Kilcullen surges against the Guardian at SWJ (H/T Zenpundit):
Today’s Guardian article (“Military Chiefs Give US Six Months
to Win Iraq War”) misrepresents the Baghdad advisers. So much so, it
makes me doubt the reliability of the single, unidentified source
responsible for much of the article’s reporting. […]
There is a real country called Iraq, where a real war is going on, with
real progress but very real challenges. We are not going to “win the
war” in six months — nor would anyone expect to. But the Guardian seems
to be describing some completely different, (possibly mythical)
country, and some imaginary group of harried and depressed advisers
bearing no resemblance to reality. As counterinsurgency professionals,
we take an evidence-based approach and we are well aware of the
extremely demanding task we face. That makes us cautious realists —
but we are far from pessimists, as the Guardian’s anonymous source
seems to imply.
Life is tough, it’s tougher when your sources suck and your targets don’t bother with the PAO.
We have committees for a reason:
To the surprise of the Bush administration, the House Intelligence Committee voted unanimously Wednesday night to allow all 435 House members to see the classified version of the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq sent to the White House last week. The report is classified in part because it contains information about sources and methods used in intelligence-gathering.
It would be nice to think that committee chair Reyes was following the Army of Analysts approach to help get through the full Iraq NIE, especially since it is fairly clear that elements in the committee lack a certain level of expertise, but that would be wishful thinking.
No, more likely this is both side of the aisle throwing an irreplaceable vase into a rugby scrum to substitute as a ball. The obvious result is going to be a broken vase, but give it a second and everyone will soon realize that there is blood on their hands.