[RegulatorCountry]

"Why are we turning to Robert Gates and Zbigniew Brzezinski and James Baker and Lee Hamilton for a diplomatic solution to another confrontation with an intractable fascist enemy?"

I basically asked this question upthread, and have no replies. Exchanging Rumsfeld for Gates gives me pause. What does Gates bring to the table, as far as more successfully prosecuting this war and achieving a victorious end? What I have read thus far is not reasssuring.

[PhilDragoo]

Expanding intelligence on Iran

Today, the United States and its allies still know far too little about the strategic capabilities of the Iranian regime. By the admission of American officials themselves, U.S. intelligence on Iran, its strategic programs, and the internal correlation of forces within the Islamic Republic is virtually nonexistent. Such a state of affairs is unacceptable. Quite simply, the United States cannot afford to be “a day late” in its estimates about the maturity and pace of Iran’s nuclear program. Neither can it afford to misjudge the extent of Iran’s political activity in Iraq, the scope of its sponsorship of terror, and its likely political evolution. To correct this critical deficiency, the United States must immediately embark upon a crash program to “get smart” on Iran. Such an effort must include identifying Iran as the number one priority intelligence target. Greater surveillance of the Islamic Republic, using all available sensors, as well as expedited work to rebuild America’s once-robust HUMINT (human intelligence) network inside that country, is essential.

So says the AFPC report of 2006. And who is responsible for the lack of HUMINT? Carter's DCI Stansfield Turner fired 820 case officers Halloween 1977 and the agency never recovered. That would be the administration Zbigniew Brzezinski served.

And what do Zbigniew Brzezinski and Robert Gates recommend? Iran:Time for a New Approach--Report of an Independent Task Force Sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations calls for negotiations, engagement, a "grand bargain"--in short, everything Neville Chamberlain did to appease and nothing Winston Churchill recommended to correct.

My question is what good does the word of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad do if it is merely given to delay our curtailment of his nuclear weapons acquisition?

What "sanctions" will prevent his nuclear blackmail of us, of Israel, if we allow him to attain nuclear capability?

What is the downside of annoying the Arab street, the world press, the diplomatic spokesmen of Russia, China and France by prosecuting the pursuit and destruction of the forces arrayed against us in Iraq, in Syria, in Iran?

For I will repeat that the downside to allowing this islamofascist enemy to attain its nuclear dimension is our precipitated downfall, abetted by the fifth column Left and its media whore.