As a political matter, whether the United States is now safer or more vulnerable is of course ferociously controversial. That the war was necessary—and beneficial—is the Bush Administration's central claim. That it was not is the central claim of its critics. But among national-security professionals there is surprisingly little controversy.
Except for those in government and in the opinion industries whose job it is to defend the Administration's record, they tend to see America's response to 9/11 as a catastrophe. I have sat through arguments among soldiers and scholars about whether the invasion of Iraq should be considered the worst strategic error in American history—or only the worst since Vietnam.
READ MORE by James Fallows in this month's Atlantic Monthly, "Bush's Lost Year
Saturday, September 18, 2004
Iraq: The worst mistake?
If you think we are safer with Saddam gone, then read this article. Even if you don’t think we’re safer, read this article. What was the biggest mistake made in Iraq? Intelligence failures over WMDs? Failure to plan for the post-war? Underestimating the cost? Not enough troops? Neglecting Afghanistan? No, no, no, no, and no. Read this article. to find out why virtually all military and intelligence professional are arguing whether the Invasion of Iraq was worst decision since Vietnam or the worst decision in American history.
Posted by Michele at 11:53 AM