>The problem I have with Podhoretz comes down to the same reason I detest bush. He does not think things thru. Or at a minimum does not re-evaluate his decisions when experts who are in a position to know contradict some of his thesis.
>
>It's different in bush's case as the stories have come out about the degree his handlers go to make sure news he doesn't want to hear is kept away from him. And this also appears to be the way gulliani operates.
>
>I find a link I was looking for last nite before I left work, but can't find it again to post here. In this particular case with Podhoretz, it appears he is not listening to military experts. The link I found included many speaking out about war with Iran. In particular was a comment from a general who participated in Pentagon war simulations involving Iran. And all the simulations turned out horrible.
>
>Basically the same thing that happened with Iraq. Pentagon planners said this is what we need to fight in Iraq. And the admin totally ignored them. I saw a documentary on the runup to Iraq. And it pointed out how all the generals had opposing views to strategy with rumsfeld. Eventually the neocons found some colonel who had been preaching his ideas for operating with a small military for a while. So one of the final acts of the cons before war, was to trot out this colonel in front of congress as prove of rumsfeld theory on number of troops needed for Iraq.
>

I actually disagree with very little of what you are saying. I think Rumsfeld was the greatest example of this shortcoming. The war itself was quite successful, but the endgame and postwar was so poorly conceived - and as you say adjustment was way too little way too late - that it really would have been better not to do it at all.

Podhoretz really is pessimistic about solutions in the middle east, so while he may see bombing Iran as a disaster he sees the alternative as worse - not exactly a rosy world view ( which doesn't make it wrong, per se, but really makes you want to think twice before buying into it )

But regarding adjusting one's thinking in light of maturing or accumulating new evidence, it is ironic that this is being applied to Podhoretz. His personal odyssey is truly a fascinating one. He was one of the most famous leftists of his generation. I really recommend his book Former Friends As an historical document is is really amazing.