Intel officer: CIA officers' deaths will be avenged

[Arrowhead2k1]

Source: CNN

Kabul, Afghanistan (CNN) -- An American intelligence official vowed Thursday that the United States would avenge a suspected terrorist attack on a U.S. base in Afghanistan that resulted in the deaths of seven CIA officers.

Two of those killed were contractors with private security firm Xe, formerly known as Blackwater, a former intelligence official told CNN. The CIA considers contractors to be officers.



Read more: http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/01/01/afghanistan.us.casualties/index.html

---

Vengeance? Really? Is this the best that our brightest intelligence officers could come up with? Our strategy is to adopt tit for tat tactics now?!?! Oh right, whatever they do will be a real winner.

[daleo]

1. Endless cycle of violence coming up

Would you like fries with that?

[G Gordon Libby]

2. "Coming up"?

It's been going on for centuries there!

[ima_sinnic]

3. the cavemen never stop beating their chests and "avenging" deaths in their clan

and revenge is certainly not a new rationale--it was the ENTIRE rationale for invading Iraq after 9/11. Only the weapons are modern.

[defendandprotect]

26. +1000%

[OKDem08]

4. as the old adage goes...

those who do not understand history are condemned to repeat it.. : /

[frog92969]

5. Spoken like a true terrorist

Look out widows and orphans, the CIA's about to throw another tantrum.

[scarface2004]

6. i avenge you, you avenge me

ad infinitum.

[Sancho]

7. Are they going to waterboard the guy who blew himself up?

These idiots don't get that the bomber already thinks that he is retaliating for them bombing their country, etc. Vietnam, Korea, and all of these wars only spend money and kill people. We need out of foreign wars now.

I suspect that the personalities portrayed in Avatar are pretty close to the guys drinking vodka from each other's butt and the Xe's in Afghanistan now. It is truly insane.

[atreides1]

8. That's the way to do it

Make it personal.

That attitude has worked so well in the past.

[MetaTrope]

9. Maybe CIA officials should hold their weddings in Afghanistan, that'll show those primitives

[SpiralHawk]

10. "We will obliterate the Na'Vi." - Xe

eom

[shadowknows69]

35. +1

:cry:

[Frank Cannon]

11. If any other corp was as inept as the CIA has been for the last 20+ years...

they would have been made a laughingstock and run out of business a long time ago.

[Selatius]

16. No, what would happen in today's corporate economy is they'd get a government bailout.

The consequences would be on the taxpayers' dime. Of course, the government is dominated by politicians who are in the pockets of these stooges.

[bemildred]

12. Yep, that's it, vengeance. That's the "strategy".

Worrying about "deterrence". Why do you think we are in Afghanistan in the first place? Somebody had to pay for 9/11.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bemildred]

14. The CIA wants us all dead? nt

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bluenorthwest]

18. So was your son the 'intelligence' agent who invited the

bomber onto the base as a guest, without a search? Is that intelligent? They 'discerned' that a terrorist was actually an 'asset' and that mistake killed people. Now they want revenge? For their own idiocy?
They can not even keep their own bases safe. They are the ones who bring the bombers home for lunch. As George Carlin said, military intelligence is an oxymoron.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tabasco]

30. This, coming from a person

who probably thought the "MBA President" was a genius.

[ronnie624]

31. The presence of your son in Afghanistan

is far more likely to cause terrorism than prevent it. You can't expect to invade another country with impunity. It is completely unrealistic, even if we have declared a righteous "war on terror". There is a clear link between U.S. foreign policy and the terrorist attacks directed at our country. The CIA itself acknowledges this. They call the consequences of our government's meddling "blow back".

[mbperrin]

82. This is a fine question, and early in the news coverage, it was mentioned

that the bomber was an invited guest. Been lost in the recent "terrorist attack" meme.

And I could not agree more heartily with George Carlin.

[bemildred]

19. Well, enjoy your pizza. nt

[UpInArms]

38. that was one disturbed poster

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=user_profiles&u_id=251501

[bemildred]

42. With poor language skills too.

Reminded me Sarah Palin that way, cliche piled on cliche in a way that suggests emotional slurs, but fails to make even rudimentary sense when you try to figure out what it means.

[bemildred]

43. Bush-like, in other words. nt

[UpInArms]

44. amazing that there were enough

brain cells functioning to put fingers to keyboard. I'm not certain how that person(?) found its way to this forum, but ... once again - kudos to the moderators

:hi:

[saigon68]

71. Another suicide poster

Reminiscent of recent lurkers from RimJob's site

[Selatius]

15. If the CIA studies the region's history, they'd know that these people have never given up to anyone

They'd rather fight and die than be subjects of a foreign occupation. You can't defeat a people like that. We should know it. Our nation already had its Viet Nam.

[Pavulon]

41. Neither had Japan.

Vietnam was a proxy war with the USSR. Not a real comparison.

Now the question here is what do we want as an outcome. We have no use for anything physically in Afghanistan. It is and will be a shithole until the end of time.

The focus is people (it should be) who are directing attacks towards us interests. Those people should be the target, no matter where they are. Except in the US they are military targets and should be treated accordingly.

Killing goat herders with AKs is pointless. Killing the people who fund, recruit, train, and supply them is where the war is.

[Tansy_Gold]

65. Unfortunately. . . . .

"Killing the people who fund, recruit, train, and supply them is where the war is" essentially means the war is here. The US has funded, trained, and supplied Afghan fighters for almost three decades. Much of that is and always has been turned right back on us. And as for recruiting, well, we just did a great job again with this statement of seeking revenge.

This whole war has been a clusterfuck from day one, and I don't see it ever getting any better.




Tansy Gold

[conspirator]

72. Japan was solved with nukes, not on the ground. Do you plan do nuke Afghanistan?

The US army is beatable in guerrila war, as is any army.

[Pavulon]

75. No Japan was destroyed with strategic bombing

and would have been destroyed without nukes by American and Russian ground forces. The was is not with Afghani's they are kleenexes, the war is with the money and logistics folks in Al -q.

[No Elephants]

79. Proxy war with USSR. Proxy war with Bin Laden/Al Qaida.

"Those people should be the target, no matter where they are."


Agreed.

[mbperrin]

86. Might want to check the pipeline construction announced in the area

http://www.allbusiness.com/mining/support-activities-mining-support-oil/447171-1.html

You'll find the Central Asia Gas Pipeline Ltd, a consortium led by Unocal, spending several billion dollars in 2005 for a Turkemenistan to Afghanistan to Pakistan pipeline.

Unocal, Unocal? Where have we heard that name before? Oh, yeah, some guy named Hamid Karzai was a consultant to them in Afghanistan. Wonder what he's doing these days?

[No Elephants]

78. We did,. But then we said, "Thank you, Sir. May I have another?"

[fascisthunter]

94. A Merc I Met Stated Something SImilar

he told me we all had no idea how tough Afghanis are and anyone who thinks our military can beat them into submission is a fool. I believe him....

[stray cat]

20. if you bothered reading it in context Vengeance = competence; Best revenge is performing well!

[bemildred]

24. Seems arguable.

He says "successful, aggressive counter-terrorism operations", or something like that, that could mean a lot of things. But your point is well taken, he is not making direct threats.

[ronnie624]

37. Yeah, but we know what they really mean, don't we? n/t

[No Elephants]

80. The link did not work for me, but the CIA should not be making announcements of this kind,

no matter how you interpret what they are saying. That's not their job or within their authority.

[stray cat]

21. if you bothered reading it in context Vengeance = competence; Best revenge is performing well!

But DU is as accurate as free republic so it was only a matter of time

[Crowman1979]

22. Let me guess, their gonna burn down a village and say that Al-Qaeda operatives were there.

Or do some other act that would normally be considered a war crime. Hell, it worked in Central America back in the 80's. :sarcasm:

[UpInArms]

23. "The CIA considers contractors to be officers."

now that is truly a stupid policy.

These people are complete idiots and morans and I did not mistype that word.

Avenge? What in the hell do they think they are, Talibanis?

Avenge - revenge -

their cycle of violence has made our world much less safe.

Continuing these foreign wars is the most idiotic policy that Obama has adopted.

Bring everyone home now - stop spending lives and treasure on these mis-adventures.

There will be nothing to "win" and the losses have been piling up for years.

[IndianaGreen]

34. They are mercenaries--soldiers for profit.

They are not even protected persons under international law.

Truman was right about the CIA being only in intelligence gathering, and not in paramilitary operations.

[boppers]

56. "not even protected persons"?

You're defending the bush principle of "unlawful combatants" having less rights than soldiers or civilians?

[IndianaGreen]

59. International does not protect mercenaries, for good reason

Europeans have used mercenaries in Africa to protect their financial interests.

[boppers]

61. Uhm, CIA folks are usually protected under Geneva Protocol I, article 47.

Mercenaries are *very* specifically defined, as follows:
----
Art 47. Mercenaries

1. A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war.
2. A mercenary is any person who:

(a) is especially recruited locally or abroad in order to fight in an armed conflict;
(b) does, in fact, take a direct part in the hostilities;
(c) is motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a Party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party;
(d) is neither a national of a Party to the conflict nor a resident of territory controlled by a Party to the conflict;
(e) is not a member of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict; and
(f) has not been sent by a State which is not a Party to the conflict on official duty as a member of its armed forces.
----

They're likely protected under (d).

[No Elephants]

76. All of Section 2, including subsection (d), is simply the definition of what a mercenary is.

Definitions do not protect. They simply define.

The operative section of the material that you quoted is Section 1:

1. A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war.


Do you mean that the Blackwater employees do not fall within the definition of a mercenary?


It all gets very murky because, theoretically, we are not at war with Afghanistan. Afghanistan is our ally. (Yes,I know-- wink, wink, but technically it is our ally.) And we are not at war with Al Qaida, although we are trying to "capture" them, wherever they may be located at the time.

So, we need a slew of other definitions, like what is a "conflict" and who is a "Party to a conflict."

[boppers]

96. Blackwater employees, who are citizens of nations party to the conflict, could qualify as non-merc..

I agree that hashing out "conflict" and "Party to a conflict" would also need hashing out, but my point is that it's not as simple as saying that Blackwater employees aren't protected, because it's an arguable point.

[bkohatlanta]

100. If everyone who violates the Geneva and Hague Conventions were prosecuted: then Fewer War Crimes.

I remember General Rios Montt took over Guatemala as the head of a Christian Fundamentalist Army in the 1980's. His army and death squads went through the country murdering hundreds of thousands. He is remembered most for practically exterminating Catholic Mayan Indians. One particular tactic was to wipe out Mayan villages and give his death squads the land. Most Mayans were shot. For fun, apparently, his soldiers would catch Mayan children from 5-12 and behead them. He was a close friend of Ronald Reagan, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell. Guatemalans are fighting to have him tried in the Hague(per the Geneva and Hague Conventions against War Crimes, Atrocities and Crimes Against Humanity). These leaders of Guatemala say that all their efforts have been thwarted by American Republicans(remember the Coup in Honduras?) and American Televangelists.
There is no such thing as Good Evil, All Evil is EVIL!

[mbperrin]

87. Losses HAVE been piling up for years, except for the war profiteers -

those famous have-mores.

They will continue to get theirs, no matter how many deaths of US citizens it takes!

Fuckers. I wish I did believe in a gawd and then they might get what they really have coming. Evidence all points to the contrary, however.

[The abyss]

25. Heinrich Himmler ordered

the entire village of Lidice destroyed after SS officer Heydrich was killed by members of the Czech resistance and allied commandos.

[No Elephants]

77. That really has nothing to do with this.

Apparently, Himmler had authority to order the village destroyed. The CIA does not have authority to retaliate on behalf of the U.S. Also, SS Officer Heydrich was, I presume, a member of the German government. Blackwater's employees, regardless of what the CIA may "consider them" are employees of an independent contractor, and not a very savory one, either. Finally, we are not Nazis.

[City Lights]

28. How utterly predictable!

x(

I want off this merry-go-round! It's making me :puke:

[pjt7]

29. The Afghans are still the freedom fighters

eom.

[OregonBlue]

32. So now we have "for profit" officers? How is that possible?

[azul]

57. Because we aim to make war-profiteers above the law.

Some hot-shot lawyer will convince some genius judge that mercenary war-mongering is critically involved in the war effort, and bingo, the old laws simply cannot apply to them at all, in the new war dementia.

Plus da bling on der uniform in lieu of medals.

[IndianaGreen]

33. We can't come anywhere near the Afghans when it comes to blood feuds

Beware of what you wish for, dumbass!

[sattahipdeep]

36. Panetta said Contract extended.

CIA Director Leon Panetta said the names of the agents would not be released "due to the sensitivity of their mission."


Erik Prince

This one single fucking guy did more to create anti-american hatred in the world than any other person INCLUDING BUSH AND CHENEY, it is ENTIRELY THIS ONE GUY and 4 of his Blackwater contractors who did something so horrendous in Fallujah that when they got caught they were torn limb from limb, burned
and hung form the bridge. Sparking the massive insurgency that was pretty much non-existent at that point. Nothing like that happened before or after.

Urbina's ruling does not say whether the shooting was proper, only that the government improperly used evidence to build the case.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2010/01/201011101136634433.html



People chant anti-American slogans and burn an effigy of U.S. President Barack Obama on the same day a suicide bomber killed seven on a U.S. base.

US-funded mercenaries are above all systems of law--US and international?

[LiberalFighter]

39. Absolutely no sympathy for the two contractors!!

No sympathy for the unnamed intelligence official. He should be water boarded.

Really no sympathy for this misfortune considering the CIA was on the base for what purpose? If they were gathering intelligence they failed miserably at their job. If they were there for black ops did they think there wouldn't be any repercussions in Afghanistan? And think that they wouldn't be spotted by the natives?

How the hell did this happen on the base? Who was running security? Xe (Blackwater)?

[Pavulon]

40. You have a job right? Their job is to follow orders from the people we elected

that includes gathering intelligence, dealing with people, and in some cases killing them. I doubt they give a fuck about your sympathy but the reality is stark. These operations have been run by the CIA and others since the mid 30's. EVERY president has used them to carry out the interests of the united states. Every nation has their equivalent.

Remember YOU elected the people who ORDER these actions, and the people who FUND it. So directing any bullshit at people other than your elected officials shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the american system.

[LiberalFighter]

45. I stand by my statements!

[Pavulon]

50. Yep, easy to make a life and death call

from whatever comfortable spot you are wrapped in a insular blanked of ignorance. You voted for it, you got it.

[Flaneur]

46. People choose to work for the CIA. They could get jobs elsewhere.

Tough shit, guys.

[Pavulon]

49. People need to do the job.

Bet hey whatever does it for ya. Maybe they like their jobs.

[Flaneur]

51. No, people DO NOT need to do that job. That's the fuckin gproblem.

I hope they liked their jobs. They just died for them. If your job is to go half-way round the world and kill people, you deserve a fucking bomb in your gym.

[Pavulon]

52. That was my job, some one had to to do it. Please stop killing bosnians

and dont start world war 3 did not work. We tried that first. Begging, appeasing, and paying off assholes only go so far. When that path stops people get shot and blown up. So IFOR/KFOR was worth my time (sure sucked then) and worth the damage inflicted. No more genocide, no regional shooting war with leftovers of the warsaw pact.

SO please stop blowing up people in bali, african embassies, trains in spain, busses in london, and a whole shitload of people did not work. So now we are killing people. What is the better option??? Circus seal routine will not work here.

The trick is killing the right people. Those would be money men, recruiters (anywhere but in the US), and logistics guys. All are fair game.

That is the reality of the world. Just like the sun rises in the east, no other way. Since dawn of time.

Clarity: Was deployed NC Army National Guard Combat Engineer, NOT CIA.

[Fumesucker]

58. We were killing people around the world a long time before the events you mention..

African embassies and so forth..

So your rationale does not really hold water, if killing people kept these things from happening they wouldn't have happened in the first place since we were already killing people and had been doing so for many decades.

[Pavulon]

63. Greece is not part of the warsaw pact, the Hilton in Hanoi takes AMEX

and the USSR is gone. We have to keep ahead of the curve. That is the hard part.

[Fumesucker]

67. The dude on the big PA said to avoid the brown acid, man..

Apparently you weren't listening though.. :evilgrin:

[ronnie624]

68. I think I get it.

- The U.S. is the arbiter of the world.
- The U.S. government is the only institution possessing the right to kill and destroy (unless we grant that right to other countries like the UK or Canada).
- The U.S. has an inherent right to control the earth's resources and execute its strategic goals by force.
- The will of the U.S. government can only be good by definition, and anyone who resists is a terrorist.
- All of the above is true because there's "no other way".

Thanks Pav!

[Hardrada]

69. How do you know who elected these war criminals?

Clairvoyant or something?

[bonniebee]

91. I agree.

[truth2power]

47. "Avenge?" So if we avenge the deaths of our people, it's acceptable...

but if they avenge the killing of their women and children by some guy controlling a drone from halfway around the world, well, they must be filthy terrorists.

Umm...I think I get it.

[mbperrin]

89. Ahh, thank gawd for clarity! Class, your homework assignment is to

read "The White Man's Burden" for tomorrow.

(One of the simplest ways for my students to understand how invaders are viewed was to show them that old movie "Red Dawn." It took very little for them to see how an indigenous force could defeat any invading force and why.)

[truth2power]

92. I'm probably the only person in the world who didn't see "Red Dawn"..

I should probably rent it.

[mbperrin]

93. You really should. My kids first always think it's about Americans

kick ass! Yeah!

Then just have them substitute any country for the US and any other country for the invaders and see what that movie would be. Yep, just the same.

Very useful in world history, economics and other social studies courses.

[Doctor_J]

48. that's the same thing THEIR terrorists are saying about the ME bombings

they keep each other in fresh martyrs.

[Politicub]

53. And CIA operatives' lives are more important than soldiers' lives because???

Thousands of US service members have gotten killed from these immoral wars, and yet a handful of CIA operatives die and now the gov't is seeking "vengeance?"

:eyes:

[daleo]

54. CIA agents are drawn from the well educated middle and upper classes

Soldiers are drawn from the less well educated lower and working classes, generally speaking. That may account for the difference right there.

I think a lot of very rich people died in the WTC, and that partly accounts for the level of response to the attack. Had the buildings been high rise tenements in Brooklyn, the response would have been much less vigorous, in my opinion.

[IndianaGreen]

60. Bingo! This was particularly true in the 1950s, CIA was full of Skull & Bones

people. Soldiers come from the working class while CIA comes from Ivy League schools.

[bonniebee]

73. One of the CIA agents was my husband's nephew.

He was a soldier before he was a CIA agent. He was a Navy seal. He had been to Iraq
several times.

[No Elephants]

83. Sorry for your loss, but an employee of Blackwater is not a CIA agent.

Blackwater is an independent contractor, not part of the U.S. government and not an agent of the U.S. government. Blackwater's employees are operatives of Blackwater.

[No Elephants]

81. Blackwater employees are not CIA operatives. The fact that the CIA considers them to be means zero.

[Lorien]

55. Um, somebody should inform that pitiful excuse for a human that THEY

have more reasons for "vengence" than we do. However, that said "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind".

[NeoConsSuck]

62. Will we get to see

those cool phosphorous bombs like we used in Fallujah the last time Blackwater cowboys met their maker?

[Pavulon]

64. I always wondered why they did not ring falluja

with mechanized units and give the men 24 hours to surrender, after that reduce it with b52's, mlrs, and 105. That is the result the world thinks was delivered, when in fact we actually sent infantry in to a city to fight block to block. I know men who watched Iraqi division sized forces destroyed in GW1, there was nothing stopping a strategic bombing mission in falluja. Any residents there at the time who did not evac would be very happy we did not do that.

Hopefully we will not see some money man in Riyadh or yemen who turns up face down. That is the center of gravity here, not stacking bodies.

[Name removed]

66. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The abyss]

95. You would have destroyed an entire city with strategic bombers

in order to avenge some blackwater mercs?

How would “ringing” Falluja with steel and demanding a 24-hour surrender be any different than what the Nazis offered to the populace of the Warsaw ghetto?

You are talking about collective punishment. A clearly defined war crime.

[Kablooie]

70. Avenge? We aren't supposed to avenge. Our system is supposed to bring legal justice. Not revenge!

Whether it does or not is an ongoing debate but we are not supposed to avenge.

(And what about the poor Iraqis that get no justice from our system.?)

[No Elephants]

85. Ah, yes. Dummya did say we were in Iraq to bring them democracy and the rule of law.

I wonder if we'll ever get them back.

[No Elephants]

74. Government employees publicly vowing to avenge the deaths of Blackwater thugs?

Thanks for putting us at greater risk, assholes.

How about leaving pronouncements about U.S. foreign policy to the President and the State Department?

I am calling my Senators and Rep.

[tom_paine]

84. LOL. Looks like hundreds, perhaps thousands of innocent civilians are going to die in this revenge.

The Bush-CIA has learned so well from it's Nazi counterparts about the importance of good PR (which the Nazis failed to use).

I mean, they could just pick out a seven hundred civilians and execute them in a blatant 100-1 ratio, like the Nazis did.

But that would be bad PR and marketing, it would cause negative connotations in the target audience and therefore must be eschewed for more subtle startegy.

Hitler and all his henchmen are smiling quite broadly down in hell these days, and probably have been since their Bush Allies took over Americcca for good in 2000 (you think Obama runs our military and law enforcement? yeah, right...)

[Solly Mack]

88. and in "good faith", no doubt

[hedgehog]

90. Accoding to Charlie Wilson's War, our involvement in Afghanistan

was revenge on the Soviets for their backing of the Viet Cong!

[primavera]

97. They're going to avenge themselves on a dead guy. Brilliant, just brilliant. - n/t

[Sultana]

98. Oh, lord

:eyes:

Here we again.. Suspected terrorist, wasn't the suicide bomber working with CIA?

[ProgressIn2008]

99. "Avenged"? Damn, can we get some adults in the house? What is this, a cheap video game? nt