Exhaustive review sponsored by the Pentagon finds NO link between Saddam, al Qaida (1 Viewer)

[DadsDream]

But I think it has everything to do to rationalize the invasion. You know it, I know it, and everybody reading this threat knows it. No, I believe it isn't about your ego, it's about defending the Decider in Chief.

No, it's about an Associated Press article, posted in Yahoo News about a Pentagon report which won't be released until tomorrow.

 

[DadsDream]

Resentful??

It's just a little exasperation with the pattern of playing games with semantics.

Words are important indeed. But sometimes he stretches common sense.

The Pentagon has clandestine capabilities using small teams. What term do they use to describe a secret "operation." What's the official word for an operation if less than division is involved.

Here are examples of explicit used of the word "operation" by the Pentagon not involving a division of troops:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=ARK20050925&articleId=1001

No one I know of is aware of any proven link between Saddam and an Al Queda "effort" against the United States. I am sure Saddam would have had his own attempts to get links with Al Queda and Islamists -- to infiltrate them and keep tabs on them.

And here's the Wikipedia entry for "Operational Warfare."

Operational warfare
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Operational warfare is, within warfare and military doctrine, the level of command which coordinates the minute details of tactics with the overarching goals of strategy.

The operational level is at a scale bigger than one where line of sight and the time of day are important, and smaller than the strategic level, where production and politics are considerations. Formations are of the operational level if they are able to conduct operations on their own, and are of sufficient size to be directly handled or have a significant impact at the strategic level. This concept was pioneered by the German army prior to and during the Second World War.

READ MORE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operational_warfare

 

[Pasty]

 

[blackadder]

And here's the Wikipedia entry for "Operational Warfare."

Operational warfare
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Operational warfare is, within warfare and military doctrine, the level of command which coordinates the minute details of tactics with the overarching goals of strategy.

The operational level is at a scale bigger than one where line of sight and the time of day are important, and smaller than the strategic level, where production and politics are considerations. Formations are of the operational level if they are able to conduct operations on their own, and are of sufficient size to be directly handled or have a significant impact at the strategic level. This concept was pioneered by the German army prior to and during the Second World War.

READ MORE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operational_warfare

Again, relevence to a clandestine terror organization?

 

[champ76]

Resentful??

It's just a little exasperation with the pattern of playing games with semantics.

Words are important indeed. But sometimes he stretches common sense.

The Pentagon has clandestine capabilities using small teams. What term do they use to describe a secret "operation." What's the official word for an operation if less than division is involved.

Here are examples of explicit used of the word "operation" by the Pentagon not involving a division of troops:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=ARK20050925&articleId=1001

No one I know of is aware of any proven link between Saddam and an Al Queda "effort" against the United States. I am sure Saddam would have had his own attempts to get links with Al Queda and Islamists -- to infiltrate them and keep tabs on them.

Sometimes it all boils down to what the meaning of is, is. I suspect the report will explain what it means by "operational links" and may even refer to the "non-operational" ones. We should wait and see.

 

[Mr. Littlejeans]

Saddam became too unpredictable. He sealed his fate when he launched missiles at Tel Aviv in the first Gulf War. For some reason, people seem to forget or gloss that over.

Dad's-
Above quote is your first post on this thread. It doesn't make mention of language in the article. It is a rationalization for the invasion of Iraq. "He sealed his fate ."
No mention of the wording of the article........until you needed something to help prop up an undefendable opinion. IMHO

 

[DadsDream]

Again, relevence to a clandestine terror organization?

Threat assessment, based on captured enemy documents is done at three levels:

Tactical
Operational
Strategic

We're talking about a Pentagon report regarding captured Iraqi documents. The methodology used to dissect said documents requires categorization, addressing each level, in turn.

"no direct operational link" means no links at a level which would provide warfare at that level.

There's nothing hard about this. Y'all can quibble with what I'm saying all you want though. That's fine.

 

[RebSaint]

Sometimes it all boils down to what the meaning of is, is. I suspect the report will explain what it means by "operational links" and may even refer to the "non-operational" ones. We should wait and see.

Wait for what? DadsDream did get one thing right--in many cases, this story is a bit of non-news. Just about every government study, commission, committee and agency has since debunked the administration's claim that there was significant ties between AQ and Hussein. Face it, either we were lied to by the bunch in the White House, or our intelligence agencies failed at an unprecedented level.

 

[DadsDream]

Dad's-
Above quote is your first post on this thread. It doesn't make mention of language in the article. It is a rationalization for the invasion of Iraq. "He sealed his fate ."
No mention of the wording of the article........until you needed something to help prop up an undefendable opinion. IMHO

That's because it was written in direct response to what Bulldawg posted:

Which just goes to show how screwed up the area is.

Syria was no friend of Saddam.

Context, my friend...context.

 

[RebSaint]

Dad's-
Above quote is your first post on this thread. It doesn't make mention of language in the article. It is a rationalization for the invasion of Iraq. "He sealed his fate ."
No mention of the wording of the article........until you needed something to help prop up an undefendable opinion. IMHO

I would argue that Hussein's fate was sealed when GWBush was elected to the presidency, a man with deep ties to the oil/energy industry and lobby.

 

[blackadder]

Wait for what? DadsDream did get one thing right--in many cases, this story is a bit of non-news. Just about every government study, commission, committee and agency has since debunked the administration's claim that there was significant ties between AQ and Hussein. Face it, either we were lied to by the bunch in the White House, or our intelligence agencies failed at an unprecedented level.

It's the former and it was from the VPs office down to the specially created propaganda "Office of Special Plans."

George Tenet colluded by filtering out or de-emphasizing dissent from the CIA and the intelligence community.

The entire CIA has been scapegaoted by the administration and Congress thanks to the efforts of Tenet, which is why he got one of these:

 

[Mr. Littlejeans]

"Formations are of the operational level if they are able to conduct operations on their own, and are of sufficient size to be directly handled or have a significant impact at the strategic level."

So Al Qaeda received no help from Iraq "of sufficient size to be directly handled or have a significant impact at the strategic level."

And yet we invaded a sovereign country at the cost of 4000+ lives and $12 BILLION a month.

Yes this report is newsworthy.

 

[blackadder]

Threat assessment, based on captured enemy documents is done at three levels:

Tactical
Operational
Strategic

We're talking about a Pentagon report regarding captured Iraqi documents. The methodology used to dissect said documents requires categorization, addressing each level, in turn.

"no direct operational link" means no links at a level which would provide warfare at that level.

There's nothing hard about this. Y'all can quibble with what I'm saying all you want though. That's fine.

You could understand someone with some level of exasperation with the semantics.

Why would be need to undertake an exhaustive review of 600,000 documents to determine that Al Queda, with help from Saddam, was not a threat to field whole divisions of fighters?

 

[champ76]

Wait for what? DadsDream did get one thing right--in many cases, this story is a bit of non-news. Just about every government study, commission, committee and agency has since debunked the administration's claim that there was significant ties between AQ and Hussein. Face it, either we were lied to by the bunch in the White House, or our intelligence agencies failed at an unprecedented level.

I think it's a "slam dunk" which it was. And not to parse, but I don't believe anyone in the administration ever claimed "operational" ties, or even "significant" ties between Saddam and AQ. They mentioned ties, some of which were proven true, some of which were the result of faulty intelligence. When DD mentioned Saddam "sealed his fate" because of his unpredictability, that's important because in the post 9-11 world, an unpredictable man who harbors weapons of mass destruction and who has links of any kind with a terror organization, risks a certain end. The belief was Saddam was all three, unpredictable, a harborer of wmd, who had links to terror organizations.

 

[blackadder]

"Formations are of the operational level if they are able to conduct operations on their own, and are of sufficient size to be directly handled or have a significant impact at the strategic level."

What's the source on that?

Seems at odds with the monolithic defintion of "oerational" so far advanced by DD...