Commies and Islamofascists - in 3 parts (Part 3)

So what do you do about the errors of the left and the right? Here, although I think I understand the errors of both sides, I am not sure what the appropriate next steps should be. Clearly, a formally established timetable for withdrawal seems like a bad idea. Joe Lieberman, who seems pretty sensible on this set of issues, said as much tonight on Fox. But at the same time, the odd and curious claims made since the declaration of victory by the administration have left us without a clear path forward. Staying the course seems unwise. Yet, I believe that we should recognize the potential for appropriate responses which would break up the efforts by the islamofacsists to move the world away from the trends of globalization that have helped many countries over the past couple of decades.

I am skeptical that the Baker Commission will come up with anything useful. If we had wanted him as president, we could have chosen him. We did not. I think his and his colleagues prescrptions may be a bit off the mark. I also am sure that the firebrands in the Congress who want to play to the crowd are not going to help us resolve a new strategy. Kerry is at best a poseur. Ditto for most of the members of the Congressional leadership - their wartime strategy is determined by a finger in the wind.

What bothers me most about the Bush policies is its inability to deal with the range of issues we face. The world is not unidimensional. Hugo Chavez is an evil force, close to our door. Evo Morales less so, but still negative. Chavez might not have been as successful (even though even he overshot the bounds of propriety in his tirade at the UN) had Bush not been so engaged in Iraq. I am genuinely not sure what would have happened had we decided to stay the course in Afghanistan and allowed that conflict to be more settled.

What also bothers me is the intransigence of our intelligence establishment. It is pretty clear to me that while our intelligence people were clear on the projects they needed to accomplish in the last era - and I think by the end they produced at least reasonable data - in this era, regardless of left of right, they are not prepared to offer us the information we need. The conflict here is global but not governmental.

When the left thinks that Kim Il Jong will act honorably - they are wrong. Albright's (what an oxymoron her name is) attempt to appease the N. Korean's during the Clinton administration was absurd. That she would be surprised when the two bit tyrant went back on his work is surprising. That Madeline Albright still gets airtime anywhere except the comedy channel is also amazing. But if the left is too accomodating the right is often too intransigent. We need to constantly look for nuances - and not just in governments. One of the errors of our intelligence apparatus today is that too much of it thinks that policy is made in government offices.

What we need to think about is how we can develop an intelligence function that can give us the information we need to give us a clear understanding of the world. At least as clear as it is possible to produce. Better intelligence might give us some better notions about how to avoid the errors of the right and the left.