Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (36711)	2/1/2004 10:14:01 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

U.S. Casualty Numbers Continue to Climb in Iraq commondreams.org

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (36711)	2/1/2004 11:22:09 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Michigan's popular governor endorses John Kerry... johnkerry.com <<...“Michigan needs John Kerry in the White House because John Kerry will deliver the national leadership the people of Michigan expect and the country needs,” said Governor Granholm. “John Kerry understands what the people of Michigan know: that the country must focus on keeping and creating jobs and on strengthening the things that matter most to us - improving education and reducing the cost of health care. John Kerry’s experience and knowledge on foreign policy and national security are second to none, making him the best Democratic candidate to take on George Bush, take back the White House, and get America back on track.”...>>

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (36711)	2/2/2004 9:11:42 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Restoring Trust in America ____________________________ By Zbigniew Brzezinski Editorial The Washington Post Monday, February 2, 2004 washingtonpost.com Whether or how our national leadership should be held accountable for having inaccurately asserted, at war's outset, that Iraq was armed with weapons of mass destruction is ultimately a matter for the politicians to debate and the electorate to resolve. But two consequences with ominous implications for our national security call for a more urgent response: U.S. credibility worldwide has been badly hurt by the WMD affair, and U.S. intelligence capabilities have been exposed as woefully inadequate. America is preponderant in the world today, but it is not omnipotent. Thus America must have the capacity, when needed, to mobilize the genuine and sincere support of other countries, particularly of its closest allies. It can do so only if it is trusted. That U.S. credibility has been hurt is indisputable. It is a serious matter when the world's No. 1 superpower undertakes a war claiming a casus belli that turns out to have been false. Numerous public opinion polls demonstrate there has been a worldwide drop in support for U.S. foreign policy. There is manifest resentment of recent American conduct and a pervasive distrust of America's leaders, even in countries that have participated in the coalition in Iraq. Trust is an essential ingredient of power, and its loss bears directly on our long-term national security. An America that is preponderant but distrusted is an America internationally weakened. The first line of homeland defense as well as the point of departure for an effective global security policy is reliable and internationally credible U.S. intelligence. The sad fact is that in the Iraq crisis U.S. intelligence was not up to par. There are many reasons for that failure, but the most obvious one is the absence of an effective human clandestine intelligence service, compounded by excessive reliance on foreign intelligence services (the Niger uranium fabrications being a case in point). Over the years the United States has been remarkably innovative in technological-scientific intelligence aimed at the Soviet Union, whose arsenal also depended heavily on science and technology. Consequently, the United States was well informed about the scale, deployments and even war plans of its most likely strategic opponent. Regarding Iraq, the opposite has been the case. The United States, we now know, was uninformed not only about the level of Iraqi military capabilities but also about Iraqi military and political planning. That indicates the means used to define with reasonable accuracy the nature and scale of the Soviet arsenal were not helpful in deciphering Saddam Hussein's relatively backward military capabilities or in penetrating his primitive regime, even though it was hated by significant portions of the Iraqi population. There is no excuse for the inadequacy of the intelligence that provided the background for the decision-making and the articulation of U.S. policy. Though an autocracy, Iraq was a much more porous state than the totalitarian Soviet Union had been. It was certainly much more porous than contemporary North Korea. The misjudgments made and the imprecision of the information provided, based (we now know) largely on extrapolations and hypothetical conclusions, are just not acceptable. The evident shortcomings of U.S. intelligence, if allowed to persist, pose too many risks for the future. Today, in the more diffused post-Cold War circumstances, access to reliable political intelligence derived from high-level human penetration of potential adversaries is the essential requirement of responsible and globally credible strategic policymaking. It is therefore a matter of high national urgency that several steps be promptly taken to give our national decision makers a more reliable basis for shaping policies that command international support: • The administration should candidly acknowledge that the United States was misinformed about the state and level of Iraqi armaments, a fact already quite evident to much of the world. Continued evasion on this subject is a disservice to America. • A shake-up of leadership in the intelligence community is needed and appropriate; measures to that end should be promptly taken. Accountability is needed to restore credibility. • A small committee of experienced individuals trusted by the administration (hence not including its critics, such as the undersigned) should be tasked on a short deadline to present the president a plan for changing the priorities and the modus operandi of the intelligence community, with high emphasis on the development of an effective clandestine service. Our national security is too much at risk for the issue to be handled in a traditional fashion. The usual reliance on a comprehensive review by a high-level commission working at a leisurely pace would not be an adequate response. Sweeping the matter under a rug would be even worse. A globally preponderant power, if blind, can only lash out when it senses danger. America's leadership in the world calls for something better than that. For the world at large, America's word should again be America's bond. _____________________________ The writer was national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter. His latest book, "The Choice: Domination or Leadership," is to be published this month. © 2004 The Washington Post Company