Melvin Goodman

Photograph Source: Maryland GovPics – CC BY 4.0 Last month, the Democratic National Committee belatedly released its autopsy of the 2024

Now that Donald Trump has established himself as the worst president in the history of the United States, George W. Bush can breathe a sigh of relief. After all, it was Bush the Younger who used the 9/11 attacks to engage in decades of illegal and unneeded warfare in Iraq and Afghanistan at great cost to American national security. And it was Bush the Younger who established the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) that did nothing to strengthen national security.

The Intelligence Reform Act of 2004, which followed 9/11, was totally inadequate to the task of reform, creating an intelligence tsar and centralizing intelligence analysis. As a result, the White House and the Pentagon received enhanced roles in the structure of intelligence, making future intelligence failures and the politicization of intelligence more likely. To make matters worse, the congressional oversight process has been broken, with little scrutiny of the intelligence community in the wake of the failures of 9/11 and the Iraq War.

The Intelligence Reform Act of 2004, which followed 9/11, was totally inadequate to the task of reform, creating an intelligence tsar and centralizing intelligence analysis. As a result, the White House and the Pentagon received enhanced roles in the structure of intelligence, making future intelligence failures and the politicization of intelligence more likely. To make matters worse, the congressional oversight process has been broken, with little scrutiny of the intelligence community in the wake of the failures of 9/11 and the Iraq War. More

_The United States is a national security state. Over the past half-century, it has unnecessarily conducted “forever wars” in Vietnam (1960s-1970s), Iraq (2000s-the present), Afghanistan (2000s-2020), and now possibly in Yemen. _

Several weeks ago, the mainstream media carried a statement from eight former secretaries of defence and five retired four-star generals that stated

The Washington Post finally conceded in an editorial recently that the United States must “spend smarter” when it comes to defence.

For the past 60 years, U.S. presidents have used and misused the concept of threat to justify the use of force on a massive scale. U.S. presidents in the post-World War II era were so fearful of a congressional and public return to isolationism that the threat of communism was exaggerated to justify increases in defense spending and maintenance of hundreds of unneeded military bases and facilities. In the current era, we are devoting large sums of money to defense spending as well as justifying military bases vulnerable to attack from third-rate military actors such as Iran.

For the past 60 years, U.S. presidents have used and misused the concept of threat to justify the use of force on a massive scale. U.S. presidents in the post-World War II era were so fearful of a congressional and public return to isolationism that the threat of communism was exaggerated to justify increases in defense spending and maintenance of hundreds of unneeded military bases and facilities. In the current era, we are devoting large sums of money to defense spending as well as justifying military bases vulnerable to attack from third-rate military actors such as Iran. More

Lessons learned are supposed to be insights and practical takeaways from past experience. The guest essays in the New York Times are arguing that such lessons will prevent the repetition of mistakes and lead to continuous improvement when faced with future decisions regarding war and peace. In making these arguments, the writers—all experienced in issues involving international security—are confident that future U.S. leaders will learn from the terrible decision-making of past U.S. leaders.