Friday, January 30, 2004
The Intelligence on Iraq: What Went Wrong?
2 Letters I like from the NYT.
The Intelligence on Iraq: What Went Wrong? (7 Letters): "To the Editor:
"Re 'Dump Cheney Now!,' by Maureen Dowd (column, Jan. 29), and 'Report on Iraq Case Clears Blair and Faults BBC' (front page, Jan. 29):
Many politicians and others have been quick to judge the Bush and Blair administrations for leading their countries into an unnecessary war and are accusing both of manipulating intelligence. But based on the David A. Kay report and the Hutton inquiry in Britain, it appears that the two leaders acted on the intelligence information presented to them at the time.
Although in hindsight this intelligence may prove to be partly or completely erroneous, the president and the prime minister have a duty to protect their citizens. Had they stood idly by, they would have failed in this responsibility.
WILLIAM D. LOWN
Bronxville, N.Y., Jan. 29, 2004"
To the Editor:
Re "Ex-Arms Monitor Urges an Inquiry on Iraqi Threat" (front page, Jan. 29):
Before judging Central Intelligence Agency analysts, we should recognize the inherent difficulty of assessing weapons in a country ruled by a barbaric totalitarian regime.
Recall how badly West Germany underestimated the slide of the East German economy, despite having a common history and language.
The real problem has been the weakness of our covert effort, which critics attribute in part to our overreliance on technology. But the use of technology was made necessary by public hostility toward covert spying and restrictions placed on it by well-meaning but naïve legislation.
And we have seen restraints, if not bans, on C.I.A. recruitment at top colleges. Why should we expect better intelligence if we discourage our brightest students from intelligence careers?
MICHAEL KRAYNAK JR.
Ridgewood, N.J., Jan. 29, 2004
The writer is a retired captain, Naval Reserve Intelligence."
There is one thing that doesn't seem to fit: I'm a college student at The University of Chicago, and I know that the CIA recruits heavily here. It doesn't seem like there limited in what they do, I see recruiting posters in the most heavily traveled halls. Of course, my perspective is only one and a half years deep, so perhaps the CIA used to recruit more heavily?
I do have an Arab-American acquaintance that was interviewing with the CIA to become an intelligence asset in the mideast, but he declined their offer. Perhaps the CIA needs to make its recruitment more attractive to help bring in the type of people it needs. The military offers bonuses and helps to pay for college for thousands of people, so why can't the CIA have such a plan as well?
----------------------
Also one that seems to be very uninformed, but printed anyway.
"To the Editor:
"George Bush, in Denial" (editorial, Jan. 29) rightly takes President Bush to task for his "strategy of spin and evade" on Iraqi weapons. But calling for an independent investigation of "the apparent intelligence failures on Iraq" does not go far enough.
Paul H. O'Neill, the former Treasury secretary, has said the Bush administration was planning for an invasion of Iraq even before 9/11. So the focus of an inquiry must be broader than the question of an "intelligence failure." The American people deserve to know whether Mr. Bush or anyone in his administration were cooking the books to justify pre-emptive war.
MARTHA ACKELSBERG
Northampton, Mass., Jan. 29, 2004"
As discussed by Oxblog, this seems to be another example of the NYT's spinning a story and trying to make an untruth into a truth through mass-belief. For a paper with the resources of the NYT's, this is obviously intentional and quite disgraceful.
The Intelligence on Iraq: What Went Wrong? (7 Letters): "To the Editor:
"Re 'Dump Cheney Now!,' by Maureen Dowd (column, Jan. 29), and 'Report on Iraq Case Clears Blair and Faults BBC' (front page, Jan. 29):
Many politicians and others have been quick to judge the Bush and Blair administrations for leading their countries into an unnecessary war and are accusing both of manipulating intelligence. But based on the David A. Kay report and the Hutton inquiry in Britain, it appears that the two leaders acted on the intelligence information presented to them at the time.
Although in hindsight this intelligence may prove to be partly or completely erroneous, the president and the prime minister have a duty to protect their citizens. Had they stood idly by, they would have failed in this responsibility.
WILLIAM D. LOWN
Bronxville, N.Y., Jan. 29, 2004"
To the Editor:
Re "Ex-Arms Monitor Urges an Inquiry on Iraqi Threat" (front page, Jan. 29):
Before judging Central Intelligence Agency analysts, we should recognize the inherent difficulty of assessing weapons in a country ruled by a barbaric totalitarian regime.
Recall how badly West Germany underestimated the slide of the East German economy, despite having a common history and language.
The real problem has been the weakness of our covert effort, which critics attribute in part to our overreliance on technology. But the use of technology was made necessary by public hostility toward covert spying and restrictions placed on it by well-meaning but naïve legislation.
And we have seen restraints, if not bans, on C.I.A. recruitment at top colleges. Why should we expect better intelligence if we discourage our brightest students from intelligence careers?
MICHAEL KRAYNAK JR.
Ridgewood, N.J., Jan. 29, 2004
The writer is a retired captain, Naval Reserve Intelligence."
There is one thing that doesn't seem to fit: I'm a college student at The University of Chicago, and I know that the CIA recruits heavily here. It doesn't seem like there limited in what they do, I see recruiting posters in the most heavily traveled halls. Of course, my perspective is only one and a half years deep, so perhaps the CIA used to recruit more heavily?
I do have an Arab-American acquaintance that was interviewing with the CIA to become an intelligence asset in the mideast, but he declined their offer. Perhaps the CIA needs to make its recruitment more attractive to help bring in the type of people it needs. The military offers bonuses and helps to pay for college for thousands of people, so why can't the CIA have such a plan as well?
----------------------
Also one that seems to be very uninformed, but printed anyway.
"To the Editor:
"George Bush, in Denial" (editorial, Jan. 29) rightly takes President Bush to task for his "strategy of spin and evade" on Iraqi weapons. But calling for an independent investigation of "the apparent intelligence failures on Iraq" does not go far enough.
Paul H. O'Neill, the former Treasury secretary, has said the Bush administration was planning for an invasion of Iraq even before 9/11. So the focus of an inquiry must be broader than the question of an "intelligence failure." The American people deserve to know whether Mr. Bush or anyone in his administration were cooking the books to justify pre-emptive war.
MARTHA ACKELSBERG
Northampton, Mass., Jan. 29, 2004"
As discussed by Oxblog, this seems to be another example of the NYT's spinning a story and trying to make an untruth into a truth through mass-belief. For a paper with the resources of the NYT's, this is obviously intentional and quite disgraceful.
Comments:
Post a Comment
