• That’s the headline in the NY Times, and the concept is as straightforward as it comes.

  A stark assessment of terrorism trends by American intelligence agencies has found that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.

  The classified National Intelligence Estimate attributes a more direct role to the Iraq war in fueling radicalism than that presented either in recent White House documents or in a report released Wednesday by the House Intelligence Committee, according to several officials in Washington involved in preparing the assessment or who have read the final document.

  The intelligence estimate, completed in April, is the first formal appraisal of global terrorism by United States intelligence agencies since the Iraq war began, and represents a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government. Titled “Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States,'’ it asserts that Islamic radicalism, rather than being in retreat, has metastasized and spread across the globe.

  An opening section of the report, “Indicators of the Spread of the Global Jihadist Movement,” cites the Iraq war as a reason for the diffusion of jihad ideology.

  
  And for those who still have trouble understanding what Bush’s loyal opposition have been saying for some time, let’s be clear:

  The report “says that the Iraq war has made the overall terrorism problem worse,” said one American intelligence official.

  More than a dozen United States government officials and outside experts were interviewed for this article, and all spoke only on condition of anonymity because they were discussing a classified intelligence document. The officials included employees of several government agencies, and both supporters and critics of the Bush administration. All of those interviewed had either seen the final version of the document or participated in the creation of earlier drafts. These officials discussed some of the document’s general conclusions but not details, which remain highly classified.
  

  
  There are several undercurrents that make this simple concept a tough sell. One is that Americans really do not like to lose wars. They can tolerate casualties in a good cause, but dislike losing to the point of preferring good news to bad (see Fox News) whether true or not, or even no news to bad (is there a clamor to hear more about Afghanistan?).

  Another is that no matter how disliked Bush is (and he is, sometimes intensely), the office of the POTUS is highly respected by Americans. If Bush said the moon was made of green cheese, a segment of the population would believe him and a further segment would want to believe him. Bush’s constant push to conflate Saddam, Iraq and 9/11 has a cumulative effect, even if sometimes more on reporters than us.

  The downside of tying the WoT^TM to iraq for the GOP is that we could be in danger of losing on both fronts. And the civil war in Iraq is not going well nor is Bush’s approach building support for his policies with our allies.

  Now that the 9/11 anniversary is over, focusing on what’s important instead of what’s force fed is vital for the media, for candidates and for us. This is still the same George Bush that made a hash out of Katrina recovery, the same George Bush that went into Iraq with no plan for the aftermath, the same George Bush whose economic policies have benefitted the rich more than regular people and the same George Bush who let Bin Laden get away at Tora Bora by diverting attention and troops to Iraq. This is not an impressive track record, and it shows in Bush’s job approval, stuck forever below 50%.

  The idea that Bush is making the WoT^TM worse by increasing terrorism should come as no surprise to anyone. We are not only less prosperous than we were five years ago, Bush’s policies are making us less safe, less respected, and less successful on the world stage. He’s breaking the Army and straining the national guard. And no artificial election year media blitz is going to keep reality from the American people.

  Bush has enablers in Congress, mostly with the R label, and they want to stay the course. And staying the course means we become less safe. That is not a formula for American success no matter how much money the RNC spends on attack ads.
  

  

  
  Comments Off

RSS Feed