 |
|
February 10, 2012
Lisa M. Krieger: Man with defibrillator demands access to his own heart's information
David G. Savage: Why activists may not be in a hurry to have High Court rule on alternative marriage
February 9, 2012
Laura McMullen: 10 Least Expensive Public Schools for Out-of-State Students
Kimberly Palmer: How to actually enjoy -- relaxing, financially -- your vacation
February 8, 2012
Warren Richey: Why momentous Prop. 8 ruling might not satisfy gay-rights groups
Menachem Wecker: Though Controversial, LL.M.'s Can Lead to Specialized Legal Jobs
The Kosher Gourmet byDana Velden: Going to the bother of making soup? You know it better be good. This CREAM OF TOMATO SOUP certainly is! And it's a cinch to make, too (Includes techinques and serving secrets)
February 7, 2012
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.: Caught off-guard? President's Super Bowl interview with Matt Lauer gives those who need a reason not to vote for him, a darn good one
Suzanne Bohan: Leaping lizards! Tiny reptiles advancing robot design
February 6, 2012
Jonathan Tobin: Iran Threatens Israel With Destruction, But the New York Times Doesn't Hear It
Jeffrey Fleishman: In newly democratic Egypt, tens of democracy activists jailed, to stand trial; their groups are 'threatening the stability of the homeland'
Julie Deardorff : Researchers say antioxidants may not be that effective and could do more harm than good
Mark Clayton: How did Anonymous hackers eavesdrop on FBI and Scotland Yard?
February 3, 2012
Edmund Sanders : Israeli official says Iran is creating missile that could reach East Coast of US
Victoria Kim: Immigrant-smuggling ring used black drivers to avoid racial profiling
February 2, 2012
Jim Carney: Wrong number call may have saved her life
Reza Kahlili : Ex-CIA spy in Iran's Revolutionary Guard: What Obama doesn't grasp about striking deals with Tehran
Tina Susman: For woodchuck rescuer, every day is Groundhog Day
February 1, 2012
Brian Bennett: US officials see increasing threat of domestic attack from Iran
Emily Brandon: How to Take Advantage of New 401(k) Fee Disclosures
January 31, 2012
January 30, 2012
Paul Richter and Ramin Mostaghim: Misreading Teheran's limits -- deadly and economically devastating as they may be -- is a risk administration, Europe seem willing to take
Suzanne Bohan: Warning: Nap-deprived tots missing more than sleep, study finds
Meg Handley: Banks Revamping Rewards Programs to Woo Customers
January 27, 2012
Caroline B. Glick: Obama: Of course I intend to prevent a nuclear holocaust . . . in a few months
Yochonon Donn: In liberal New York City, fervently-Orthodox Jews may soon be getting a district to call their own
Jeannine Stein: An inflated ego and thinking you're 'all that' doesn't just make others sick of you, it can make you ill
Katy Hopkins: New budget rules may affect how much money you get for college
January 26, 2012
Ed Koch: To the New York Times, calling for the murder of Jews by those capable of having their incitement taken seriously isn't news
Jeannine Stein: Mental illness struck one in five U.S. adults in 2010: Report
January 25, 2012
Richard Simon: House passes two bills endorsing the use of religious symbols at military memorials
Fred Weir: Putin: Multiethnic Russia cannot survive as a US-style 'melting pot'; must find its own way
Susan Johnston: 5 Sneaky Coupon Strategies Consumers Should Watch Out For
January 24, 2012
Carol Clark: The price of your soul: How your brain decides whether to 'sell out'
Caroline B. Glick: America lost most in 'Arab Spring'. Sadly, many voters still don't grasp the extent
Warren Richey: Drug criminal scores win in GPS ruling from conservative-leaning high court
Erika Bolstad: Black conservatives gather to talk about gaining strength
January 23, 2012
Melissa Dribben: Jewish voters to play a key role in Florida's Republican primary
Jordan Rau: In quest to grow, Catholic hospital system will announce this morning its break from church
Ali Safi: U.S. envoy gives Taliban terms for peace talks
January 19, 2012
January 18, 2012
January 17, 2012
Frank J. Gaffney Jr.: No-kidding red lines: U.S. response to an Iranian nuke may be bluster, but Israel's won't be
David G. Savage: They sued their principals after slandering them online --- now the cases are headed to the Supreme Court
David Francis: Where to Invest in 2012: With stocks expected to rebound, opportunity abounds for investors
January 13, 2012
Ben Lynfield: Israeli lawmakers move to annex Jewish Judea, one museum at a time
Alexia Elejalde-Ruiz: Thriving through touch: Gentle massage helps older people with low mobility improve in mind and body
January 12, 2012
Warren Richey: Landmark Supreme Court ruling a 'resounding win' for religious groups
Warren Richey: Supreme Court says no to new rule on eyewitness testimony
John Fauber : Statins found to raise diabetes risk in postmenopausal women
Katy Hopkins : Consider This Before You Pay for an Online Degree
The Kosher Gourmet by Joseph Erdos: This mushroom and barley soup has an intense -- almost nutty -- flavor that mixes robust with Middle East. It has creaminess without cream
January 11, 2012
Shari Roan: Millions of atrial fibrillation sufferers at risk for devastating, but preventable, stroke
Tom Hussain: Pakistan -- recipient of more than $21 billion in civilian and military aid -- speeds pursuit of Iranian pipeline, defying US
David G. Savage: High court signals it won't be loosening TV's 'indecency' rules
Stephen Ceasar: Oklahoma's Islamic law amendment can't go into effect, court rules
January 10, 2012
Reza Kahlili: From an ex-CIA spy: US must exploit new split in Iran's Revolutionary Guard
Karen Kaplan: Study: Nicotine replacement products ineffective when used in real-life situations
January 9, 2012
Michael Doyle: Put through legal hell over dream home, couple fought back hard --- all the way to Supreme Court
|
| |
Jewish World Review
Feb. 26, 2007
/ 8 Adar, 5767
When skepticism becomes dangerous
By
Jonathan Tobin
Drawing the wrong conclusions about Iraq shouldn't lead us to worse mistakes on Iran
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com |
The passage last week in the U.S. House of Representatives of a nonbinding
resolution opposing a troop buildup in Iraq was pure symbolism. But in modern
war, such symbolism is often as powerful as an exploding car bomb.
Whatever its ultimate place in the account of the stunning decline in
American public support for this war, it does serve as an adequate barometer of the
fact that most politicians feel there is more danger in being labeled as a war
supporter than one of its opponents.
But perhaps no one has a right to feel as exposed by this turn of events than
one of the men labeled as the war's architects, former Undersecretary of
Defense for Policy Douglas Feith.
Feith, the son of a Holocaust survivor and Philadelphia community activist,
left the administration in 2005 after four years of hard labor in a Pentagon
tasked with fighting the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the general
post-9/11 conflict with Al Qaeda. But this Washington attorney, who also served
in the Reagan-administration Pentagon, has not faded into the obscurity that
is usually the reward of Cabinet undersecretaries.
SINGLING OUT FEITH
Instead, he is the subject of an ongoing media blitz led by The New York
Times, in which he has been made to appear the chief culprit in the "Bush lied us
into war" explanation for the invasion of Iraq.
While no one in the administration can be surprised that the public sees the
failure to find "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq as a standing rebuke to
much of what came out of Washington before the invasion, Feith is
particularly vulnerable since he headed a Pentagon intelligence unit that supposedly
circulated the idea that Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda were closely associated.
Since, the story goes, most CIA analysts disagreed with that analysis, Feith and
his cohorts are the among the chief "liars" who should be called to account.
Along these lines, a recent Pentagon investigation into the affair criticized
Feith for disseminating "alternative intelligence assessments on the Iraq and
Al Qaeda relationship that were inconsistent with the consensus of the
intelligence community, to senior decision-makers."
The report was the basis for a scathing editorial in the Times on Feb. 10, in
which the veteran analyst was derisively described as a "renegade
intelligence buff" who did "dirty work" to deceive the nation. Yet for all of that, Feith's critics at the Times and in Congress had to concede that nothing he had
done was remotely illegal. He had, in fact, been tasked with taking a skeptical
view of an official intelligence community whose pre-9/11 failures were every
bit as bad as its pre-Iraq work.
Everyone in the administration, Feith included, turned out to have been wrong
in some, though not all, of their prewar assessments. But it should be
pointed out that Feith never alleged, as some assert, that Saddam and Osama bin
Laden coordinated the attacks.
Under current circumstances, it appears to be impossible for partisans to
credit their opponents with good faith even when they turn out to be wrong. Thus,
a dedicated public servant who, though he properly understood the gravity of
the terrorist threat to the United States (something that cannot be said for
many in the intelligence bureaucracy, Congress and the Times), may have drawn
some wrong conclusions about conflicting evidence gets to be a piņata for those
who cannot content themselves with darts thrown at former defense secretary
Donald Rumsfeld or President Bush.
A more insightful reading of the report came in a New York Sun editorial on
Feb. 12, which saw nothing wrong in Feith's willingness to question a CIA that
seemed to be involved in some oddly politicized "shenanigans" itself in those
tumultuous days. Rather than the shame that the Times thinks Feith deserves,
the Sun believes that in time his role will be vindicated by history because
he risked all "to ask the tough questions."
Let's hope they are right about that, but it is no surprise that Feith has
been singled out by those with a political axe to grind. His name was usually
among the first listed when anti-Semitic jibes about neo-conservative Jews and
Israel pushing America into war began to surface. It was a crude lie, but given
that the war has dragged on longer than an impatient public can tolerate, it
was to be expected that Feith would be among the first to be pilloried by
far-left bloggers, as well as more established media.
HEIGHTENED CYNICISM
But there is more at stake in the venomous nature of the current debate about
the origins of the war than the reputation of an experienced Washington
player like Feith, who knew what he was getting into when he returned to government
service in 2001. Congressional and press inquisitions about the origins of
the war are entirely appropriate. Yet if the result of all of these
investigations is merely to heighten the sense of cynicism that pervades everything
that
is said about the war, then the poison will affect more than the future
disposition of U.S. troops in Iraq.
If the point of the targeting of Douglas Feith seems to mean anything, it is
that anyone who questions what the Pentagon investigators called the "consensus
" of the intelligence community is headed for trouble. But considering that
the CIA failed so miserably in the last decade of war against a deadly Islamist
enemy, that would be a terrible mistake.
The fact that the agency was riddled with leaders like Michael Scheuer, an
analyst who was allowed to pen an anti-administration and anti-Israel diatribe
titled Imperial Hubris while on duty speaks volumes about the odd nature of the
contemporary CIA. Under these circumstances, it would seem that the next
administration, be it Republican or Democratic, is going to need a Douglas Feith
to provide its leaders with a skeptical look at what the spooks are feeding it.
That will be all the more important because the next president is likely
going to have to confront the threat from an Iranian regime whose threats loom
over us today even more heavily than those of Saddam Hussein did a few years ago.
This rogue nation is unlikely to be deterred from its nuclear ambitions by an
America that is too divided and war-weary to call it to account for its
intervention in Iraq or its nuclear threats against Israel and the West.
And if the only conclusion we can draw from the decision to go to war in Iraq
is that we should never believe those who fear the worst about Middle Eastern
jihadists and dictators, then we are heading for certain disaster.
Unfortunately, that is exactly what Feith's critics at the Times seem to be
telling us. The tone and the context of their commentary on Feith seem to savor
more of a new campaign to deter Americans from the necessary task of taking
on Iran than to account for Iraq.
At a time when America's leaders need to be finding the courage to confront
our enemies, it would be a pity if Feith's successors in this or future
administrations will be worrying more about the politicized agenda of a cynical media
than the peril that Iranian nukes will present us.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in Washington and in the media consider "must reading." Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
JWR contributor Jonathan S. Tobin is executive editor of the Philadelphia Jewish Exponent.
Let him know what you think by clicking here.
Jonathan Tobin Archives
© 2005, Jonathan Tobin
|
