Posted on 12/05/2007 1:16:01 PM PST by Ooh-Ah
One of the interesting things about national intelligence is that while it describes what it thinks it sees (hedging its bets with what it calls "estimative language" and degrees of confidence), it derives no implications and prescribes no policies. Also remember that National Intelligence Estimates (NIEs) only cover what the intelligence community is studying - our intelligence community missed the Pakistani nuclear test until it happened, missed the three-stage North Korean rocket until it was fired over Japan, and missed the extent of the Libyan nuclear program until the Libyans turned it over.
So what to make of the new unclassified NIE on Iran? Not having to worry about implications or policy, it is quick reading. The "Key Judgments" are only three pages long, followed by a handy-dandy chart comparing the 2005 NIE to its current counterpart.
Most prominently in the news, the NIE asserts with "high confidence" that Iran shut down its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and has "moderate confidence" that it has not restarted. "Our assessment that the program probably was halted in response to international pressure suggests Iran might be more vulnerable to influence on the issue than we judged previously."
Let us assume for the moment that the NIE is entirely correct. (We know, we know. Hold the nasty e-mails; just suspend disbelief and follow the first train of thought.)
Before the invasion, the UN was convinced - through intelligence estimates, including British inspectors' field reports - that Iraq had a hidden nuclear and chemical/biological weapons program. Even countries strongly opposed to the American invasion [mainly because they were making millions of dollars on the UN Oil for Food (read weapons) Program], agreed with the intelligence assessment that Saddam had non-conventional programs in defiance of UN demands for transparency.
Iran and Libya pursued their programs in the belief that UN inspection was a joke and American threats were bluster. Their intelligence missed the fact that in the post-9/11 atmosphere, the United States was unwilling to accept continuing uncertainty.
We have known since January 2004 the impact of U.S. policy on Libya. We may now understand the impact on Iran, making us wonder whether increased pressure at the time might have convinced the Iranians to show what the Libyans showed.
JINSA Ping.
Good group of people. Been to a few events of theirs and its great to be able to talk in person with intelligence people who truly understand Islamofascism. Beats the hell out of the Saudi sponsored events or CAIR events where they try to convince the US that we are over-reacting to terrorism and how its ‘only a small vocal minority’ who wants to kill us.
Congrats Ooh-Ah on the shout out you got last month.
Great implications. “The NIE doesn’t do implications; but we do.” I like it. These implications DO include the fact that, in view of the juxtaposition of events, the Iraq invasion SHOULD INDEED be credited with any stand-down Iran did at that time. So the MSM will be all over crediting G-Dub with this astounding implication, too — right????? Yeah, right.
Given their track record, why should believe them now?
They also completely missed the fall of the BERLIN WALL!
Missed Syria’s a couple months ago, too!
ping
The NIE is pant load not worthy of analysis or reply!!
Mark Levin is tearing into this now: seems alot of something is going on, such as political hacks with axes to grind, switching their positions after four months?/Just Asking - seoul62.......
SEPTEMBER 9, 2004 : ("TRUTH TELLING COALITION" ...ANYTHING BUT --- SEE VIPS, ELLSBERG, National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC), Ray Mcgovern) "For three years now, we in Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) have been saying that the CIA and its British counterpart, MI-6, were ordered by their countries' leaders to "fix facts" to "justify" an unprovoked war on Iraq."
"Those of us who care about unprovoked wars owe the patriot who gave this latest British government document to The Sunday Times a debt of gratitude. Unauthorized disclosures are gathering steam. They need to increase quickly on this side of the Atlantic as well—the more so, inasmuch as Congress-controlled by the president's party-cannot be counted on to discharge its constitutional prerogative for oversight.
In its formal appeal of Sept. 9, 2004 to current U.S. government officials, the Truth-Telling Coalition said this:
"We know how misplaced loyalty to bosses, agencies, and careers can obscure the higher allegiance all government officials owe the Constitution, the sovereign public, and the young men and women put in harm's way. We urge you to act on those higher loyalties...Truth-telling is a patriotic and effective way to serve the nation. The time for speaking out is now.--------http://www.oldright.com/modules.php?name=News&new_topic=14 From a post on that page titled "Proof Bush Fixed The Facts by Ray McGovern":493 posted on 07/26/2005 9:09:19 PM PDT by Wendy44
If persons with access to wrongly concealed facts and analyses bring them to light, the chances become less that a president could launch another unprovoked war—against, say, Iran."
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.