Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Shooting First (Part II, Rebuttal to PNAC goon--LA Times)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Mayberry Machiavelli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-30-04 09:57 AM
Original message
Shooting First (Part II, Rebuttal to PNAC goon--LA Times)
The preemptive-war doctrine has met an early death in Iraq
By Ivo H. Daalder and James M. Lindsay
Ivo H. Daalder, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, and James M. Lindsay, vice president and director of studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, are coauthors of "America Unbound: The B

May 30, 2004

snip

Bush's radical departure from past practice was based on two assumptions, both of which our experience in Iraq has shown to be flawed. The first was the belief that Washington would have access to reliable intelligence about the intentions and capabilities of potential adversaries. An enemy's society might be closed, but our modern spy technologies could pry it open. We could peer into secret weapons sites from on high and listen to conversations and other communications without being detected. Our intelligence would be good enough to warn us of impending danger.

snip

The second assumption that drove Bush's willingness to launch a preventive war was the belief that the technological edge held by the U.S. made the costs of war, if not cheap, then at least acceptable.

snip

With the Iraqi threat having turned out to be far less than advertised and the cost of occupying Iraq far higher, it is hardly surprising that preemption suddenly looks far less attractive. Earlier this year, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell told the Washington Post that had he known then what he knows now about Iraq's weapons capabilities, it would have changed "the political calculus; it changes the answer you get" when asking whether to go to war or not.

Many Americans now agree. Polls show that a majority now believes that the war in Iraq was not worth fighting. Persuading them, much less the rest of the world, to launch another preventive war elsewhere in the world would be a tough sell.

snip

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-daalder30may30,1,837327.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions


Bush Administration Transition Team
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
reprehensor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-30-04 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
1. I hope they're right.
But this administration seems blinded by ideology, so I can't rule out any more extremely stupid moves.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 08th 2024, 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC