Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (170733)	6/22/2006 4:28:03 PM
From: rich evans	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793974

Cobalt, I thought the program was biased. On Afghanistan: We sent the CIA in first to get the Northern Alliance set up and paid for. We then sent in about 90 A teams (534) special forces to be with the warlords , embed , and direct air attacks. It was brilliant and we took Kabul. As the Rangers and others arrived we started redeploying SF to Iraq. There is no operation in war that does not have mistakes but all in all Afghan was done well and no reason to use the "usual suspects" who have been complaining for 3 years to continue complaining. Tommy Franks and others have given interviews and contradict what you heard on Frontline. For example the complaint about no blocking force on the east side at Tora Bora. As the program said their were 1000 taliban and more Pushtuns on the Pakistan side of the border with lots of tunnels and 100s of miles. How you would block this with a couple companies of rangers dropped by helicopter is beyond me. You would end up trapping the rangers in mountainous terrain between the taliban and pustuns. On Iraq, once again they presented incomplete facts. ATTA 's prague trip was attested to by Czech intel. The only evidence we have which they did not tell is that his cell phone was used during the 3 day period when last seen and seen again and no passport records of trip.The 9/11 report left his whereabouts unknown and not proven. Same with AQ/terrorists and Saddam. We now know that Saddam through his IIS was heavily involved with terrorist including AQ from the documents being translated found at IIS headquarters.. Also we haveAnsar Al Islam. Zarqawi,Nidal.Salmon Pak,etc. So the CIA who concluded differently back then was wrong. And what is wrong with Military Intelligence.The military always has its own intell for military matters and since planning for Afghan and Iraq was going on beefing it up was normal. CIA is supposed to do the political and economic intelligence not the military fighting side. All in all the program was inaccurate and needed a lot of rebuttal, cross examination and complete facts not their selected facts often used for misleading conclusions. Rick