WtLtfp^h-lfa faO f\fV3&^.

l> in

}?H l^'V/Fi/ PW-

**V"

r^ i3/
^j

1- <s

r
i .5 c-

IE^ ^

. 11
^
«
"^ V ^
» » »
(T

0 >
-->
Military is out of the calculation

Not a silver bullet

Not a policy

Easiest thing to do

Stand off

Really matter

TLAM not an option, never going to get actual intelligence

Your approach to the Taliban. How are you going to put coercive diplomacy to work for
you?

State department is carrying on diplomacy, threatening follow through. But there is no

plan in place as to what we are going to do. We are just sitting around waiting for
actionable intelligence.

What about a sustained, unilateral campaign at times and place of our choosing? We've
had the Embassy attacks, we've had the Cole attack, we've had the millennium, people
trying to get into the country to attack us.

Why aren't we following through on this.

Did you have high ranking US military officers in these meetings with the Taliban?
Would it have mattered?

When you issued these ultimatums to the Taliban, did you have an interagency decision
that the ultimatum would be backed up with military force?

Did you have actual intelligence against the Taliban? Did you have targets that you
could have taken out?

Was the military married up with diplomacy?

We were doing diplomatic steps, but military was not really part of our coercive
diplomacy campaign

Don't issue ultimatums unless you intend to follow through on them.

Can't have a pol mil plan unless the military is involved.

The Cole attack was an attack on the U.S.

Are you able to respond to something that occurred two months previously?

Politically, can you do this?

Public agenda gets married to entrepreneurs who want to carry this out. Need to find an
ally.

Title 10 vs. Title 50

Collecting against a non-nation state actor. A virtual station

A transformative event.

A lot of creative improvisation, imaginative uses of existing institutions, negligible

institutional changes.

Big world out there, lots of non-decision decisions.

What's the mission organization of the underlying problems?

What's the unified command plan?

Mission oriented?

Strategic plan

9-11 story drives substantive findings, those findings drive management prescriptions

Policy recommendations have to derive linearly from our fact findings. Here's how we
got there!

Volcanic driving force on making these changes. A Tectoinic shift

The community is evolving haltingly but not really addressing its significance.

Limping halting progress toward a unified command plan

The system is inventing a unified command, but it's ad hoc

Atrophied intelligence structure

Why no military response to Khobar?

We prevented attacks: aQ and UBL

Why didn't we respond militarily?

President, we're under attack, need to change our behavior and our approach

HUMINT: tough and difficult, a hard thing to do

More presidential role in this, more direction

Did GT have the authority to do what was being asked of him?

Military always wanted to go in heavy, Weinberg doctrine, Powell doctrine, Slocombe

interview.

Reagan's comment on Grenada, double the size, "If Carter had done it with Desert One,
he'd be president.

Not just military that wants to go in heavy, lessons are not lost on political leadership

Rand was doing a lot of work on matching up shooters with observation platforms

AC-10 Warthogs, for example

Predator and recon platforms, combining them

Why didn't we use recon or laserball Predator to have B-52's in the air?
Marine barracks bombing Beirut 1983 occurred during Cold War. Afghanistan sanctuary
was not a Cold War problem. Soviets were gone. Russians had been burned.

Who plausibly proposed and backed an offensive strategy? Who said, we should destroy
the sanctuary? No one. Well, except,... Clarke's Delenda comes close. PolMil plan
Delenda would have done this.

Fall '98 - '99: Clarke and Pavitt really thinking about the same strategy. Pavitt said we
needed to destroy the Afghanistan sanctuary, to take it away.

CA was just a palliative.

Clarke's approach is to keep bombing until the sanctuary is ended, until we get this right.

This goes away until NSPD 9, which is basically the same approach.

Use force, similar to what we were doing in Iraq—if we had a target on any given day we
would hit it. We'd have blanket authorization to go ahead and do this.

Delenda committed us to this kind of offensive approach. It was a sustained bombing

campaign. It might have ended the sanctuary.Would have committed us in writing. We
would have had to do it and gone ahead until we defeated the enemy.

The Afghanistan sanctuary posed the biggest problem.

Hadley did articulate regime change in summer 2001.

\
 l
;
y Ll

/•
/

0
 Cu

Ib
 JJ,0

x,

^'
 o
s.

^s
>s.
0
3 c

I
0
t
N
s" -4
'-0 V

c
f oo 0 0
->;

c
« >-

\
 0

Jv S
^ r^
^
*~ j: "^^ $ L
£-c-
•* i >

^ ^ r
I
\ x

o- P
\
X
'A

r^

(*

V
<K

U
 77
y)
37
' ; jJfify.^Tl'y?

fr^l fc' ^v
' JJr/*
,^0fy ^^
f# ^^
. -X
/?
/ _&
~> „ *~$
,,t £„,
5 if \~**St-S?

-> <? y c ^,

? 4-
'-F7' Jf TTft^^O
I * (Ji

-. cxj-fiM ! 0^*
 vn i i\j3 j\

^ '-'pK^vl v-/1 -^-'v-fyi

/'

s ifru
/ I r
xa^<7,>-^>
f

f^

Ly^
 o

O
V
2 I*
v
r^5*-
-N^J

o
 WITHDRAWAL NOTICE

RG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial Commissions

SERIES: Team 3,9/11 Commission
NND PROJECT NUMBER: 52100 FOIA CASE NUMBER: 31107

WITHDRAWAL DATE: 12/03/2008

BOX: 00002 FOLDER: 0001 TAB: 18 DOC ID: 31207906

COPIES: 1 PAGES: 1

The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file:

FOLDER TITLE: Analysis & Recommendations [Iof2]

DOCUMENT DATE: 01/01/2004 DOCUMENT TYPE: Note/Notes

FROM:

TO:

SUBJECT: handwritten notes

This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s):

9/11 Classified Information

WITHDRAWAL NOTICE
Ctarr Ml uv,
X"

^
*
\ X

•1
1
C far fa*
 5/

u S\

.VI

IM

±-<3
 WITHDRAWAL NOTICE

RG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial Commissions

SERIES: Team 3,9/11 Commission
NND PROJECT NUMBER: 52100 FOIA CASE NUMBER: 31107

WITHDRAWAL DATE: 12/03/2008

BOX: 00002 FOLDER: 0001 TAB: 20 DOC ID: 31207908

COPIES: 1 PAGES:

The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file:

FOLDER TITLE: Analysis & Recommendations [Iof2]

DOCUMENT DATE: 01/01/2004 DOCUMENT TYPE: Note/Notes

FROM:

TO:

SUBJECT: Handwritten Notes

This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s):

9/11 Classified Information

WITHDRAWAL NOTICE
 WITHDRAWAL NOTICE

RG: 148 Exposition, Anniversary, and Memorial Commissions

SERIES: Team 3,9/11 Commission
NND PROJECT NUMBER: 52100 FOIA CASE NUMBER: 31107

WITHDRAWAL DATE: 12/03/2008

BOX: 00002 FOLDER: 0001 TAB: 22 DOC ID: 31207910

COPIES: 1 PAGES: 40

The item identified below has been withdrawn from this file:

FOLDER TITLE: Analysis & Recommendations [Iof2]

DOCUMENT DATE: 01/01/2004 DOCUMENT TYPE: Note/Notes

FROM:

TO:

SUBJECT: Illegilbe Handwritten Notes

This document has been withdrawn for the following reason(s):

9/11 Law Enforcement Privacy

WITHDRAWAL NOTICE
 r

V .... . ,
 ±.
r

^Tri6?
-^

/• ' •'/--
? / ^7

N' J

^ A \^ ^ ,/^
r\ /VA
cC- ^,
v- W 'x
^ ^ _-,y a ^7
 o
0) J

\T\
J J
?!