CIA is undermining British war effort, say military chiefs

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by whitecity, Dec 10, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Another example of the terms of our 'special relationship' within the coalition?

    Do 'we' have any influence in the decision making process??
  2. Another dubious story using invisible people. How can we check the verasity of this story, how can we know this isn't just another lying journalist making things up.

    The only name of a source given is that of General Jones who "let it be known" ...... but this is only true if You believe the sources that said he is letting it be known.

    This may be true but if it cannot be verified then it is just gossip
  3. Which part of the story do you find "dubious";

    1. that Mohammed Daud was the previous governor of Helmand,
    2. that Mohammed Daud is no longer governor of Helmand,
    3. that he was dismissed by Hamid Karzai,
    4. that Hamid Karzai was influenced/pressurised by US (CIA) elements into this decision,
    5. that the British military is not 'happy' with this, or
    6. that the British military have expressed their concerns off the record to the media - a process of disseminating contentious 'news' that they learned from their political masters.


  4. Thought Your ability to disseminate information from the written word was better than that Merkator.

    The answer, of course, is none of the above but rather :-

    7. That Fox actually spoke to any British Intelligence sources
  5. I consider this to be covered by my option 6.

    I notice you don't question the accuracy of the 'news', just the manner in which it has reached the public domain.
  6. I question the validity of the actuality when there is no evidence to support the supposition. Except the word of a journalist.

    And if You think that point six has the same meaning as point seven then You need to brush up on Your English Language skills
  7. I'm very disappointed Sven. You are now starting to adopt the 'debating' tactics of the GOP blogging wibble-mongers: move the debate onto some infinitely miniscule, irrelevant and tangental issue in order to try to discredit the main argument.

    The title of the Independent's piece is, "CIA is undermining British war effort, say military chiefs." Note the word military.

    The first line of the article says, "British intelligence officers and military commanders have accused the US of undermining British policies in Iraq and Afghanistan, after the sacking of a key British ally in the Afghan province of Helmand." The word intelligence does not appear again.

    Fox refers to his source(s) as, "British" (x1), "the official" (x1) and "diplomatic" (x2). He never refers to his source as being a "British Intelligence source" as you expicitly implied. However, he does also refer to a "confidential assessment of the situation in Iraq" with the implicit understanding that this is a military report.

    I deliberately chose not to write a 1,000 word rebuttal that crossed every t and dotted every i, and thought it quite sufficiant to word my point 6 as I did to save time and effort.

    The minor picture is, has Fox has received off the record briefings from individuals who include, but are not limited to, military officers in Afghanistan (and Iraq). Whether one of those sources happens to be a "British Intelligence source" is infinitely miniscule, irrelevant and a tangental issue.

    The big picture is, did the US (CIA) brief/demand Karzai to dismiss Daud against British wishes?
  8. What does the M in MI6 stand for?

    My point stands, if Fox has evidence then he should produce it - innuendo and tittle tattle is not good enough
  9. Hi Cnut: MI6 does not actually exist outside of fiction novels.

    Are you perhaps refering to the Secret Service who recruit most of their personnel direct from university?
  10. What is the official site of the Secret INTELLIGENCE Service???

    Here's a clue
  11. So why did you call them MI6?

    Having met several members of the Service I normally drop the I, and should drop the first S as well: most are neither intelligent (or any good at gathering intelligence) and very often are so bleeding obvious about what they are.

    From the ones I have met I have arrived at the conclusion that better 'intelligence' would be gained from simply reading the local papers and chatting to people in the local pub.


    PS. You are still a party-line-towing cnut.
  12. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator


    A question.

    Is it your self appointed role on this site to act as the "spin master" for our beloved Bliar on this site, to distance Labour from any criticism, including that implied, found here?

    You sound like a political lobbyist.

    Please get a slightly more balanced and realistic view - I am getting a bit bored of your crap.
  13. You obviously didn't go to the website -

  15. ITC

    Why, bacause I question the journalistic qualities of this report, should I be representing the government. The report isn't even slagging off the government but the septics. Perhaps I'm a CIA lobbyist


    How about if You give me a pointer as to the validity of the article, perhaps vouch that the information is correct. What's that - You can't do that?? No, and the way it is written, the only people who can are the sources - if they exist, and the reporter who isn't going to