Saddam seen using proxy groups to attack the U.S.

Washington Times ^ | 2/25/03 | Bill Gertz

[kattracks]

A recent CIA analysis concluded Saddam Hussein is highly likely to use a "third party" terrorist group to conduct a proxy attack on the United States in advance of American military operations, according to U.S. officials.

Analysts within the CIA's intelligence directorate reached the conclusion based on a complicated process that applied statistical probabilities to unknown threat scenarios, said officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

[Mr. Mojo]

A recent CIA analysis concluded Saddam Hussein is highly likely to use a "third party" terrorist group

How can this be? ...I've been told that Saddam has absolutely no connections with terrorist orgs.

< /sarcasm>

[Free_at_last_-2001]

"third party" terrorist groups - DNC, CNN, CBS, ACLU...etc...etc...

[McGavin999]

This is the reason for the slow march to war. The FBI/CIA are rounding up the known perps and praying they waited long enough to find all the links. There is still a high probability of scattered attacks, but once the Iraqui situation is over, most of these threats go away.

Good luck everyone.

[vbmoneyspender]

You may be correct, but the possbility/probability of terrorist attacks should not be dictating when our military response occurs.

[The Great Satan]

That sort of depends on what kind of weapons the terrorists have, doesn't it?

[vbmoneyspender]

If terrorists have weapons that fearsome, why would anyone think that we can prevent them from using their weapons merely by delaying an attack on Iraq. Furthermore, if it is correct that Hussein is using proxies, then it makes it all the more important that we attack as soon as possible to disrupt his plans.

[The Great Satan]

If terrorists have weapons that fearsome, why would anyone think that we can prevent them from using their weapons merely by delaying an attack on Iraq

Your homework for tonight:

1. Engage brain.
2. Identify the weapons we are talking about.
3. Describe characteristics of said weapons.
4. Discuss counter measures to said weapons.
5. Outline strategy, timetable for implementing said countermeasures.

[vbmoneyspender]

Your homework for tonight -- pull head out of posterior and think about how delaying an attack only gives time to the enemy to further carry out their plans.

[The Great Satan]

Don't forget to post us all the answers to the homework assignment.

[vbmoneyspender]

Nice to see you came up for air.

[The Great Satan]

The penny still hasn't dropped for you, has it? You're still completely in the dark, right?

[vbmoneyspender]

Aren't you the guy who has been saying that our attack on Iraq won't take place for another year?

[The Great Satan]

Yes, and I was telling people that a year ago, when people were also saying we just about to attack Iraq. Hmm, guess who called it right all along? Yours truly, TGS.

[bradactor]

How about Osama Bin Laden in the Past . Was that sponsored by you know who

[weegee]

How can this be? ...I've been told that Saddam has absolutely no connections with terrorist orgs.

BUMP! Also we can't strike because he may unleash the WMD that he "doesn't" have and it would put a lot of innocent people at risk.

[vbmoneyspender]

I could have sworn you were saying we wouldn't attack until the end of this year?

As far as attacking in the winter or spring of 2002-2003, how was that prediction any different than what every talking head has been saying since the end of operation Anaconda?

[FreeCanuckistan]

Not so sure we need any Bayesian methodology to figure this out. There's a lot of debate regarding a speedy attack on Iraq.

It looks like shoring up the defense at home won out. If the defense building outgains Saddam's plans to counter-strike, then the answer is clear as to which argument holds true.

I think other considerations have been in rightfully assessing this war, and re-beefing the military after Bubba's sorry stewardship of affairs.

The right people are in charge now. Wish I could say that about us......maybe next decade.

[Norman Arbuthnot]

I was telling people that a year ago, when people were also saying we just about to attack Iraq.

TGS, I've read your posts with great interest. They are very thought provoking, if not alarming. You are right up there with Fusion when it comes to painting scary scenarios. I'm very concerned about an NBC attack because I live in NYC. I don't totally dismiss the possiblity of an anthrax attacks carried out by Iraqi sleepers or AQ, but I doubt they can successfully launch attacks on the scale that you have suggested. I just don't think that the prime suspects are capable of maintaining the operational security required to successfully launch multiple large scale attacks. We will see soon enough because I have no doubt that we will attack Iraq within the next 30 days unless Saddam and the top tier of the Baath Party leave Iraq soon and I don't think that will happen.