The article discusses the Senate's consideration of Tulsi Gabbard for Director of National Intelligence, emphasizing the need to question conventional wisdom. It argues against the establishment's attempts to suppress dissenting opinions, as exemplified by a New York Times article criticizing Gabbard's beliefs. The author suggests that the Intelligence Community suffers from groupthink and highlights the dangers of consensus-driven analysis, which has led to significant intelligence failures in history. The choice for the Senate lies in embracing diverse perspectives to avoid repeating past mistakes in foreign policy.
In the face of intelligence failures in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and Ukraine, questioning conventional wisdom is crucial for the Senate's choice regarding Tulsi Gabbard's nomination.
The New York Times' criticism of Gabbard's beliefs reflects a troubling trend within the foreign policy establishment, prioritizing power protection over intellectual diversity.
A prevailing groupthink within the Intelligence Community undermines its effectiveness, as seen by past consensus judgments that led to significant national security failures.
Implicit assumptions in national security strategy, like believing that consensus judgments are correct, have historically resulted in flawed analyses and consequential errors.
Collection
[
|
...
]