We have no idea what the NIE really says, because we don't have the text of the document. The Senate Intelligence Committee is calling for it to be declassified so we can see it and decide for ourselves what is says.
I would disagree with your conclusions, though. The President is saying that winning in Iraq is central to winning the war on terror. The NIE, we are told, says that Iraq is now a prime recruiting tool for terrorists. Doesn't that mean if we help the Iraqi government create a stable, free country and we bring our troops home after a successful mission that we will have taken away the terrorists' prime recruiting tool? Doesn't it then follow that winning in Iraq is very important to winning the war on terror? Granted, not because Iraq was by necessity at the center of the war on terror, but because we chose to make it the center of the war on terror, and Al Qaeda accepted our choice. On 9/26/06, Gruss wrote: > > > I guess I find it almost disingenuous that anyone would say that > calling Iraq "central to the war on terror" doesn't clearly and > directly MEAN that our presence in Iraq in necessary to defeat > terrorism. > > It's not, and the President's own people are telling him it's making it > worse. > -- --------------- Robert Munn www.funkymojo.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:216060 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
