Of course, all the NIE does is note that the Iraq war has inspired more to join the jihadists (the Ds' talking point) but that prevailing in Iraq will seriously reverse jihadist recruitment (the Rs' point). Both parties have their points here, but the Rs win politically because their point is grounded in hope while the Ds are grounded in despair.
There remains nothing new under the sun. This question is a variant on Machiavelli's classic question whether the prince is better off being loved or being feared (note to present and former students of SWNID: "yes" is often a good answer to questions with "or," and Machiavelli notes that being both loved and feared is the most excellent outcome, but he avers that both are not always possible). The answer is that for the prince love is nice but fear is necessary. Bush's comment that the Ds' reading of the NIE leak is "naive" reminds us that the adjective is synonymous with "not having read and understood Machiavelli."
The fact that this sophisticated intelligence document merely reflects a classic work of Western literature leads us to agree with the sentiment, though not every aspect of the diction, of Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit:
We should probably also fire whoever wrote this -- for producing a meaningless document full of empty bureaucratic twaddle. If the jihadists win, they'll have more prestige! And they will probably use the internets [sic]! Do tell. [Blasphemy deleted], if this is the quality of intelligence we're getting, no wonder we haven't won yet.
But there are some intelligence data out there, at least in raw form. The NY Sun has published a report of a letter from a senior Al-Qaida operative, captured with al-Zarqawi's ambush in June, loudly decrying the weakness of Al-Qaida and allies in Iraq and Afghanistan. We'll see if that other paper in NY picks up on this, giving permission to the rest of the media to cover it.
No comments:
Post a Comment