A little over a year ago, I started working for a small, upstart group called the National Security Network. I was wary of think tanks for a variety of reasons, but I thought the organization had great potential. NSN had a founder, Rand Beers, who was an actual expert on terrorism and who got the Iraq war right, and policy and communications leadership with talent, aggressiveness, and good political instincts.
Still, I felt like my blog life and establishment life were starkly separate. There wasn't a ton of communication between those worlds, key people didn't know each other, and there was some mistrust.
Today, however, thanks to tons of hard work and the occasional leap of faith, there is unbelievable cooperation and stellar results. Iraq -- and especially the escalation of troops -- has brought together activists, wonks, bloggers, and establishment types to work for a sane foreign policy. It's a privilege to be part of so many valuable parts of this effort, especially when the quality is at the level of NSN's latest, a video of *actual* experts explaining exactly why the Petraeus White House September "report" on Iraq is completely and utterly bogus:
Richard Clarke's comment is especially worth repeating: "What it's going to say is, if we keep troops in a given area, a lot of troops in a small area, we can achieve security in that area. Well, duh, of course we can! The United States military, which is costing us a half a trillion dollars, ought to be able to do that. That's not the issue: the issue is, why the hell are we there in the first place?"
