The Flynn report, itself a symptom of deep problems in the government establishment
I lack the time to write an analysis of the Flynn report: “Fixing Intel: A Blueprint for Making Intelligence Relevant in Afghanistan“, by Michael T. Flynn (Major General, USA), Matt Pottinger (Captain, USMC), and Paul D. Batchelor (DIA). In brief, I believe…
- It’s important.
- Nagel’s grossly understated the event with ”“ it was an irregular way to disseminate an idea for a serving officer”. (source)
- This is the best brief cut at the report’s conclusions: “A Bit More on the Flynn Report“, Michael Cohen, Democracy Arsenal, 8 January 2010
- It shows that the internal dynamics in DC are screwed up even beyond what their worst critics (e.g., Lind) suspected. The wheels have already fallen off.
Galrahn at Information Dissemination has done a great job (as usual) chipping away to find the underlying significance. I recommend reading these, and following the links.
Esp note the relationship of CNAS and the military. IMO there is much more to this story; we’ve only scratched the surface.
The big picture
We’re at war — the long war — in part because our geopolitical experts are almost exclusively funded – directly or indirectly — by the military. That is, geopolical analysis in the US is a circle-jerk. Or, as Brad Delong (Economics Prof at Berkeley) says, “The Cossacks work for the Czar.” This is key to remember when debating geopolitics. Don’t expect the other side to seriously debate anti-war positions.
It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!”
— Upton Sinclair in I, Candidate for Governor: And How I Got Licked (1935)