« Home

Pretty Good

So we've gone from "slam dunk" to "pretty good" to describe intelligence which may eventually be used to justify the next war, this time with Iran. Given this administration's track record with intelligence (see previous post), taking such claims with a copious amount of salt would be warranted.

And as the need to find a scapegoat for their debacle in Iraq becomes ever more paramount, look for the Bushies to lower the bar for war further from "pretty good" to just plain "good enough".

More from Lindsay and Cernig.

Update: While the administration has been focusing mainly on the IED angle as part of their evidence against Iran (with help from the usual suspects), another angle the Bushies might try to push is on some pretty wobbly legs.

From WaPo:
Last week, the CIA sent an urgent report to President Bush's National Security Council: Iranian authorities had arrested two al-Qaeda operatives traveling through Iran on their way from Pakistan to Iraq. The suspects were caught along a well-worn, if little-noticed, route for militants determined to fight U.S. troops on Iraqi soil, according to a senior intelligence official.

The arrests were presented to Bush's senior policy advisers as evidence that Iran appears committed to stopping al-Qaeda foot traffic across its borders, the intelligence official said. That assessment comes at a time when the Bush administration, in an effort to push for further U.N. sanctions on the Islamic republic, is preparing to publicly accuse Tehran of cooperating with and harboring al-Qaeda suspects.

Of course the administration says these arrests prove nothing. No doubt some would contend they are yet more proof that the Mullahs in Tehran are in cahoots with the Sunni terrorists of Al-Qaeda.
"We are not convinced that the Iranians have been honest or open about the level or degree of al-Qaeda presence in their midst," said one Bush adviser who was instrumental in coming up with a more confrontational U.S. approach to Iran. "They have not made proper accounting with respect to U.N. resolutions, have not been clear about who is in detention and have not been clear as to what is happening to individuals who might be in custody."

Yes, because only a country with something to hide would hold people in secret.