The Iraq Study Group

So now we have the considered wisdom of the Iraq Study Group.

In neither college nor law school did I find study groups particularly useful. I still don't see what value is added. An idea is not made more right, more useful, more likely to work, or more wise by virtue of the number of out-of-work politicians who endorse it.

I learned all I needed to know about the report when I discovered that it includes the word "Israel" several times.

The United States is presently undertaking security and military operations in support of the elected government of Iraq. Syria and Iran daily support a murderous insurgency with weapons, training, and funds. The Iraq Study Group was appointed to review the situation and suggest possible courses of action.

All of which has exactly what to do with Israel?

Well, nothing, of course. But if we'd like to bribe Iran and Syria to stop undermining the Iraqi government, perhaps Israel represents a bargaining chip. As an ally, we have more influence over that state than we have with Iran, since the latter is our sworn enemy. The reasoning appears to go that we can pressure Israel to come to an agreement to resolve the problem of Palestine. But since the only thing Syria, Iran and the Palestinians actually agree on is that Israel should be destroyed, it's a tad difficult to figure out how to work that triangle into a deal that has anything (helpful) to do with Iraq.

John Derbyshire, relying on others actually to read the report, observes:

It seems the only thing I would have learned from reading it is that what G.B. Shaw called "the great and the good"—the likes of Sandra Day O'Connor, James Baker, etc.—are not actually very smart, and rarely have anything interesting or useful to say.

Which I already knew.

Me too.