I wonder the same thing about CIA and DOJ (and frankly, even my local governments), and smile gleefully when they screw things up. I'm happy to see them be incompetent as often as is possible, because it means there's still some hope.
========
I agree.
Incompetence on the part of our adversaries is a good thing.
But when debating with Bush true believers I need a wedge -- something we can agree on.
Everyone can agree a legitimate part of any government's list of responsibilities is performing due dilligence in preventing events such as 11 Sept '01. The Bush admin argues militarism IS that due dilligence.
Bush true believers agree.
These are the folks I'm surrounded by at work and other forced social settings. Political talk is inevitable; I have to make a choice regarding how to proceed.
I can stay silent, I can unleash the full rad-left Monty (a certain ear closer), or I can find those points of agreement that exist and build a broader counter-Bush argument from there.
The incompetence factor is just such an argument builder.
...
In William Gibson's sprawl series of novels there's a supra-governmental organization named SenseNet -- sort of a 24th century FBI/NSA/DoD/CIA. SenseNet's everywhere, cannot be fooled and strikes fear into the hearts of even the baddest of genetically altered, nano-enhanced badasses who choose to run rather than fight the flawless agency. SenseNet's a good part of why Gibson's sprawl series is called dystopian.
I wouldn't want to live in a world with a real-life SenseNet (the goal of efforts such as Total Information Awareness and other DARPA fevered dreams).
So no, I don't dig super-competence in government -- particularly as presently configured.
But I have to talk with folks who would get headaches from what's considered normal discourse here at LBO-talk -- It's important to find a common language.
DRM