I’d like to say something that has been on my mind for five years now, since the Bush administration first began the push into Iraq: The intelligence never supported the mission.

When I say this, I am not talking about the intelligence that was reported and misrepresented. What I am talking about is intelligence that was obvious to most, and is typically used in determining the viability of military action in bringing about positive results. That is social intelligence.

Social intelligence has been taken into account in every war ever fought. That information told an invading force exactly where they might find friends, local support, sympathizers and neutrality. It also told them where they would not. Before ever getting involved, the intelligence would be used to decide whether or not enough support existed to justify the mission.

Intelligence of that nature never supported the notion that U.S. soldiers might be welcomed as liberators. In fact, most Iraqis had celebrated the attacks of 9/11 as a victory for the region. Because that intelligence was ignored, a few criminally dishonest men and women had Americans walking into this thing believing that another outcome was possible. The intelligence never supported that notion.

Jamie Beaulieu, Jay