[Coop]

This was a HUGE intelligence failure.

On the contrary, it's been quite an intel success, for the objective among us:

-We would not have taken Baghdad in three weeks had our intel failed.
-We would not have nearly killed Hussein twice had our intel failed.
-We would not have captured Hussein had our intel failed.
-We would not have killed Hussein's sons had our intel failed.
-We would not have captured/killed nearly all in the infamous deck of cards had our intel failed.
-We would not have known who all these WMD scientists were, nor where their equipment and facilities were located had our intel failed.

See, when you lay things out, these general "failure" statements really do appear rather ridiculous.

The only thing we can accurately say is that any presumed WMD storage sites proved empty upon being searched. That does not mean the intel failed. It could simply mean the perishable intel was not acted upon in a timely manner.

And keep in mind, you have no idea what true intelligence (i.e., not publicly released) is still out there. Nor do I.

[Solson]

Specific to the subject of this post, namely WMD in Iraq, this was an intelligence failure. The war and the subsequent intelligence has been fantastic. However, in the lead up to this war, the intelligence was a failure. Tenet admittedly had no one on the ground in Iraq, relied too heavily on UN inspectors and towards the end, had to rely upon spy satellites, intercepts, and Iraqi-exile information.

This war, whether we like it or not, was predicated, to a larger degree, on WMD. Had we known before the war that WMD stockpiles no longer existed but the programs were in place for the rapid and prolific production of WMD, we could have framed the argument in that light.

I know this is all so much easier from the view of the Monday Morning Quarterback. But, unless we start to acknowledge, at least in some part, that there was an intelligence failure here, our stance, our reasoning, and the fact that this was was necessary, good, and the RIGHT thing to do will be lost.

Acknowledge that there was a failure in intelligence (to what extent we do not know right now) and start to move forward. That's all.

[sean327]

You make a good argument, but the WMD intel was a failure. There is a huge differnce between Operational Intel and Strategic Intel.
The intel used to target Saddam, take Bagdad,capture Saddam, kill his sons and capture the deck of 52 was Operational Intel most likley developed by tactical units S-2, or G-2 sections.
The CIA, or other non military agencies had little to do with this.
The WMD matter on the other hand was developed exclusivly by the Big Intel agencies, CIA, NSA, MI-6 ect. That intel failed mostly due to the fact we did not have assets on the ground at the time to confirm what was being put out. That my friends is the failure of the previous administration, and Congress for allowing our Intel agencies to decay to such a point.
The failure lies with them! The CIA and friends were working with what they had.

[justshutupandtakeit]

It is refreshing to read the posts of one who knows what the hell he is talking about rather than the professional meatheads, ideological dumbells and determined know-nothings who infest this site in such great numbers.

Thanks for your thoughts and information.

[Dave S]

The only thing we can accurately say is that any presumed WMD storage sites proved empty upon being searched. That does not mean the intel failed. It could simply mean the perishable intel was not acted upon in a timely manner.

Or it could mean it was never there.