet? Perhaps a second or third to use at their discretion? And what Russian lives are threatened by the technology we give to who? The West in fact, brought pressure to many Eastern Euroean countries to end their wmd research, weapons and even nuclear enrichment. Russians certainly are as much to blame for Bin Laden as the West was for arming him.

The show the US military put on in Afganistan probably shocked the hardliners a bit. No wonder GPS and selling cruise missile technology is high on their list. And how much control does Putin have over organized crime? He must wonder every night he goes to sleep. The the nexus of terrorism and organized crime

Thanks for the link...

Another view on Russian strategy for a Multi(tri)polar world

Its all about energy politics right now. Perhaps the Conservatives and Libertarians might want to conceed a Manhattan Project on Alternative Energy is the best defense against our "partner's" hydrocarbon leverage. And it would take some wind out of many an adversarial sail.

True.

Europe should feel squeezed about now. They assumed that the Russians were down and out, and the U.S. was no longer crucial to their self-defense. The way was open for a Euro-resurgence!

Now they're noticing that the Bear is as good as the Phoenix at rising from the ashes, and that their own population growth is driven by Muslim immigration. Uncomfortable.