Great Analysis Irrelevant, Again

This David Ignatius op-ed makes some great points about things that don't really matter in the Bush Administration. No matter how great the analysis or the analysts, if the guys at the top don't listen or try to re-shape it, we'll get bunked up results.

Tenet famously said to Bush the Iraqi WMD issue was a "slam dunk". Those two words are about the only mitigating evidence that Bush cared one way or the other about whether Iraq posed any threat. His due diligence, in this case, took about one second, and that's if we assume Rove didn't make up the whole conversation in exchange for the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

In the case of Iran, we're a lot more sure that there are nuclear ambitions, because the IAEA has actually seen the evidence. But whether it exists or not is hardly the issue. The issue is whether this administration will really make war a "last resort". Everything we have seen is that it won't. Direct negotiation is off the table, warships are moving into position, and the rhetoric is stepping up. None of this has to do with the CIA getting it right. Instead of taking up precious newspaper print with analyzing the analyzers, we should instead be analyzing (or maybe psychoanalyzing) the Decider in Chief.