What's new

US intelligence fears Iran duped hawks into Iraq war

Both stories were presented to Bush prior to the war, he chose to believe the Iranian version of WMD story from Chalabi and invade. How does that negate role of Chalabi and his alleged sponsor Iran?
Now you changed the question. First you told me to prove that U.S wasn't fooled by Iran, I proved it, now you made up another story, that both were presented to Bush, and he 'chose' what it seems to fit your own agenda.

Just to make things clear, what I wrote in this thread was mainly for other members to judge, don't think for a second that I'm here to convince you, you have made up your mind, and given your notorious sectarian background against Shias on this forum, that's a wise decision.
 
.
Now you changed the question. First you told me to prove that U.S wasn't fooled by Iran, I proved it, now you made up another story, that both were presented to Bush, and he 'chose' what it seems to fit your own agenda.

Just to make things clear, what I wrote in this thread was mainly for other members to judge, don't think for a second that I'm here to convince you, you have made up your mind, and given your notorious sectarian background against Shias on this forum, that's a wise decision.

You are just trying to wiggle out where you don't have any valid argument to present. Good that you admit defeat.

@Serpentine
@kalu_miah's sectarian talk comes form his identity crisis. Like many Muslim immigrants growing up in the US, he's trying to find an identity among the world's Mid-Eastern Sunni population, though he's not of mid-east descent. He probably feels closer to his Sunni Arab brethren when bashing Shias. His views are not representative of the average Bangladeshi.

Says an atheist Bangladeshi, most probably of Hindu origin, who is trying to speak for 90% Muslim Bangladeshi's, 99.9% of whom happen to be Sunni Hanafi.
 
.
Says an atheist Bangladeshi, most probably of Hindu origin, who is trying to speak for 90% Muslim Bangladeshi's, 99.9% of whom happen to be Sunni Hanafi.

Wrong. I'm not an atheist, but a secular infidel who takes pride in his Islamic culture and heritage.

Sunni or whatever, Bangladeshis are certainly not anti-Shia or anti-Iran. The Persianized, and later Indianized, Sufi Islam of South Asia has nothing to do with Salafism. It's sad how this Salafism epidemic is spreading among impressionable Muslim youth both in the West and at home. Muslims from regions without a history, culture or ethnic identity to be proud of are most vulnerable, because they seek another identity to take pride in.
 
.
Wrong. I'm not an atheist, but a secular infidel who takes pride in his Islamic culture and heritage.

Sunni or whatever, Bangladeshis are certainly not anti-Shia or anti-Iran. The Persianized, and later Indianized, Sufi Islam of South Asia has nothing to do with Salafism. It's sad how this Salafism epidemic is spreading among impressionable Muslim youth both in the West and at home. Muslims from regions without a history, culture or ethnic identity to be proud of are most vulnerable, because they seek another identity to take pride in.

Ok, so you are one of those ex-Muslims, good to know, but what made you conclude that I am a Salafi? Because I do not support Iran's Mullah's and their sectarian policies?
 
.
Ok, so you are one of those ex-Muslims, good to know, but what made you conclude that I am a Salafi? Because I do not support Iran's Mullah's and their sectarian policies?

Because you take sides in matters that are not even remotely related to BD's interests. Among non-mideast Muslims, only two groups support the Arabs: Salafis and anti-Shia guys.
 
.
Because you take sides in matters that are not even remotely related to BD's interests. Among non-mideast Muslims, only two groups support the Arabs: Salafis and anti-Shia guys.

First read these threads if you missed them:
Salafi vs Muslim Brotherhood
Saudis Must Stop Exporting Extremism
Why Shia and "secular" Muslims call Sunni's they don't like Wahabi/Salafi?
How to stop Islamic extremism: Global Fiqh Council (GFC)

Yes, I take side because I believe only ignorant confused fools stay neutral, in most situations. And what makes you think that I have to worry about Bangladesh interest while expressing my personal opinion? Because that is what my posts are, my own personal opinions. I am not Ambassador of Bangladesh on PDF, and you are not either. You only represent yourself, just one individual, just like myself. And please stay away from generalization and putting people in boxes.
 
.
...
Why Shia and "secular" Muslims call Sunni's they don't like Wahabi/Salafi?
How to stop Islamic extremism: Global Fiqh Council (GFC)

...makes you think that I have to worry about Bangladesh interest while expressing my personal opinion? Because that is what my posts are, my own personal opinions. I am not Ambassador of Bangladesh on PDF, and you are not either. You only represent yourself, just one individual, just like myself. And please stay away from generalization and putting people in boxes.

Then remove the BD flag and replace it with Saudi flag. When you hold our flag while expressing some highly outrageous sectarian "opinions", other Bangladeshis have reasons to get involved.
 
.
Then remove the BD flag and replace it with Saudi flag. When you hold our flag while expressing some highly outrageous sectarian "opinions", other Bangladeshis have reasons to get involved.

You are free to express your opinion like above, but who gives a ****. Go cry to the mods may be they will do something for you.
 
.
Israel is the only country who has benefited from this saga, so i dont really buy this story.
 
.
Israel is the only country who has benefited from this saga, so i dont really buy this story.

Not sure about this, Israel actually did not benefit much, as Shia crescent appeared as a consequence of this invasion and then the subsequent destabilization as we have it today. Going forward the future is unpredictable for Israel's security concerns, which cannot be a good thing.

Governmental positions on the Iraq War prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Israel
Further information: Iraq-Israel relations
Israel did not officially support or take part in the Iraq war. However there were reports that Israel pushed US for action against Iraq. According to John Kerry,Netanyahu was profoundly forward-leaning and outspoken about the importance of invading Iraq.[4] However, this was at a time when Netanyahu was a private citizen of Israel and held no government position; Ariel Sharon was Prime Minister at the time. It was reported in the Washington Post that Israel is urging United States' officials not to delay a military strike against Iraq's Saddam Hussein[5] It was also reported that Israeli intelligence provided Washington with alarming reports about Iraq's alleged program to develop weapons of mass destruction.[6]

On the contrary, some have argued that Israel did not have much role in pushing for the war. According to former US undersecretary of defense Douglas Feith, Israeli officials did not push their American counterparts to initiate the war in Iraq. In an interview with Ynet, Feith stated that "what you heard from the Israelis was not any kind of advocacy of war with Iraq" and that "[w]hat you heard from Israeli officials in private discussions was that they were not really focused on Iraq... [t]hey were much more focused on Iran."[7]

At Washington's behest, Israel did not provide vocal support for the war, as the US government was concerned that Israeli support for or participation in the war would potentially alienate the Arab world. In January 2007, the Forward reported that sometime before March 2003, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon told Bush that Israel "would not push one way or the other" for or against an Iraq war. Sharon said that he believed that Iraq was a genuine threat to the Middle East and that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, but explicitly warned Bush that if the US did go to war with Iraq that he should make sure to formulate a viable exit strategy, prepare a counterinsurgency strategy, and should not attempt to impose democracy in the Middle East. One of the sources who provided this information was Israeli Ambassador to the US Daniel Ayalon.[8]

Israel has also assisted the US military by sharing its expertise on counterinsurgency methods, such as utilizing drones and operating checkpoints.[9]
 
.
Please look at post #4, Iran is trying to pull another Iraq in Bahrain, that is not old news, it is ongoing. Although I do not support ISIS, but I also do not support Iran using US air power to destroy ISIS. Iran should do this on its own. Iran shouts Death to America, but is the biggest expert to covertly manipulate and use US firepower against its enemies.

That is Iran's impressive track record, which should be a lesson for Sunni's.

LOL post # 4 the source is Arab news a well known HOUSE OF SAUD Propogenda tool .
 
.
Not sure about this, Israel actually did not benefit much, as Shia crescent appeared as a consequence of this invasion and then the subsequent destabilization as we have it today. Going forward the future is unpredictable for Israel's security concerns, which cannot be a good thing.

Governmental positions on the Iraq War prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Israel
Further information: Iraq-Israel relations
Israel did not officially support or take part in the Iraq war. However there were reports that Israel pushed US for action against Iraq. According to John Kerry,Netanyahu was profoundly forward-leaning and outspoken about the importance of invading Iraq.[4] However, this was at a time when Netanyahu was a private citizen of Israel and held no government position; Ariel Sharon was Prime Minister at the time. It was reported in the Washington Post that Israel is urging United States' officials not to delay a military strike against Iraq's Saddam Hussein[5] It was also reported that Israeli intelligence provided Washington with alarming reports about Iraq's alleged program to develop weapons of mass destruction.[6]

On the contrary, some have argued that Israel did not have much role in pushing for the war. According to former US undersecretary of defense Douglas Feith, Israeli officials did not push their American counterparts to initiate the war in Iraq. In an interview with Ynet, Feith stated that "what you heard from the Israelis was not any kind of advocacy of war with Iraq" and that "[w]hat you heard from Israeli officials in private discussions was that they were not really focused on Iraq... [t]hey were much more focused on Iran."[7]

At Washington's behest, Israel did not provide vocal support for the war, as the US government was concerned that Israeli support for or participation in the war would potentially alienate the Arab world. In January 2007, the Forward reported that sometime before March 2003, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon told Bush that Israel "would not push one way or the other" for or against an Iraq war. Sharon said that he believed that Iraq was a genuine threat to the Middle East and that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, but explicitly warned Bush that if the US did go to war with Iraq that he should make sure to formulate a viable exit strategy, prepare a counterinsurgency strategy, and should not attempt to impose democracy in the Middle East. One of the sources who provided this information was Israeli Ambassador to the US Daniel Ayalon.[8]

Israel has also assisted the US military by sharing its expertise on counterinsurgency methods, such as utilizing drones and operating checkpoints.[9]
yr not seeing a bigger picture sir nor are u understanding the strategic and tactical importance of this towards future israeli expansion plans.
 
.
Did Iran provided "solid undeniable proofs of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction" to CIA? or
did CIA created those "solid undeniable proofs of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction"? on Iran's advise/instructions?
Whatever the case CIA lied!



US intelligence fears Iran duped hawks into Iraq war | World news | The Guardian

US intelligence fears Iran duped hawks into Iraq war
· Inquiry into Tehran's role in starting conflict
· Top Pentagon ally Chalabi accused

Julian Borger in Washington

Monday 24 May 2004 21.17 EDTLast modified on Friday 3 October 201404.56 EDT

An urgent investigation has been launched in Washington into whether Iran played a role in manipulating the US into the Iraq war by passing on bogus intelligence through Ahmad Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress, it emerged yesterday.
Some intelligence officials now believe that Iran used the hawks in the Pentagon and the White House to get rid of a hostile neighbour, and pave the way for a Shia-ruled Iraq.

According to a US intelligence official, the CIA has hard evidence that Mr Chalabi and his intelligence chief, Aras Karim Habib, passed US secrets to Tehran, and that Mr Habib has been a paid Iranian agent for several years, involved in passing intelligence in both directions.

The CIA has asked the FBI to investigate Mr Chalabi's contacts in the Pentagon to discover how the INC acquired sensitive information that ended up in Iranian hands.

The implications are far-reaching. Mr Chalabi and Mr Habib were the channels for much of the intelligence on Iraqi weapons on which Washington built its case for war.

"It's pretty clear that Iranians had us for breakfast, lunch and dinner," said an intelligence source in Washington yesterday. "Iranian intelligence has been manipulating the US for several years through Chalabi."

Larry Johnson, a former senior counter-terrorist official at the state department, said: "When the story ultimately comes out we'll see that Iran has run one of the most masterful intelligence operations in history. They persuaded the US and Britain to dispose of its greatest enemy."

Mr Chalabi has vehemently rejected the allegations as "a lie, a fib and silly". He accused the CIA director, George Tenet, of a smear campaign against himself and Mr Habib.

However, it is clear that the CIA - at loggerheads with Mr Chalabi for more than eight years - believes it has caught him red-handed, and is sticking to its allegations.

"The suggestion that Chalabi is a victim of a smear campaign is outrageous," a US intelligence official said. "It's utter nonsense. He passed very sensitive and classified information to the Iranians. We have rock solid information that he did that."

"As for Aras Karim [Habib] being a paid agent for Iranian intelligence, we have very good reason to believe that is the case," added the intelligence official, who did not want to be named. He said it was unclear how long this INC-Iranian collaboration had been going on, but pointed out that Mr Chalabi had had overt links with Tehran "for a long period of time".

An intelligence source in Washington said the CIA confirmed its long-held suspicions when it discovered that a piece of information from an electronic communications intercept by the National Security Agency had ended up in Iranian hands. The information was so sensitive that its circulation had been restricted to a handful of officials.

"This was 'sensitive compartmented information' - SCI - and it was tracked right back to the Iranians through Aras Habib," the intelligence source said.

Mr Habib, a Shia Kurd who is being sought by Iraqi police since a raid on INC headquarters last week, has been Mr Chalabi's righthand man for more than a decade. He ran a Pentagon-funded intelligence collection programme in the run-up to the invasion and put US officials in touch with Iraqi defectors who made claims about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction.

Those claims helped make the case for war but have since proved groundless, and US intelligence agencies are now scrambling to determine whether false information was passed to the US with Iranian connivance.

INC representatives in Washington did not return calls seeking comment.

But Laurie Mylroie, a US Iraq analyst and one of the INC's most vocal backers in Washington, dismissed the allegations as the product of a grudge among CIA and state department officials driven by a pro-Sunni, anti-Shia bias.

She said that after the CIA raised questions about Mr Habib's Iranian links, the Pentagon's Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) conducted a lie-detector test on him in 2002, which he passed with "flying colours".

The DIA is also reported to have launched its own inquiry into the INC-Iran link.

An intelligence source in Washington said the FBI investigation into the affair would begin with Mr Chalabi's "handlers" in the Pentagon, who include William Luti, the former head of the office of special plans, and his immediate superior, Douglas Feith, the under secretary of defence for policy.

There is no evidence that they were the source of the leaks. Other INC supporters at the Pentagon may have given away classified information in an attempt to give Mr Chalabi an advantage in the struggle for power surrounding the transfer of sovereignty to an Iraqi government on June 30.

The CIA allegations bring to a head a dispute between the CIA and the Pentagon officials instrumental in promoting Mr Chalabi and his intelligence in the run-up to the war. By calling for an FBI counter-intelligence investigation, the CIA is, in effect, threatening to disgrace senior neo-conservatives in the Pentagon.

"This is people who opposed the war with long knives drawn for people who supported the war," Ms Mylroie said.
 
. .
You are just trying to wiggle out where you don't have any valid argument to present. Good that you admit defeat.

I think besides spreading lies and cheap claims, you also have some hallucinations about winning arguments, the only place where you won is in your own mind. You posted a claim and couldn't prove it, I proved you wrong pretty good, it's up to members to decide.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom