A post-euphoric New York Times tells it like it is:

While administration officials maintain that the intelligence estimate does not mean that the United States and its allies should ease the pressure, the practical consequence of the report has been to embolden Iran. It has also made it more likely that China and Russia, two of the countries with perhaps the smallest appetite for sanctions against Iran, will not agree to a new round of tough sanctions by the United Nations Security Council.

A de-fanged Cheney means the world goes about its business. The world’s business is not to lie down prostrate, but rather to counterbalance U.S. global dominance.

Yay?

The Guardian does some reporting in Iraq, profiles one of the Sunni “Concerned Citizens”, a certain Hajji Abu Abed. The Guardian has agendas, but this article rings oh so true, given America’s remarkable track record of recklessly funding strongmen and having it all blow up in their face some time later.

“The Americans lost hope with an Iraqi government that is both sectarian and dominated by militias, so they are paying for locals to fight al-Qaida. It will create a series of warlords.

“It’s like someone who brought cats to fight rats, found himself with too many cats and brought dogs to fight the cats. Now they need elephants.”

Lovely Iraqi imagery. The article is chock-full of other tragi-comic descriptions and vignettes which, again, would be hilarious if they weren’t actually happening.

I’m reasonably sure that our terrorist headaches 5-10 years down the line will be primarily coming out of Iraq. Once someone finally establishes themselves as a dominant player in the region (doubtlessly by overwhelming use of force), it’s doubtful that he’ll be a friend to the United States.