Pentagon Looking Into Leak of Classified Intel to New York Times (Bust someone finally, PLEASE)

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon is looking into how classified information indicating Iraq is moving closer to chaos wound up on the front page of Wednesday's New York Times, and is not ruling out an investigation that could lead to criminal charges.

A spokesman for U.S. Central Command, which has responsibility for operations in Iraq, confirmed to FOX News that a chart published in The Times is a real reflection of the thinking of military intelligence on the situation in Iraq as of Oct. 18, adding that an effort is underway to find out who leaked the chart and if the breach of operational security constitutes a crime.

The published report includes a classified one-page slide show from an Oct. 18 military briefing. The slide show is titled: “Iraq: Indications and Warnings of Civil Conflict,” and shows spiraling violence in Iraq and a worsening position for American efforts.

Based on the slide show, Iraq is moving sharply away from "peace," designated in green on the left side of the chart, to a point much closer to the red-zoned right side of the spectrum, marked “chaos.”

It makes one shudder when realizing that these leakers are part of a military and/or service that took an oath to serve, uphold and protect intelligence, i.e. do not disseminate confidential information.
Nevertheless such oath transgressions happen frequently by what obviously are political antagonists to a truly elected government with which they disagree.
How close or better how unified to our enemies are these so called "the country serving" people to enemies just to harm out of spite, regardless of oath.
Their justification is the same:
Tear down, betray, while pretending to serve.

This was a transcript on the 6th of Oct. by Gordon (middle of picture),Chief Military Correspondent at The Council Of Foreign Relations.

CUT

Walter Russell Mead, Michael Gordon, and Ronald Steel participate in a lunchtime discussion on U.S. foreign and defense policy.

"And Michael Gordon, who is somebody who all of us have learned a great deal from lately, and I hope will continue."

"We’re going to try to talk about where things are going, where American foreign and military policy is going, how it’s been changed by what’s happening in Iraq. And I’m going to ask both of our panelists to be prescriptive as well as predictive, a little bit."

"And I’d like to start with Michael and ask, where do you see, as a result of this war in Iraq—what impact is that having on sort of the Rumsfeld plans for transformation, American military doctrine? What use is the military making of the experience that it’s having over there?"

MICHAEL R. GORDON: Well, you know, the war, understandably, is having a huge impact on the military, particularly the ground forces. And they are, of necessity, changing the way they do things. It would have been better if some of these changes had been made several years ago but, you know, here’s where we are.

CUT

GORDON: Well, you know, the Army generals talk on—to their retired colleagues about increasing the Army, which is around 500,000 now, you know, anywhere from 50,000 to 60,000. That said, the Army doesn’t propose doing that formally. They’re trying to safeguard their modernization budget. I think if they could get, you know, more forces and all of the weapons in the pipeline, that they would take that. I’m not sure the administration’s prepared to give them that, because there are trade-offs there."

If in fact, this was a story to get added forces/money, and the graph would be made public to influence a decision to deploy said numbers which has been consistently denied in the past by Bush/Rumsfeld as necessary, whereas; Gordon might be doing a favor for a specific General by inserting this classified story on the need for more focus on the number of troops to get the job done...a Democratic talking point.

Sorry, too tierd to do more tonight..maybe someone else can pick up, discard or cover another aspect.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/11680/iraqs_impact_on_the_future_of_us_foreign_and_defense_policy.html

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.