Brent Scowcroft is a voice of reason who was ignored.

I must say that I read Jeffery Goldberg's interview with Brent Scowcroft with complete fascination. I always respected Mr. Scowcroft's views and I do not think I could agree more with his assessments on the Iraq War.

The neoconservatives—the Republicans who argued most fervently for the second Gulf war—believe in the export of democracy, by violence if that is required, Scowcroft said. “How do the neocons bring democracy to Iraq? You invade, you threaten and pressure, you evangelize.” And now, Scowcroft said, America is suffering from the consequences of that brand of revolutionary utopianism. “This was said to be part of the war on terror, but Iraq feeds terrorism,” he said.

The Bold emphasis is mine. I think it is important. Iraq has done more to feed terrorisim then it has done to reduce it. Scowcroft understood the negative issues involved with occupying Iraq in Gulf War I. All of his concerns then over an invasion played out in Gulf War II. The following comment sums this up.

“This is exactly where we are now,” he said of Iraq, with no apparent satisfaction. “We own it. And we can’t let go. We’re getting sniped at. Now, will we win? I think there’s a fair chance we’ll win. But look at the cost.”

I actually found the following paragraph from Goldberg to be most interesting:

Colin Powell told me that he was not offended by Scowcroft’s public doubts. “The concern is cost—what are we getting ourselves into? That is not an unprincipled concern.” But the White House—in particular Rice—saw Scowcroft’s op-ed as a betrayal, and as a political problem: Scowcroft has a commanding voice on national-security matters. But there was another, more personal dimension. “What makes it even more awkward is the suspicion that he’s speaking not just for himself” but for the elder Bush as well, Robert Gates, who was Scowcroft’s deputy at the National Security Council, said.

I should not be surprised about the Bush folks seeing betrayal in Scowcroft's actions, they take criticisim about as well as three year old takes having their favorite toy taken from then. It does put the father/son relationship into an interesting light though. Another point later on is about how the Elder Bush has tried to get the Younger Bush to talk to Scowcroft; but it has not worked.

Iraq is the neocons Waterloo. Everything they have built thier philosophy on is falling apart becuase of it. The cost has been too high for a gain that probably will not be what they envisioned. I think this is another case of Father knows best. Too bad the Son is surrounded by a group of ideological fools.