11–20 of 49 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It says in the PDF: 2009
Thank you! Added. Next question: should we link directly to the pdf?
Without understanding OPs reason to share this link it's hard to make a call on that.
> 2003 Iraq’s WMD Programs > Saddam failed to cooperate with UN inspectors because he was continuing to develop weapons of mass destruction. Apparently this "analysis" was written in 2009, a good 6 years after the start of the Second Iraq War, and still the CIA followed the political manoeuvre of not challenging their leaders' lies about Iraq's WMD. This is one of the most vulnerable points of any "intelligence" agen…
>If Iraqi authorities had destroyed their WMD stocks and abandoned their programs, they might refuse to fully acknowledge this to the UN to maintain Iraq’s regional status, deterrence, and internal regime stability.
How about
> If the current US Administration needs to invade Iraq for their domestic political agenda and requires a narrative of existing WMD stockpiles. They will ignore any evidence that counters this, and even create a completely fictional narrative to justify the invasion.
I understand this document is from 2009, not secret, and probably contains information known elsewhere. Still, what is the intent of the CIA in publishing this on the open web? I assume they would be able to distribute this to US nationals even in other orgs through internal networks.
I understand this document is from 2009, not secret, and probably contains information known elsewhere. Still, what is the intent of the CIA in publishing this on the open web? I assume they would be able to distribute this to US nationals even in other orgs through internal networks.
Maybe it’s bad advice that ne’er-do-wells will try to employ, leaving them susceptible to the CIA.
Wouldn't it be dangerous to publish bogus info that can be picked up by nationals and allies, especially since it is branded?
> 2003 Iraq’s WMD Programs > Saddam failed to cooperate with UN inspectors because he was continuing to develop weapons of mass destruction. Apparently this "analysis" was written in 2009, a good 6 years after the start of the Second Iraq War, and still the CIA followed the political manoeuvre of not challenging their leaders' lies about Iraq's WMD. This is one of the most vulnerable points of any "intelligence" agen…
> 2003 Iraq’s WMD Programs > Saddam failed to cooperate with UN inspectors because he was continuing to develop weapons of mass destruction. Apparently this "analysis" was written in 2009, a good 6 years after the start of the Second Iraq War, and still the CIA followed the political manoeuvre of not challenging their leaders' lies about Iraq's WMD. This is one of the most vulnerable points of any "intelligence" agen…
I think fundamentally, if you have incomplete information and have to make some actions or judgements, either you are: 1. doing things to reason about or uncover more useful datapoints to increase certainty 2. you are accepting the probability that you are right/wrong at face value The direction in which you decide to uncover datapoints is the "bias" that they are talking about. This process if further influenced by…
> 2003 Iraq’s WMD Programs > Saddam failed to cooperate with UN inspectors because he was continuing to develop weapons of mass destruction. Apparently this "analysis" was written in 2009, a good 6 years after the start of the Second Iraq War, and still the CIA followed the political manoeuvre of not challenging their leaders' lies about Iraq's WMD. This is one of the most vulnerable points of any "intelligence" agen…
Don’t really want your various 3 letter agencies operating apart from elected leaders.