With friends like these....

[phillyd2]

In case you guys missed this story.

Moscow spies tipped Saddam on U.S. war plan
By Rowan Scarborough
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
March 25, 2006

Moscow had informants inside U.S. Central Command whose information on the March 2003 invasion of Iraq was relayed to dictator Saddam Hussein days before American troops ousted him from power, according to a Defense Department history released yesterday.

And, as U.S. troops encircled Baghdad in April, Russia's ambassador fed information from Moscow's intelligence service to Saddam's regime regarding U.S. troop movements.

The new disclosures show that Moscow was working against the Bush administration in private, as it opposed in public the U.S. desire for a United Nations Security Council resolution explicitly authorizing the invasion.

The report was produced in book form by U.S. Forces Command, which studies "lessons learned" in military operations. This document, however, focused not on American units, but on how Saddam, his regime and military prepared for the March 19, 2003, attack and tried to blunt it. Titled "Iraqi Perspective Project: A View of Operation Iraqi Freedom From Saddam's Senior Leadership," it is based largely on postwar interviews and seized documents. It is in one of those documents that the Iraqis told of spies inside U.S. Central Command, which planned and executed the invasion.

"The information that the Russians have collected from their sources inside the American Central Command in Doha [Qatar] is that the United States is convinced that occupying Iraqi cities are impossible, and that they have changed their tactic," states the Iraq intelligence report. Another part states, "Jordan had accepted the American 4th Mechanized Infantry Division."

Although U.S. forces did avoid occupying towns and cities on the march to Baghdad, they did enter Tikrit, Mosul and other large cities. But as for Jordan, the 4th Infantry Division never docked there, instead traveling by sea to Kuwait.

The Forces Command report offered no information on whether Central Command ever identified and purged the spies.

The report also tells of a seized memorandum from Iraqi's Foreign Ministry. The memo said Russia's ambassador was relaying intelligence reports to Saddam aides, including one memo that stated that allied forces would not enter Baghdad until the 4th Infantry Division arrived. That turned out to be false.

In other report findings:

• The regime planned to restart production of weapons of mass destruction. It continued to hide scientists from U.N. inspectors right up to the time U.N. inspectors left and the war began.

A seized Dec. 15, 2002, memo, written by an Iraqi intelligence agent posing as a U.N. escort, states, "Inside Bader WMD inspection site, there are Russian and Turkish scientists. When we visited the site, they were forced to hide from inspectors' eyes."

And, Saddam continued to tell his commanders he still had such weapons. "For him, there were real dividends to be gained by letting his enemies believe he possessed WMD, whether it was true or not," the report said.

•The quickly assembled air strike on one of Saddam's residences, Dora Farms, in pre-dawn March 19, 2003, never had a chance of succeeding. Saddam had not stayed there since 1995.

•There was no evidence that Saddam or his top aides planned the insurgency, now in its fourth year; in fact, Saddam was sure the Americans would never advance on Baghdad.

"There were no national plans to transition to a guerrilla war in the event of military defeat," the report states.

This fact helps explain why commanders did not predict, nor plan for, the robust insurgency and al Qaeda terrorists now spreading violence.

Saddam's misguided belief that he would stay in power in 2003 was fed by the support he got from France and Russia, his top aide, Tariq Aziz, told U.S. investigators.

"France and Russia each secure millions of dollars worth of trade and service contracts in Iraq, with the implied understanding that their political posture with regard to sanctions on Iraq would be pro-Iraqi," Mr. Aziz said. "In addition, the French wanted sanctions lifted to safeguard their trade and service contracts in Iraq."

[JamesBrown]

Goes to show why we still can't trust Russia. As for France....they're having trouble with civil unrest and Arnold Schwartzenager governs a bigger economy than they do...so who cares?

[Joe Demko]

Nations don't have friends. Nations have alliances that last so long as they are mutually advantageous. The Russians and French are no more, or less, treacherous than anybody else. Their leaders are looking out for what they perceive to be their national interests; the same as our own leaders do.

[The Drew]

The real story of the Opposition to the Iraq war is rooted in the oil for food scandal where people in france and russia and in the UN made billions off of the Saddam regime... Nobody wants to kill the cash cow...

[klpolk3]

You should email this to Bill O'Reilly.

[ChamberedRound]

Nations don't have friends. Nations have alliances that last so long as they are mutually advantageous. The Russians and French are no more, or less, treacherous than anybody else. Their leaders are looking out for what they perceive to be their national interests; the same as our own leaders do.

I agree with this statement, although there's another related debate to be had here. Why is it OK for other nations to be worried about their national interests, but the US:

- is obligated to "be the better nation" and babysit the world, forgoing our own interests in many cases
- gets roasted in world opinion when we, on rare occasion, worry about our own national interests

Many nations of the world, especially the European nations, always make the assumption that the US will deal with every problem presented. Then, when we address it, we're criticized for HOW we addressed it. IMHO, if anyone's going to complain/criticize, then they shouldn't have waited for someone else to deal with it.

How many more times does "peace at any price" have to fail before the nations of the world realize that capitulation doesn't protect anyone's interests, or keep one free and safe? It only buys time to prepare for the worst. Vigilance, and the willingness to ACT, is what's needed.

Sorry, rant over. Although I know the US isn't perfect in it's foreign affairs, sometimes it seems we're overly criticized for doing what no one else is willing to do.

[LorDiego01]

ChamberedRound, I always agree with your viewpoints eye to eye, but not this time

I agree with this statement, although there's another related debate to be had here. Why is it OK for other nations to be worried about their national interests, but the US:

- is obligated to "be the better nation" and babysit the world, forgoing our own interests in many cases

You are frigging kidding right?? The US sets up puppet regimes in order to further its own interests, when the general world oppinion is against it. These puppets regimes sometimes lose control, and thats where trouble beings.
See, Nicaragua, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Osama, and the list goes on and on and on...

- gets roasted in world opinion when we, on rare occasion, worry about our own national interests
Read above comment


Many nations of the world, especially the European nations, always make the assumption that the US will deal with every problem presented. Then, when we address it, we're criticized for HOW we addressed it. IMHO, if anyone's going to complain/criticize, then they shouldn't have waited for someone else to deal with it.
Read comment above


Sorry, rant over. Although I know the US isn't perfect in it's foreign affairs, sometimes it seems we're overly criticized for doing what no one else is willing to do.
Terrorism is mostly a direct result of US Foreign Policy. The US is often critized for doing what nobody else wants them to do, and killing a boatload of innocent people in the process. Just because the media doesnt report it, doesnt mean it doesnt exist. Can you say unilateral and pre-emtive strikes against soverign nations??

Chambered round, if you can back anything you've said, I'll take you on.
Other than that, your post was full of propaganda that your government brainwashes you with since kindergarden.

For example, do you honestly belive "they" hate you for your freedoms?
Do you honestly belive we are there to "liberate" the Iraqi people?
Is it not a fact that Saddam and Osama were trained and funded by US interests, FOR US interests..
How can you say "The Land of the Free", when reporters are being jailed for not dilvuging their resources, when whistlblowers are being hunted down, when we have "Designated Free Speech Zones" and "permits to protest"?
Can you say Patriot Act?
Do you know that the US ranks 41st against all other countries for Freedom of Press?
Secret jails? Military tribunals???
Torture??
Echelon?
NSA Wiretaps?

Again, dont get me wrong, I love this country and have chosen to spend the rest of my life here amongst you people. This country has an incredible foundation (The Constitution), but the government has been hijacked by neo-facists and wrapped around the flag they are selling you the destruction of the Constitution as a protection of your freedoms.

[ChamberedRound]

ChamberedRound, I always agree with your viewpoints eye to eye, but not this time


Chambered round, if you can back anything you've said, I'll take you on.
Other than that, your post was full of propaganda that your government brainwashes you with since kindergarden.

For example, do you honestly belive "they" hate you for your freedoms?
Do you honestly belive we are there to "liberate" the Iraqi people?
Is it not a fact that Saddam and Osama were trained and funded by US interests, FOR US interests..
How can you say "The Land of the Free", when reporters are being jailed for not dilvuging their resources, when whistlblowers are being hunted down, when we have "Designated Free Speech Zones" and "permits to protest"?
Can you say Patriot Act?
Do you know that the US ranks 41st against all other countries for Freedom of Press?
Secret jails? Military tribunals???
Torture??
Echelon?
NSA Wiretaps?

Again, dont get me wrong, I love this country and have chosen to spend the rest of my life here amongst you people. This country has an incredible foundation (The Constitution), but the government has been hijacked by neo-facists and wrapped around the flag they are selling you the destruction of the Constitution as a protection of your freedoms.

I can't back it, that's why I qualified it as a rant.

I won't retract on the issue surrounding US involvement; when an issue comes to a head globally, the US is almost always expected to act, more so than any other country in the world.

However, I WILL admit that this post is a little off-base, and came more from a place of emotion than fact. From what little I know, I agree the US has been far from always acting honest and forthright. That my country's actions are demanded for "cleaning up our mess" due to other, less publicized and less correct actions taken by the US (like puppet regimes and the like), I can't argue for lack of proof, and probably would be wrong anyway.

With that said, I ask you not to put words in my mouth either. I never mentioned the US being the "Land of the Free". When talking about "they", as you put it, I didn't use the word HATE, I used the word CRITICIZED. I never commented on what foreign nations, or their people, believe on the subject of US freedom, so don't question me as if I did. I also never commented at all on the "liberation", or lack thereof, of the Iraqi people, or my related beliefs on the issue, so again don't question me as if I did.

I appreciate the comments and perspective, Diego, on an admittedly less-than-stellar post.

[LorDiego01]

With that said, I ask you not to put words in my mouth either..

But isnt that the fun of debating??

All jokes aside, I wasnt trying to put words on your mouth, just broaden up the horizon of the thread, but now realize that might be considered highjacking the thread.
ANd when I meant "you", I didnt mean, "you" in particular CR, I meant people who have that doublethink mindset without realising it.