NIE IS CORRECT, AND IT IS AN IMPEDIMENT TO RASH MILITARISM

Submitted by GWK (United States), Dec 12, 2007 at 20:49

No; In this case, the Jerusalem Post is wrong.

The NIE reports data as impartially and unpolitically as it can, and with the hamstringing of the uber-vice president, that is a lot more impartially than it was four years ago.

Militarism is never a best first option. Even Clausewitz would argue that. War is unpredictable, and a "preemptive" invasion or attack against Iran would send about 35 million - 55 million potentially friendly Iranians into an Anti-American rage. The USAF's "Shock and Awe" campaign never produced it's intended effect, and in a redux v. Iran, there is ZERO evidence to suggest that it would produce any better result. There is, however, a lot of evidence to suggest it would produce a counter-productive result.

So, the NIE further hamstrings Mr. Militarist of the administration, and it further isolates the Bush administration. A military action, in light of the NIE is definitely LESS likely over the remainder of Bush's term in office. IF GW Bush could accept that and deal with it -- in a non-militaristic way -- GW Bush MIGHT be able to gain some diplomatic leverage. But it is doubtful that Bush or Cheney see any merit in diplomatic leverage; Now is the time for Ms. Rice to work her wonderful magic of education.

(And time for the anthropoloists in the NSC to speak up! Perhaps GEN Norman Schwarzkopf should be asked for his opinion on the matter?)

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".