Wednesday, April 09, 2008
Meet Doug Feith
The anti-Bush crowd uses every trick in their book to make fighting the war on terror extremely difficult in the world of public opinion.
And I'm willing to bet that if something bad happens, those same people will find a way to blame him...
And I'm willing to bet that if something bad happens, those same people will find a way to blame him...
Doug Feith's writes at CenterForSecurity.org:
"Even more critical to this week's congressional testimony – and what follows on Capitol Hill, on the hustings and, not least in Iraq – are Mr. Feith's insights into problems that continue to afflict America's execution of the war. For example:
On issue after issue, George W. Bush's decisions on Iraq were undermined by subordinates who opposed the president's policies. As Feith charitably puts it, Mr. Bush "could...justly be faulted for an excessive tolerance of indiscipline, even of disloyalty from his own officials." This pattern continues with members of the intelligence community, senior diplomats and even, until recently, a top military officer routinely flouting presidential direction – sometimes openly, on other occasions through malicious leaks to the press.
There has been an abject failure to address competently and comprehensively the ideological nature of our Islamofascist enemies and their enablers. "...In the fight against terrorism, the effort to counter ideological support remains a gaping deficiency. No one in the Administration...is currently developing and implementing a comprehensive strategy beyond public diplomacy." Congress has not helped matters, by failing to confirm Jim Glassman or reconstituting a dedicated organization like the U.S. Information Agency to do this work.
Most importantly, the costs of failures to act – or win in Iraq – continue to be underestimated. "If and when major new terrorist attacks occur in the United States, the public will reexamine the Bush Administration's strategy for the war on terrorism. The likely criticism then will not be that the President was too tough on the jihadists, the Baathists and other state supporters of terrorism, but that the Administration might have fought the terrorist network even more intensely and comprehensively.
'No dereliction of statesmanship is as unpardonable as a failure to protect the nation's security. If the head of government underreacts when the country is threatened, history is not likely to excuse him on the grounds that his excessive caution enjoyed bipartisan support.'"
