Current Events — HabitableZone

Current Events » in reply to Re: So why not tell Blix where to look? n/t

A cold calculus
Robert — (archived)

I do understand the argument about not revealing sources. That was the choice facing Churchill when he learned the Germans planned to bomb Coventry, and why he accepted responsibility for the civilian deaths caused by keeping Enigma secret. On the other hand, JFK weighed the issue and chose to reveal U2 capabilities during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

The difference between those two incidents is the scope of potential damage from not revealing what we know. The Germans bombed only Coventry, while the Soviet missiles were a threat to bomb a wide swath of the southeastern US with nuclear weapons. The issue on the table again is nuclear weapons, and Bush maintains that they're a direct threat to America. If Bush really believes the threat is real, he should disclose the information and accept the consequences.

I should also point out that the value of an inside intelligence source drops to zero anyway after we attack. What's the point of protecting it indefinitely? There's a point at which the information has optimum value, and I believe that that point is before a war.

In the cold calculus of this decision, on the one hand is the possible death of one or two agents, versus the possible deaths of many more American soldiers. We expect a President to make hard choices like that without flinching.

--Robert

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (52 posts)