Watch CBS Videos Online

Interesting information but keep in mind, Woodward is pushing his new book, The War Within.

Found by zefyr on Cage Match.




  1. eyeofthetiger says:

    What we need is a Maverick or a hockey mom who knows how to handle librarians to win this war.

  2. bobbo says:

    This stuff along with the original decision to invade Iraq was so completely and obvious a product of the Whitehouses ill conceived neo-con view of the world, that of using military power before exhausting other available alternatives, that this kind of reporting is stale as I hear it for the first time.

    Really–wasn’t it all obvious as it went down that Bushie boy was telling us a story?

    WMD in Iraq?–No. A STORY.
    Invade Iraq as last resort?–No. A STORY.
    Bad Intelligence?–No. A STORY.
    Surge is Working?–No. A STORY.

    And the Rovian playbook remains open with McCain following it 95% of the time.

  3. hhopper says:

    A STORY = LIE

  4. Paddy-O says:

    #2 “And the Rovian playbook remains open with McCain following it 95% of the time.”

    I know! Can you imagine why the Dems continue to send Iraq war funding bills to the Pres to sign and spend?

  5. bobbo says:

    #3–hopper==yes a lie indeed. Morning Joe was discussing aspects of this last week with Joe and Buchannan saying it was an intelligence failure and the chick challenged them on that and they did give a longer explanation to which she responded “I don’t see any difference.” So, yea–a lie in my book.

    #4–Paddy–Both parties in Congress “support the troops” or are chickenshit as hell of being accused of not doing so. They call it being astute political players, but in fact its just chickenshit.

  6. roemun says:

    Woodward has no credibility. He always cites unnamed sources, and even then they usually hedge their bets. This is a consistent truth about all of his “exposes”.
    This guy was made famous because of his “investigative” reporting. WTF, he had an FBI leaker giving him the dope. Prett tough investigating.

  7. Paddy-O says:

    #5 “Both parties in Congress “support the troops” or are chickenshit as hell of being accused of not doing so. They call it being astute political players, but in fact its just chickenshit.”

    Right, but I like you (I assume) voted the Dems into congress to end the war. They have since lost my support (vote & financial) for lying to me. You’d think they’d be more afraid of that…

  8. bobbo says:

    #7–Paddy: “You’d think they’d be more afraid of that…”==well, there just aren’t enough of us voting all the incumbents out.

    There needs to be some more effective way to register disgust than voting for a third party candidate? Withholding money is a good start, but no where near sufficient. So, the “story” continues.

  9. JimD says:

    Well, roemun, Woodward was able to get the ball rolling that brought down Richard “I am not a CROOK !!!” Nixon – who in fact, WAS A CROOK – FOR OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE, SUBBORNED PURJURY, AND CONSPIRED IN THE WATERGATE COVER-UP !!!

  10. Jopa says:

    This secret weapons stuff is very interesting.

    If they are able to target individuals it should be one of the following:
    1. DNA identification from afar – no, I don’t know how a crazy idea like this works.
    2. Some sort of active camo, that enables them to spy without being spotted.
    3. A breakthrough in the area of encryption / decryption methods. This CAN be achieved through quantum computing, if they have a full fledged working quantum computer and I am not talking about “it works in the lab” but about the real deal – a quantum super computer. A machine like that can decrypt ANY type of encryption almost in real time. If you can listen in on the communications of your enemies you win. If you know who is talking you might be able to figure out where he is in real time. Then it is just a matter of sending in the right type of weapon platform to take him out…

    “Hello?! Ahmed?”

    “Yes… who is that?”

    BOOM.

    I think that number 3 is the most plausible option.

  11. jescott418 says:

    What is scary is that McCain seems to be the maverick that Bush is. He even says he is his own man. Sticks to his guns. After losing over 4,000
    men and woman in Iraq. I don’t want another president who will not listen to his military and cabinet leaders and decides his own direction.
    Frankly, I am still confused as too how we can justify going into Iraq to liberate a country? I thought the original reason was to stop the weapons of mass destruction. Now we call it the liberation of Iraq.
    It is sad to here about all these solders who lived through one or even two tours only to be killed on their 3rd or 4th tour.
    We truly do not know how much the Iraq war has stressed ourselves, our country and our military.

  12. Jägermeister says:

    He missed out on that they’re paying the insurgents to be nice guys.

  13. chuck says:

    Didn’t Obama just recently admit that the surge worked beyond anyone’s expectations?

    Now Woodward is saying that it was all the Whitehouse’s idea and the generals didn’t think it would work.

    So everyone was wrong about the surge? Except Bush?

    I guess Bush is a genius.

  14. Improbus says:

    Jägermeister is correct. The surge didn’t work. Paying off the insurgents did. When we stop paying them watch the civil war restart. We should cut our losses and leave or raise the country to the ground and stay. Running an Empire is dirty nasty work. Are we up to it?

  15. GetSmart says:

    The only reason the surge worked at all was that Iraqi ethnic cleansing had already done most of the heavy lifting beforehand. Everyone who had been relocated to Kurdish territory under Saddam (Mainly Shiites)knew that the Kurds wanted them the hell out of Dodge, and got the hell out. They knew what awaited them if they stayed. The majority of violence was Shiite/Sunni, with a large portion of the Sunni population now as refugees in Jordan, Syria and others. The rest has been the carving out of territorial enclaves inside of Iraq for the folks who couldn’t afford to leave. No one wants to talk about this because it’s kind of embarrassing to have had “Ethnic Cleansing” going on as a result of W’s idiot invasion of the country.

  16. #15 – Imp

    >>The surge didn’t work. Paying off the
    >>insurgents did.

    That’s the whole story. It’s amazing what money can do. As long as it’s somebody else’s.

    Oh. Wait. It’s ours.

  17. bobbo says:

    #14–Chuck==you ask: “Didn’t Obama just recently admit that the surge worked beyond anyone’s expectations?”

    and the answer is NO.

    From memory, Obama said the surge had successes beyond expectations but that it had not worked.

    Perhaps too subtle a distinction for a partisan or a Bushie to recognize, but there you have it.

  18. Carcarius says:

    Again, we can simply vote for a third party. Pick someone, anyone other than the big 2. I don’t care how that only ends up helping one of the two big parties, when they both suck does it really matter?

  19. hhopper says:

    Don’t waste your vote on someone who has no chance of winning. Vote for the person whom you think will screw up this country the least.

  20. Mr. Fusion says:

    As much as this sounds silly, Hopper’s comment in #20 is correct. Vote for the least of the evils.

    Back in March I emailed my Congressman. I told him I wanted us out of Iraq and to put more troops into Afghanistan and get bin Laden. He (or a staffer more likely) replied about six weeks later saying he will always support the troops. I guess he doesn’t understand that the best support for them would be to bring them home.

  21. hhopper says:

    Amen. We’ve done our job over there. Saddam is history. We need to get out and let them have their civil war or whatever. ‘Democracy’ is not the way for Muslims.

  22. Greg Allen says:

    Bush is such a shameless liar.

    All the time he was claiming to be listening to the generals in Iraq, he was letting a right wing ideologue call the shots. AND TOTALLY IGNORING THE MILITARY.

    If you want more of this hubris, vote for McCain/Palin.

  23. QB says:

    Ahem, Afghanistan?

  24. Churro says:

    As far as the secret technology goes – it sounds like it might be fly-on-the-wall micro-robotics containing listening devices and transmitters. There are examples of this sort of tech in academia but I suspect that the NSA, CIA, or other government agency has a strong research and development program in this area. If not robotic flying bugs then active, nano to micro, solar-powered listening dust… just sprinkle on someone or something and voila! Of course, if they’re using such technology to spy on Maliki then they’re likely using to spy on political opponents here at home (in addition to the warantless wiretaps, of course).

  25. scottmace says:

    The tech stuff Woodward is so cagey about in the 60 Minutes interview was pretty much spelled out in a November 2007 Wired story:

    http://www.wired.com/politics/security/magazine/15-12/ff_futurewar


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 12896 access attempts in the last 7 days.