Obligatory Post About The NIE Report - Anti-War Partisans Switch From Sophisticatedly Undermining War Effort To Being The Bestest And Most Objective Analysts Ever. Except Not.

First of all, even if the entirety of the NIE report was sound, it would still be a justification for preempting Iran. The report says that Iran has the capacity to build nukes. It's just that apparently they aren't interested in building them right now. Which would be great, except for how Iranian hardliners are taking over the regime and putting madmen who want to end the world in key nuclear decision-making posts.

Moreover the report is predictably unsound. US military personnel in various echelons have been saying for a couple years that they'll do anything - including bureacratic slowdowns and outright disobedience - to prevent military action against Iran. Diplomatic and military pressure is being brought to bear domestically and internationally against intelligence-gathering operations that may uncover an Iran bomb. But supposedly this report - which, though it contradicts previous reports - is suddenly the true one. Except for the part where that makes no sense:

Israeli officials yesterday disputed the conclusions of Monday's surprise U.S. assessment of Iran's nuclear program, citing "clear and solid intelligence" that Iran is continuing to develop nuclear weapons to threaten Israel and Europe. "We have no doubt," said one Israeli official, who requested to remain anonymous. "If one looks at the investment, if one looks at the nature of the project, if you look at the cost to the Iranian economy, there is no logical explanation other than that the Iranian program is not benign."

And except for the part where this is an example of exactly the kind of politicized action that military officials have indicated they're willing to take to stop an attack on Iran. Exactly the kind:

A friend, formerly at the CIA, tells me that while this NIE: does confirm Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons in 2002 and 2003, its conclusions that as to why it may have stopped the program and why this halt may have continued are debateable and speculation. These KJs [Key Judgments] have too much political spin. This assessment was strongly influenced by two hyper-partisan anti-Bush officials who oversaw it, both former State officials who fought tooth and nail against Bush WMD policies, especially Iran.

But let's imagine that the analysts who controlled the wording have the best intentions - which they don't. This is still woefully stupid analysis: the new conclusions are based on a grumpy Iranian military officer complaining that Iran's nuclear program was suspended in 2003. Which is totally true - except for how after the suspension they went ahead and restarted it. Printing things that are technically true but crucially incomplete as part of an effort to mislead Americans into underestimating the threat of political Islam - it's like the LA Times editorial board took over the US intelligence apparatus. Which they might as well because US intelligence about Iran sucks - ergo the spectacle of political machinations completely reversing the NIE in the span of four months.

References:
* Great News: USAF Accidentally Put Nuke-Tipped Bombs On Bombers, Flew Them Across The Country, And Left Them Unguarded For More Than A Day (Plus: Will USAF Pushback Prevent Bush From Attacking Iran?) [MR]
* US Forces Israel To Ground Cutting-Edge Spy Satellite [MR]
* Re: Iranian Nukes [Cliff May] [NRO The Corner]
* Israel challenges report on nukes [Washington Times]
* U.S. Finds That Iran Halted Nuclear Arms Bid in 2003 [WaPo]
* Israel Unconvinced Iran Has Dropped Nuclear Program [NYT]
* John Bolton discusses the NIE on O'Reilly [ roguesquadron123 / YouTube]
* Lessons of Iraq Aided Intelligence On Iran [WaPo]
* Smug Liberal Sophistication Untroubled By Undeniable Evidence That Hardliners Are Winning In Iran [MR]
* Super! Iran's New Nuclear Negotiator Dedicated To Bringing About The End Of The World. Yes, Really. [MR]
* A word from Mark Falcoff on the NIE [Power Line]