It might seem simple

From my gal, Moll:

On Oct. 21, the foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany persuaded Iran to accept stricter international inspections of its nuclear sites and to stop production of enriched uranium. This might seem, to the simple-minded, to be good news indeed. But according to The New York Times: "In Washington, the State Department reacted skeptically to the agreement, with officials privately voicing concerns that Teheran would not fully comply. Officials there only grudgingly praised the work of their European colleagues. ... Bush administration officials dismissed the notion that a less confrontational approach by the Europeans had yielded more tangible results than the administration's policy of ultimatums."

Now, some might consider that petty, small-minded or just bad manners on the part of the administration, but the more serious question is whether it's the beginning of another intelligence gap.

The Senate Intelligence Committee has been working since midsummer to figure out how the Bush administration's pre-war assessment of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction tuned out to be so wildly at variance with what has been found. According to Hersh's report: "One finding ... was that the intelligence reports about Iraq provided by the United Nations inspection teams and the International Atomic Energy Agency, which monitored Iraq's nuclear programs, were far more accurate than the CIA estimates. ... One official said, 'If you look at them side-by-side, CIA versus United Nations, the U.N. agencies come out ahead across the board.'"

...Those who consider this the beginning of the Same Song, Second Verse would do well to ponder the track records of American versus U.N. intelligence. As you recall during the lead-up to Iraq War II, anyone who cited the U.N.'s findings on Iraq was stigmatized as "unpatriotic." Who would believe the sorry old United Nations, as opposed to our very own Bush administration?

It's not going to be easy to run that play again.

I usually agree with you Molly, but in this case I have to say that maybe that play wouldn't be easy to run on discerning people, but just who does the administration have to run it against?

Congress, right? I could rest my case. But, just to cinch it up, we are now talking about the Syria Accountability Act to impose sanctions on Syria, and we're lining up Libya, Cuba and Iran to be joined in the "Axis of Evil". And, the groundwork has been laid for taking the war on terror to Venezuela.

Congress people still have re-election as their primary objective, right?

And American voters are still watching Fox News, right?

That we forget the plays of history so recent as the Viet Nam War-related Gulf of Tonkin fiasco is shameful enough, but that we forget the plays of the Iraq fiasco which are still quite fresh in our faces is a testament to our vulnerability to the same old play over and over again.

Lab rats learn a program more quickly. So, I'm not going to place any bets here.

....but hey, do what you want....you will anyway.