Wednesday - December 05, 2007

NIE Report on Iran's Nukes 

Just imagine if we, at The Virtuous Republic were running an airline and we made this announcement before takeoff:

Hi, welcome to The Virtuous Republic Airlines, where we "Get you from here to there with high confidence*."

And it is with moderate confidence* that we think the mechanic's work will keep an engine from falling off during the flight.

According to the NIE, here is what we really mean:

So, at The Virtuous Republic Airlines, when we say "We get you from here to there", it is based on high quality information, but it isn't a fact and "carries a risk" of being wrong. Would you get on this airliner?

Or when, we at The Virtuous Republic Airlines say that we think we fixed the engines last night, we really mean to say that while we think the mechanic is competent, his test results aren't of "sufficient quality" to be really sure he knows how to fix an engine.

So would you fly this airline?

As to the NIE report, it points to one of three things:

• our intelligence community is highly politicized. The Wall Street Journal

• the intelligence services received new information. The New York Times

• our intelligence services are incompetent and can't get anything right. The Israeli view

So which is it? Is our intelligence community become a political power, independent of the President? Has it actually improved itself since the Iraq WMD mistake and found new sources of information on Iran's nuke program? Or is this flip-flop another indication that our intelligence community is broken.

Or even worse. Is our intelligence community so gun shy since Iraq, that to save face, they are unwilling to take a stand, just in case they are wrong?

It is with moderate confidence that I think one of my opinions are right. Maybe....

Author: The Machiavellian
Technorati Tags: NIE
Technorati Cosmos:
Technorati Watchlist:
Add this entry to: