Cherry-Picking

Paul Pillar is a former national intelligence officer who spent 28 years at the CIA. He has written an article for the next issue of Foreign Affairs claiming the White House ignored reports stating Iraq wasn't primed for democracy and warned reconstruction would require a Marshall Plan-like effort despite abundant oil resources.

It appears Mr. Pillar is politically obtuse.

First the former; notwithstanding partial initial reluctance, the Iraqi public has increasingly exercised their suffrage on several ballots of significant consequence. Those resisting early votes (the Sunni) later regretted their hesitancy. Though the formation of a government has been painfully slow, there is a constitutionally representative parliament. The horse trading has begun on positions of power and public visibility.

On history, Mr. Pillar explains the fallacy of 'Resource Reconstruction' but ignores the political aspects. Hawks argued the oil in Iraq would finance its reconstruction. This was a hope based on assumptions Saddam Hussein would upkeep his most profitable embezzlement asset, namely his oil infrastructure. This was incorrect. Reconstruction (or Nation Building) of entire infrastructures requires financing from external sources even with abundant natural resources at hand (i.e. Europe & the Marshall Plan). The Bush administration played coy on reconstruction costs because big bills aren't popular with Americans, but in matters of national security the cost is immaterial. Making hypothetical calculations would have only opened the possibility for eccentrics to offer their financial forecasts. The war has cost a shade under $240 Billion since it began in March 2003, one third the amount of last year's trade deficit ($725.8 billion in 2005). Which is more significant to Americans: importing cheap goods or winning a war?