Rumsfeld's war-on-terror memo

October 16, 2003

TO: Gen. Dick Myers
Paul Wolfowitz
Gen. Pete Pace
Doug Feith

FROM: Donald Rumsfeld

SUBJECT: Global War on Terrorism

The questions I posed to combatant commanders this week were: Are we winning or losing the Global War on Terror? Is DoD changing fast enough to deal with the new 21st century security environment? Can a big institution change fast enough? Is the USG changing fast enough?

DoD has been organized, trained and equipped to fight big armies, navies and air forces. It is not possible to change DoD fast enough to successfully fight the global war on terror; an alternative might be to try to fashion a new institution, either within DoD or elsewhere � one that seamlessly focuses the capabilities of several departments and agencies on this key problem.

With respect to global terrorism, the record since Septermber 11th seems to be:

We are having mixed results with Al Qaida, although we have put considerable pressure on them � nonetheless, a great many remain at large.

USG has made reasonable progress in capturing or killing the top 55 Iraqis.

USG has made somewhat slower progress tracking down the Taliban � Omar, Hekmatyar, etc.

With respect to the Ansar Al-Islam, we are just getting started.

Have we fashioned the right mix of rewards, amnesty, protection and confidence in the US?

Does DoD need to think through new ways to organize, train, equip and focus to deal with the global war on terror?

Are the changes we have and are making too modest and incremental? My impression is that we have not yet made truly bold moves, although we have have made many sensible, logical moves in the right direction, but are they enough?

Today, we lack metrics to know if we are winning or losing the global war on terror. Are we capturing, killing or deterring and dissuading more terrorists every day than the madrassas and the radical clerics are recruiting, training and deploying against us?

Does the US need to fashion a broad, integrated plan to stop the next generation of terrorists? The US is putting relatively little effort into a long-range plan, but we are putting a great deal of effort into trying to stop terrorists. The cost-benefit ratio is against us! Our cost is billions against the terrorists' costs of millions.

Do we need a new organization?

How do we stop those who are financing the radical madrassa schools?

Is our current situation such that "the harder we work, the behinder we get"?

It is pretty clear that the coalition can win in Afghanistan and Iraq in one way or another, but it will be a long, hard slog.

Does CIA need a new finding?

Should we create a private foundation to entice radical madradssas to a more moderate course?

What else should we be considering?

Please be prepared to discuss this at our meeting on Saturday or Monday.

Thanks.

� Copyright 2003 USA TODAY



The outlook is not good!

Call me ignorant, but what exactly is a madrassa, or a madrassa school?

I dont like the whole "does the CIA need a new finding" something about when Rummy says ominous # doesnt sit well with me.
Why are there no questions about updates on the search for WMD's, or Osama, or Saddam?

Does CIA need a new finding?

Now there is an attention getter. Just who is going to give them this finding? Will they make something up, or just point the CIA in a differant direction?

Is our current situation such that "the harder we work, the behinder we get"?

Couldn't help myself....behinder????

Originally posted by Grommer
Call me ignorant, but what exactly is a madrassa, or a madrassa school?

They are religious schools used to teach Islam and alot of times they are also Whabi indoctrinational grounds. Alot of well read zealots come out of the institutions.

was this memo supposed to be public?

Did Rummy leak this on his own? There's more to this me thinks (bob88, master of the obvious today).

I think he's covering his butt and it's probably pay back for the WH house puttig Rice in charge or Iraq?

Originally posted by Bob88
was this memo supposed to be public?

Did Rummy leak this on his own? There's more to this me thinks (bob88, master of the obvious today).

I think he's covering his butt and it's probably pay back for the WH house puttig Rice in charge or Iraq?

I don't think it was supposed to be public, Bob...

www.foxnews.com...

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld was "livid" Wednesday when he discovered a memo written to top aides made it onto the front page of the nation's largest circulated newspaper, a senior defense official told Fox News.

...oops?

-B.

From the Fox news article:

"Privately, defense officials�said one of the four officials' staff made photocopies for internal distribution in an attempt to prompt some office-wide thinking.

Officials said they believe the memo may have slipped out from someone on that staff, and the assumption for now is that the leak was "not malicious."


It would interesting to find out who those staff members are and whose left after tmmrw... Hell, it might be even more valuable to figure out who they're connected to and derive whose doing what infighting.

Couldn't help myself....behinder????

Clearly a reference to GW Bush's public persona.

The CIA will manufacture any finding they are ordered to manufacture.

Originally posted by MKULTRA
The CIA will manufacture any finding they are ordered to manufacture.

Acutally, I was thinking that CIA personnel probably leaked the "snow flake". They're not happy about the Plume leak.

[Edited on 22-10-2003 by kukla]

Hell, it might be even more valuable to figure out who they're connected to and derive whose doing what infighting.

Likely to be the hawks and the doves. Factions at war.

Acutally, I was thinking that CIA personnel probably leaked the "snow flake".

Interesting theory, I suppose they are adept at getting close to leaders! Definitely probable.

Will they make something up, or just point the CIA in a differant direction?

Ramadan is coming, isn't it? Getting an awful lot of public attention lately for terrorist attack warnings, too-- coming from Usama/Osama himself, supposedly. But when you find that Osama (as well as the Taliban) was funded by George Bush's Carlyle Group, it leads you to wonder if the funding is still happening. Publically we are told that Osama's assets are frozen, that we are going after Al Qaeda financially. In Afghanistan, the war on terror has allowed the US to drill an oil-pipeline that had been sought for years-- heading into the Caspian Sea refineries.

Here is some info on the Carlyle Group from Oct 2001:

The offices of the Carlyle Group are on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC, midway between the White House and the Capitol building, and within a stone's throw of the headquarters of the FBI and numerous government departments. The address reflects Carlyle's position at the very center of the Washington establishment, but amid the frenetic politicking that has occupied the higher reaches of that world in recent weeks, few have paid it much attention. Elsewhere, few have even heard of it...

www.hereinreality.com...

Bush tells folks outside of Texas that if they don't know what he's capable of doing, they should just come down to Texas and look around. Then they'd know. Some are dismayed by what they've found. On Monday we wrote that in the February issue of "Harper's" Joe Conason's will "report that scant weeks after Dubya was sworn in as first-term Texas governor in 1995, the University of Texas Board of Regents voted to place millions of state dollars with the Carlyle Group, even though Bush had just quit his job as a corporate director of Carlyle-owned Caterair, a leading U.S. airline caterer."

www.bushnews.com...

Things that make you wonder what is happening behind the scenes now, eh?

Doesn't seem like much of a leak other than showing confusion regarding the "war" on terror.

May in fact be a psyop. That is an awfully damned curious phrase.


[Edited on 23-10-2003 by MKULTRA]

I've been thinking for several months that there's real chaos and in-fighting between and inside intelligence agencies. I think this leak is evidence of that..

heelstone, "Does the CIA need a new finding?"...doesn't this question ring alarm bells for you?

Originally posted by kukla
heelstone, "Does the CIA need a new finding?"...doesn't this question ring alarm bells for you?

Not really. The world knows that the information on WMD in Iraq was completely fabricated as nothing has panned out. A new finding in the war on terror simply means yet another deception.

[Edited on 23-10-2003 by heelstone]

Agreed heelstone. You have to admit though, we really haven't had any transparent evidence that the CIA has been involved in any recent "findings", other than some Venezuelan action. Notice the language, "new findings", which obviously infers that they've already concluded some "findings".

It's documents like these that some historians spend lifetimes waiting for. It may not be that damaging, but for a brief moment the emperor is naked.

If the world knows about it, then why isn't it being prosecuted?

Give it some time mk, 540 articles in google right now. Not bad for being almost a day old.

I just saw this..

While the source of the leak was a prime topic in Washington political corridors yesterday, there was a broad consensus that the leaker was no friend of the embattled defence secretary.

"Rumsfeld has stepped on many toes at the Pentagon," a senior congressional source said, "and this was the revenge of the toes."

[Edited on 23-10-2003 by kukla]

Wow nice find! I wonder what is going to come next. You just know there is going to be a consequence to it.

I just got this email from Working Assets Long Distance.

"Call on President Bush at 202/456-1414 to ask for Donald Rumsfeld's resignation."

On rare occassions, when WALD feels something is REALLY important, they let their customers call the WH bitch line for free. A feature I've really come to enjoy!

In other news, this hit the wire this evening.

Ex-CIA Officers Want Senate to Probe Leak

WASHINGTON - Two former CIA (news - web sites) officers are asking the Senate Intelligence Committee to open its own investigation into who leaked the identity of an undercover officer.

Jim Marcinkowski, a case officer from 1986 to 1989, said a congressional investigation will be needed to demonstrate the credibility of an investigation now under way by the Justice Department (news - web sites).

story.news.yahoo.com.../ap/cia_leak

[Edited on 23-10-2003 by kukla]

I'm turning full circle..this was leaked on purpose.
Its on a dod site for god's sakes..

www.defenselink.mil...