Marc Cooper blogs in a blog post dated Friday November 19th, about a disturbing pattern in USA’s approach to foreign policy. The issue I think is this: The intelligence the USA used to justify its invasion of Iraq was wrong. What can we do to make sure that intelligence is accurate? Marc Cooper writes
Here’s the now-familiar scenario: An exile source from one of the Axis of Evil countries comes to U.S. officials and tells them that the government he opposes is developing weapons of mass destruction of the nuclear variety. Next the top leadership of our own government claims that our immediate security depends on taking out the regime in question.
He is of course referring not only to Iraq but now to Iran as well.
Here’s a post about the agreement between Iran and the Europe 3. According to the author:
The prevailing wisdom in Washington these days seems to be that the US is waiting for an Israeli attack on Iran. There is some logic to such a policy. No doubt, the Arabs and the Iranians will all blame America anyway, but they are not America’s chief concern here. Britain and Germany are.
Check out this blog on regime change in Iran.
Now it’s déjà vu all over again. The lame duck Secretary of State was back at it again this week warning us that it is now Iran that is developing missiles that could carry nuclear warheads. And once again, his principal source is an activist from the exiled Iranian opposition. More perplexing, Powell’s warning came only two days after the Iranian government concluded a deal with the EU, vowing it would not develop nuclear weapons.
And further…
So who are we going to trust on this? Who can we rely upon? Is Powell being straight with us even though he was instrumental in the orchestrated lying about Iraq? Is this single Iranian source who has a vested political interest any more reliable than was Chalabi? Do the knock-down quotes in the Washington Post from anonymous officials merely reflect a factional dispute within the administration? Given the human and financial costs of the Iraqi war, what quality of information do we require as a citizenry to support expanded conflict?
If the Iranian mullahs are lying about their nuclear development program, we are, indeed, in peril. How comforting it would be to have an administration in place that could be trusted on such matters. How distressing and dangerous it is that we don’t.
Exactly. Whether you supported the war or not (I did- I believed Bush that Saddam had WMD, and I was wrong) you have to have an honest assessment of the reliability of sources that the Administration relies upon. There has to be a check and balance. The CIA should be providing information (checked and rechecked) to verify the situation in Iran.
I have no faith in the competency of the CIA to deliver. Do I feel safer?
Nope.
Read the whole entry. Here is the link to Marc Cooper’s blog.
