Looks like Bush needs to release the report so we can all read it. They can redact those sections that would reveal methods and sources. This has been done in the past!

Why col? You obviously have gotten everything you needed to know from the NYT. What needs to happen is for the government to file charges against the papers that published these classified leaks.

What is true is that Bush and Cheney who have had this report since April have IGNORED it and keep telling us the Iraq war has made us safer when they have been provided the PROOF from the 16 Intelligence agencies that is NOT TRUE!

Do you just copy and paste the same statements over and over in different threads? You don't know what the President has ignored and not ignored. You are not there, and you have absolutely no knowledge of what goes on. You posts just prove your ignorance beyond all doubt.

IslandDog

The release is for you and the others that refuse to accept the truth about the Bush policies in Iraq!

If the President has read the NIE then WHY is he telling us the exact opposite of what the report says?

Cat got your tongue?

The release is for you and the others that refuse to accept the truth about the Bush policies in Iraq!

Col, I don't need a report written by bureaucrats to know what the policy is. We are in Iraq col, nothing you will ever do will change that. Democrats still can't win elections on being anti-war, and you still don't understand that. You read 3 sentences from a multi-page report and now somehow you understand policy.

Like I said before. If it was up to you, we would all be speaking another language and surrendering to anybody who threatens us.

I notice you ignore everything that is posted to you. Hey col, fighting crime creates more criminals, let's stop fighting crime. I'm sure you will agree with that.

If the President has read the NIE then WHY is he telling us the exact opposite of what the report says?

First of all col, you DO NOT KNOW ANYTHING of what that report says except for a few sentences which is being used for democrat propaganda. For all you know the report could go on to say good things. Which of course you will dismiss and ignore if it did anyways. So STOP CLAIMING things that you do not know.

Second, reports are not word of law, nor are they completely factual. If you want to change policy every time a "report" comes out, then no wonder people like you cannot get elected. I bet if this report said going to Iraq was the right thing to do, you wouldn't be so obsessive about it.

So most people see this report for what is has become.....democrat propaganda. So once again col keep crying and whining about Bush...you are wasting your life obsessing over this man. Why don't you head over to the DU where people like you are welcomed and maybe you can sell a book or two?

Cat got your tongue?

Should I go back and find all the threads you have abandoned because you were proved wrong and were AFRAID to admit it?

Why don't you go to Iraq and fight with the people you support......the terrorists?

Most sentient Americans are not going to sweat what the NYT says because of the simple fact that we have not been attacked since 9/11.

Bush is going to de-classify parts of the report. I bet you guys get made fools of again.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12913317/

The facts on the ground in Iraq have proven me correct. Look at this excerpt from my book.
George W. Bush Robin Hood For The Rich by Colonel Gene P. Abel:
The Bush policy has isolated the U.S. from billions of people throughout the world. His credibility has been seriously impacted by the inability to locate any WMD in Iraq. After eight months of searching for these weapons, Mr. Kay believes that production was not resumed by Saddam Hussein after 1991. Colin Powell has now conceded that Iraq may not have had the weapons claimed by George Bush as the principal reason for the war. We must find a way to protect our nation in cooperation with the rest of the world. When we ignore world opinion we embark on a very dangerous path. Even General Powell has now stated that his speech before the U N on February 5, 2003 was the biggest mistake of his career.

The most dangerous reality is that millions of Muslims believe the policies of the United States and other Western countries threaten their belief, their territory and their God. Michael Scheuer, in his book Imperial Hubris states that America is faced with what he calls a defensive jihad, which is triggered by our policy in the Middle East. He points out that for Muslims do not separate politics and religion from their lives. They are all intertwined. For a Muslim to not join to protect Islam means that they are disobeying God's law. According to Mr. Scheuer the relationship of the Muslims to their religious beliefs is something that the Western world does not fully comprehend. Millions of Muslims look at Osama bin Laden as the protector of the Muslim faith, their way of life, their God and is not a terrorist. In fact the way Mr. Scheuer describes the conflict is more than just terrorism, it is an international insurrection by Muslims against what they believe is an attack on them, their religion and their way of life. The former CIA agent claims that we are faced with international insurrection by millions and millions of Muslims and that they will not end their resistance until the United States and other Western countries stop interfering with what they believe and remove themselves and their influence from all Muslim countries.

If this former CIA agent is correct, we have grossly understated the danger and the difficulty in dealing with what President Bush terms, “terrorism”. It would do us well to look at the experience that Michael Scheuer brings to the defense of our country and the western world. He believes that our invasion of Iraq has done more to energize the Islamic militants and thus weaken our security.

That excerpt proves nothing as usual col. You are making a cheap attempt at promoting a book which doesn't sell and that you have wasted part of your life writing.

I can and have posted articles from CIA/experts who say pretty much the opposite. But then again nobody can understand the logic of an obsessive Bush hater.

Bush made the islamists hate America even more than when they flew airplanes into buildings. I can't stop laughing at your logic.

The problem is the National Intelligence Estimate supports what I have said. The material in my book is being proven correct EVERY DAY.

Here is another section about the current problem of the military force levels being too small:

This is from my book about what Bush said concerning the size of the Active military and nation building:

"National Defense

During the campaign of 2000, Bush seemed to understand we had overused the so-called peace dividend and that our military, especially the Army, was too small. Bush also campaigned on a belief that the United States should limit its actions in nation building. It is hard to know whether Mr. Bush recognized the shortcomings in our security services that suffered from a lack of human resources and collaboration among the various agencies. Clearly the events of 9/11 documented in spades that we were vulnerable to attack and our intelligence network was inadequate."

"At the same time the Bush White House was planning the Iraq adventure, the Secretary of Defense set aside the issue of expanding our military strength. Instead Secretary Rumsfeld began his campaign to restructure the Department of Defense. It is true that the nature of the threat facing the United States has significantly changed since the end of the Cold War. Restructuring the military, to better align itself with the new threat, is a legitimate undertaking. However, restructuring alone does not deal with the adequacy of the active component to accomplish its mission. During the Cold War the United States faced an enemy of immense power that was relatively predictable. Today we face a combination of rogue states and international terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda that have the capability of employing weapons of mass destruction (WMD). However, the real danger comes from the militant Islamists as Michael Scheuer points out is his book, Imperial Hubris."

The problem is the National Intelligence Estimate supports what I have said. The material in my book is being proven correct EVERY DAY.

YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE REPORT....YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE REPORT CONCLUDES.

People don't buy your book col because it's propaganda. I was right that your book is nothing but a collection of quotes from other Bush haters. Keep going col, you are on the right track of making sure Bush isn't re-elected?

Will you ever seek help for your obsession?

What we need is a change in the rubber stamp Congress in November 2006. What I have done in my book is research the issues and have used the experience of the MOST knowledgeable people in this country to show HOW Bush has failed America!

What we need is a change in the rubber stamp Congress in November 2006.

No col, what you want is tax raising liberals to be elected. Do not ever refer to yourself as a republican again.

What I have done in my book is research the issues and have used the experience of the MOST knowledgeable people in this country to show HOW Bush has failed America!

No col. You have taken the opinions of people who hate Bush, and try to make money off hating Bush. Richard Clarke is one example. The only difference is he made some money, while you are not. We have proven your stances wrong over and over and you simply ignore it and keep telling yourself "I AM RIGHT". I mean the total ignorance is outstanding.

Ever wonder why nobody buys your book? Even the other looney liberals here don't defend your bs, now that tells you something.

Better take a look at the major sorces I used in addition to my experience in Business and the military:

George W. Bush – Robin Hood for the Rich by Colonel Gene P. Abel


Sources:

Against All Enemies by Richard A. Clarke

Alan Greenspan, Chairmen Federal Reserve

Bill Gates

Boston Globe-Bush National Guard Service

Brookings Institute

Center For Economic And Policy Research

Charles Lewis

Congressional Budget Office - CBO

Dan Rather

David M. Walker Comptroller General of the United States

Dept. of Labor, Division of Labor Force Statistics

Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Public Debt

Face The Nation Interview with VP Cheney 2001

Federal Reserve

General Accounting Office –GAO

General Barry McCaffrey

General Eric Shinseki, Former Army CoS

General Wesley Clark

Hoover Institute

Imperial Hubris by Anonymous (Michael Scheuer)

Journal of Foreign Affairs

Lt. General John Riggs

Lt. George W. Bush’s National Guard records

Office of Management and Budget – OMB

Paul Craig Roberts

Paul O’Neil, Former Secretary of the Treasury 2001-2003

Paul R. Pillar retired CIA Top Counterterrorism Coordinator

Plan of Attack by Bob Woodward

Popular Science -- Airborne Laser

Presidential Commission on Social Security

Professor Jeffrey Record -- United States Army War College visiting professor

Professor Paul Krugman, Princeton University

Professor Rogan Kersh

Senator Ted Kennedy comments on Medicare January 2005

Sierra Club

Social Security and Medicare Trustees

The Price of Loyalty by Ron Suskind

Toshi Tsurumi, Harvard Professor of GWB

United States Army War College

U S Conference of Mayors

Warren Buffet

Washington Post

60 minutes

60 Minutes II